* Senior Articles Editor, Boston College Third World Law Journal (20012002). 1 John E. Yang, Lines Drawn in Oregon Gay Rights Battle; Voters to Decide if Constitution Will Declare Homosexuality Abnormal, Wrong, Unnatural,Wash. Post, Sept. 27, 1992, at A21. 2Id. 3Id. 4See Bill Graves, Measure 9 Defeated; New Battle Expected,Oregonian, Nov. 9, 2000, at C1. 5 The characterization lesbians and gay men is commonly used in academic literature regarding gay and lesbian issues. See William E. Adams, Is it Animus or a Difference of Opinion? The Problems Caused by Invidious Intent of Anti-Gay Ballot Measures, 34 Willamette L. Rev. 449, 450 (1998). These measures also pose threats to bisexual persons, but the measures themselves speak only of lesbians and gay men or homosexuals. Id. For this reason, references to gay men and lesbians in this Note also include bisexual persons, at least to the extent that their same-sex sexual behavior and affectional preferences are affected. Id. 6 Article IV, Section 1 of the Oregon Constitution enables registered voters to place proposed constitutional amendments or statutes on the ballot after submitting a signed petition, obtaining a ballot title, and securing valid signatures of registered voters equal to a specified percent of the votes cast for governor at the preceding general election. Or. Const. art. IV, § 1. 7See Graves, supra note 4. 8SeeAnti-Gay Rights: Assessing Voter Initiatives 165 (Stephanie L. Witt & Suzanne McCorkle eds., 1997) [hereinafter Anti-Gay Rights]. 9See Brian T. Meehan, Measure 9 Reveals Deep Splits Among Voters,Oregonian, Nov. 5, 1992, at A1. Even though the measure failed, it still received over 560,000 yes votes. SeeHospitality, Not Hostility, Oregonian, Nov. 5, 1992, at C12. 10SeeAnti-Gay Rights, supra note 8, at 16566. 11See By the Numbers, Oregonian, Nov. 11, 1994, at C1. Measure 13 received 457,822 yes votes and 515,660 no votes. Id. 12SeeOregon Voters Pamphlet (on file with author). 13SeeMeasure 9 Losing in Election Cliffhanger,Oregonian, Nov. 8, 2000, at C1; Meehan, supra note 9; CNN.com, Voter Results in Oregon, at http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/ 2000/results/OR/ (last visited Nov. 30, 2001) [hereinafter Voter Results in Oregon]. 14See Voter Results in Oregon,supra note 13. The second Measure 9 received 688,572 yes votes and 771,205 no votes. Id. 15See Graves, supra note 4. 16See David B. Magleby, Let the Voters Decide? An Assessment of the Initiative and Referendum Process, 66 U. Colo. L. Rev. 13, 13 (1995); City Club of Portland, The Initiative and Referendum in Oregon 4 (1996) (on file with author). 17SeeCity Club of Portland, supra note 16, at11. 18See Richard B. Collins & Dale Oesterle, Structuring the Ballot Initiative: Procedures That Do and Dont Work, 66 U. Colo. L. Rev. 47, 56 (1995). 19See id. at 53; Magleby, supra note 16, at 19; David Schuman, The Origin of State Constitutional Direct Democracy: William Simon URen and The Oregon System, 67 Temple L. Rev. 947, 947 (1994). 20See Yang, supra note 1. 21See Derrick A. Bell, Jr., The Referendum: Democracys Barrier to Racial Equality, 54 Wash. L. Rev. 1, 1819 (19781979); Magleby, supra note 16, at 3536. For practical flaws, see infra notes 204255 and accompanying text. 22See Magleby, supra note 16, at 3536. 23Seeid. at 41; Adams, supra note 5, at 45859; Bell, supra note 21, at 14. 24 Bell, supra note 21, at 29. 25Id. at 14. 26See Sylvia R. Lazos Vargas, Judicial Review of Initiatives and Referendums in Which Majorities Vote on Minorities Democratic Citizenship, 60 Ohio St. L.J. 399, 426, 428, 433 (1999). 27See Michael Gillette, The Legislative Function: Initiative and Referendum, 67 Or. L. Rev. 55, 59 (1988). In Oregon, [i]f fifty percent of the people vote in an election but only forty percent of those people vote on the constitutional amendment in question, and a bare majority of that forty percent votes in favor of the constitutional amendment, less than a majority of people eligible to vote in this state will have changed the law for everybody. Id. at 61. 28See Magleby, supra note 16, at 26. 29All Things Considered (NPR radio broadcast, Nov. 6, 2000). 