Schmitt v. Larose
In brief
The Supreme Court refused to hear Schmitt’s challenge, so the Sixth Circuit’s ruling for LaRose stays in place without a Supreme Court decision on the legal question.
- Where it stands
- Decided
Decided · May 26, 2020
- What it’s about
- The Court declined to review the case, leaving in place the Sixth Circuit’s ruling in favor of Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose.
- Who it affects
- The Sixth Circuit’s ruling for Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose remains in place, but the Supreme Court did not decide the constitutional question.
Summary: written with AI from the case record.
What it's about
The dispute concerned whether Ohio’s limits on the subjects that may be addressed through ballot initiatives must satisfy the First Amendment’s strict-scrutiny standard.
Ohio limits the subjects that voters may address through ballot initiatives, and the dispute reached the Supreme Court after the Sixth Circuit ruled for Secretary of State Frank LaRose.
Question presented
Whether subject-matter restrictions on ballot initiatives are subject to strict scrutiny under the First Amendment.
What the Court decided
Holding
Petition DENIED.
What's next
The Supreme Court has finished its action in this docket. The Sixth Circuit’s ruling remains in place, and this order provides no Supreme Court answer to the strict-scrutiny question.
Documents
Docket activity
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Case Briefing
New analysis added
New analysis added
New analysis added
Show 7 moreShow fewer
New analysis added
New analysis added
New analysis added
New analysis added
New analysis added
New analysis added
New analysis added
Sources
Primary materials plus reporting. Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.