30See Bell, supra note 21, at 1415; Hans A. Linde, When Initiative Lawmaking is Not Republican Government: The Campaign Against Homosexuality, 72 Or. L. Rev. 19, 3233 (1993); Magleby, supra note 16, at 41. 31SeeThe Federalist, No. 10, at 5455, No. 49, at 323, No. 51, at 33334, No. 63, at 40304 (James Madison) (Modern Library ed., 2000); Linde, supra note 30, at 3233. 32U.S. Const. art. IV, § 4; see Linde, supra note 30, at 2224. 33 Linde, supra note 30, at 27; seeThe Federalist, supra note 31, No. 10, at 5455, No. 49, at 323, No. 51, at 33334, No. 63, at 40304 (James Madison). 34See generally Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186 (1962); Pac. States Tele. & Tele. Co. v. Oregon, 223 U.S. 118 (1912); Luther v. Borden, 48 U.S. 1 (1849). 35See generally Romer v. Evans, 517 U.S. 620 (1996); Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186 (1962); Pac. States Tele. & Tele. Co., 223 U.S. 118; Luther v. Borden, 48 U.S. 1 (1849); Equal. Found. of Greater Cincinnati Inc. v. City of Cincinnati, 128 F.3d 289 (6th Cir. 1997); Bailey v. City of Austin, 972 S.W.2d 180 (Tex. App. 1998). 36SeeAnti-Gay Rights, supra note 8, at 165. The measure continues, State may not recognize this conduct under sexual orientation or sexual preference levels, or through quotas, minority status, affirmative action, or similar concepts. See id. 37See id. at 18. 38Seeid. at 165. 39See Brian T. Meehan, Ballot Measure 9 Creates Climate of Fear,Oregonian, Oct. 17, 1992, at A1. 40SeeAnti-Gay Rights, supra note 8, at 165. 41See Alliance that Battled Measure 9 Looks to theFuture, Oregonian, Nov. 22, 1992, at C1. 42See id.; Bill Graves, Schools in the Balance,Oregonian, Oct. 25, 1992, at D1. 43See Graves, supra note 42. 44See id. 45See id. 46See id. 47See Meehan, supra note 39; Meehan, supra note 9. 48See Meehan, supra note 9. 49Seeid. As income and education rose, support for Measure 9 waned. Id. About 55% of high school graduates supported it, compared with 35% of college graduates and 22% of people with postgraduate degrees. Id. The initiative produced a gender gap of about ten percentage points. Id. 55% of yes voters were men; 45% were women. Id.. 50SeeAll Things Considered,supra note 29. Of Oregons thirty-six counties, nine urban counties surrounding Portland and Eugene rejected the measure, and twenty-seven of Oregons smaller rural counties approved it. See Meehan, supra note 9. 51See Meehan, supra note 9. Voters who described themselves as born-again fundamentalists or regular church-goers were the most loyal supporters of the measure. Id. More than seven of ten fundamentalists and six of ten regular church-goers voted for the measure. Id. 52See Meehan, supra note 39. 53See id. 54See id. 55Blaze Damages Salem House Where 2 Died in Firebombing,Oregonian, Nov. 29, 1992, at D3. 56 Meehan, supra note 39. During 1991, 483 incidents of intimidation or violence against gays and lesbians were reported for the entire year. Id. 57Id. 58Id. 59See id. 60See Sura Rubenstein, OCA Head Pledges Stripped-Down Version of Measure 9 for 1994,Oregonian, Nov. 8, 1992, at A1. 61Id. 62Anti-Gay Rights, supra note 8, at 19. 63Id. 64Seeid. 65See id. 66Id. As one commentator noted, the coded rhetoric of special rights enables opponents of gay rights to tap into deep and powerful reservoirs of social anxiety and anger about other anti-discrimination laws based on race, gender, and disabilityparticularly affirmative action measureseven as these opponents claim to champion existing civil rights protections. Adams, supra note 5, at 459. 67SeeAnti-Gay Rights, supra note 8, at 19; Analyzing the Ads,Oregonian, Oct. 20, 1992, at B4. 68Analyzing the Ads,supra note 67, at B4. 69Id. 70 See Rubenstein, supra note 60; David Sarasohn, Lon Mabon Discovers the Schools,Oregonian, Nov. 3, 2000, at B9 [hereinafter Sarasohn, Lon Mabon Discovers]; David Sarasohn, Rural Oregon Ponders the Real Threat,Oregonian, Nov. 4, 1994, at C10 [hereinafter Sarasohn, Rural Oregon Ponders]. 71 See Graves, supra note 42; Sarasohn, Lon Mabon Discovers, supra note 70; Sarasohn, Rural Oregon Ponders,supra note 70. 72See Sarasohn, Lon Mabon Discovers, supra note 70. 73Id. 74Id. 75See Analyzing the Ads,supra note 67. 76See id. 77See id; Anti-Gay Rights, supra note 8, at 19. 78See Analyzing the Ads,supra note 67. 79See id. 80See id. 81Id. Spokespeople for the Lavender Network newspaper, which ran a NAMBLA advertisement in only two editions, said that the advertisment was mistakenly accepted by a volunteer staff member. Id. The newspapers advertising guidelines prohibit accepting advertisements from NAMBLA. Id. 82See Meehan, supra note 9. 83See Meehan, supra note 39. 84SeeAnti-Gay Rights, supra note 8, at 17; Rubenstein, supra note 60; Sarasohn, Lon Mabon Discovers, supra note 70; Sarasohn, Rural Oregon Ponders,supra note 70. 85SeeAnti-Gay Rights, supra note 8, at 20, 165. 86See id. at 17; Sura Rubenstein, What is Measure 13?, Oregonian, Oct. 30, 1994, at A22. 87 Rubenstein, supra note 86. 88Id. 89Anti-Gay Rights, supra note 8, at 20. 90Id. at 16566; Rubenstein, supra note 86. 91SeeAnti-Gay Rights, supra note 8, at 20. 92See id. 93See Osker Spicer, Journey Often Tough for Black Homosexuals,Oregonian, Nov. 10, 1994, (Portland Zoner Magazine), at 1. 94See id. 95See id. 96See Sarasohn, Lon Mabon Discovers, supra note 70; Sarasohn, Rural Oregon Ponders,supra note 70. 97See Sarasohn, Rural Oregon Ponders,supra note 70. 98Id. 99See By the Numbers,supra note 11. 100Oregon Voters Pamphlet, supra note 12. Interestingly, it appears that the OCA had borrowed some of the language used by its opposition in drafting the new measure. For example, one section of the measure provides that sexual orientation is a divisive subject matter not necessary to the instruction of students in public schools. Id. 101Id. 102Id. 103 As will be discussed in the next part of this note, statutory initiatives can be subject to legislative amendment and judicial review, whereas constitutional amendments negate any inconsistent portions of the Oregon constitution and can only be overturned by later amendments or by federal judicial review. Gillette, supra note 27, at 59. 104See Alice Tallmadge, Living in the Shadow of the OCA, Lessons from a Bitter Battle: Lane County Residents Disagree on the Long-Term Effects of Past Anti-Gay Rights Campaigns, Oregonian, Oct. 22, 2000, at A21. 105 Bill Graves, Prayer Vigil Takes Aim at Measure 9,Oregonian, Nov. 2, 2000, at D18; Tallmadge, supra note 104. One vigil in a downtown Portland park reported only three dozen people in attendance. Graves, supra. Also, whereas No on 9 campaign funds surpassed $2 million in 1992, the campaign raised only $648,000 in 2000. Bill Graves & Tomoko Hosaka, Measure 9 Rips Open Cultural Division,Oregonian, Oct. 22, 2000, at A1. 106SeeMeasure 9 Losing in Cliffhanger Election,supra note 13; Tallmadge, supra note 104. 107See Measure 9 Losing in Cliffhanger Election,supra note 13. 108Id. 109Oregon Voters Pamphlet, supra note 12. 110Id. 111SeeMeasure 9 Losing in Election Cliffhanger,supra note 13; Tallmadge, supra note 104. 112All Things Considered,supra note 29. 113SeeVoter Results in Oregon,supra note 13. 114See id. 115SeeMeasure 9 Losing in Election Cliffhanger,supra note 13. 116See Tomoko Hosaka, Mabon Readies Next Round in Last Great Battle,Oregonian, Nov. 12, 2000, at C5. 117See id. 118See id. 119See id.; Anti-Gay Rights, supra note 8, at 17; Rubenstein, supra note 60; Sarasohn, Lon Mabon Discovers, supra note 70; Sarasohn, Rural Oregon Ponders,supra note 70; Tallmadge, supra note 104. 120See Adams, supra note 5, at 45867; Lazos Vargas, supra note 26, at 42832. 121See Barbara S. Gamble, Putting Civil Rights to a Popular Vote, 41 Am. J. Pol. Sci. 245, 258 (1997). 122See Adams, supra note 5, at 458; Lazos Vargas, supra note 26, at 42829. 123See Adams, supra note 5, at 458. 124Id. 125See Tomoko Hosaka, The OCAs Initiatives,Oregonian, Sept. 10, 2000, at A17. 126See Merrick v. Bd. of Higher Educ., 841 P.2d 646, 651 (Or. Ct. App. 1992). 127See Adams, supra note 5, at 459 n.56. 128Seeid. at 460. 129See Gamble, supra note 121, at 259. 130Seeid. 131Seeid.; Adams, supra note 5, at 460. 132See Adams, supra note 5, at 46061. 133Seeid. at 461. 134See In re Advisory Opinion to the Attorney Gen.: Restricts Laws Related to Discrimination, 632 So.2d 1018, 1021 (Fla. 1994). State constitutions that include citizen initiative processes often also include a single subject requirement. See id.; City Club of Portland, supra note 16, at 15, 17. This provision requires that the initiative shall embrace one subject only in order to simplify the voters choice. See In re Advisory Opinion, 632 So.2d at 1019; City Club of Portland, supra note 16, at 15, 17. 135See Gamble, supra note 121, at 262; By the Numbers,supra note 11. 136See generally 517 U.S. 620 (1996). 137See id. at 632. Under the Fourteenth Amendment law of substantive due process, when courts are confronted with an enactment that targets a suspect class, they employ strict scrutiny to ensure that the enactment is tied to some legitimate governmental interest. See id. at 62930. For all other laws, courts must merely find a rational relationship between the enactment and a legitimate governmental interest. See id. at 632. In Romer, the Court avoided the issue of whether homosexual persons constituted a suspect class by stating that Amendment 2 failed the lower standard of finding a rational relationship between the amendment and a legitimate governmental interest. See id. at 63132. The Court held that the sheer breadth of the prohibition in Amendment 2 was so discontinuous with the reasons offered for it that the amendment seems inexplicable by anything but animus toward the class it affects; it lacks a rational relationship to legitimate state interests. Romer, 517 U.S. at 632. 138See Romer, 517 U.S. at 63435 (emphasis added). The Court also noted that, [a] law declaring that in general it shall be more difficult for one group of citizens than for all others to seek aid from the government is itself a denial of equal protection of the laws in the most literal sense. See id. at 633. 139See Adams, supra note 5, at 463; Gamble, supra note 121, at 258. 140 Adams, supra note 5, at 463; Gamble, supra note 121, at 258. 141See Adams, supra note 5, at 45863; Gamble, supra note 121, at 25862. 142See Adams, supra note 5, at 47273; Graves & Hosaka, supra note 105; Meehan, supra note 39. 143 Adams, supra note 5, at 47273. 144 Graves & Hosaka, supra note 105. 145 Meehan, supra note 39. 146See Adams, supra note 5, at 47273; Graves & Hosaka, supra note 105; Meehan, supra note 39. 147See Schuman, supra note 19, at 948. 148See id.; Lazos Vargas, supra note 26, at 411. 149See Schuman, supra note 19, at 94849. 150See id. at 94950. 151See id. at 95051. 152See id. at 95156. 153Id. at 956. 154See Collins & Oesterle, supra note 18, at 5455; Schuman, supra note 19, at 948. 155See Lazos Vargas, supra note 26, at 411. The states that provide for initiatives, in the order that they adopted the intiative, are South Dakota, Utah, Oregon, Montana, Oklahoma, Maine, Missouri, Arkansas, Colorado, Arizona, California, Idaho, Nebraska, Nevada, Massachusetts, Alaska, Florida, Wyoming, Illinois, District of Columia, and Mississippi. Id. at 411 n.34. Florida and Illinois allow only constitutional initiatives. Id. Utah, Maine, Idaho, Washington, Alaska, Wyoming, and the District of Columbia allow only for statutory initiatives. Id. 156See id. 157See Lazos Vargas, supra note 26, at 41213; Magleby, supra note 16, at 1415. 158See Magleby, supra note 16, at 26. 159See id. 160See id. at 27; Lazos Vargas, supra note 26, at 415. 161See Magleby, supra note 16, at 27. 162 Collins & Oesterle, supra note 18, at 48. 163 Lazos Vargas, supra note 26, at 415 n.55. 164SeeCity Club of Portland, supra note 16, at 13. 165See id. 166 Steve Mayes, Election Outlay Prompts Request for Money,Oregonian, Nov. 16, 2000, at B12. 167Id. 168City Club of Portland, supra note 16, at 4. 169See Collins & Oesterle, supra note 18, at 50. 170Id. 171See Lazos Vargas, supra note 26, at 417. 172 Collins & Oesterle, supra note 18, at 50. 173Id. 174See Magleby, supra note 16, at 14. 175See Collins & Oesterle, supra note 18, at 50. 176Seeid. at 5052. 177See Collins & Oesterle, supra note 18, at 51 n.11; Magleby, supra note 16, at 13, 4041. 178See Collins & Oesterle, supra note 18, at 51 n.11; Magleby, supra note 16, at 13, 4041. 179 Collins & Oesterle, supra note 18, at 51. 180See Collins & Oesterle, supra note 18, at 51; Magleby, supra note 16, at 13, 4041. 181See Magleby, supra note 16, at 13. 182SeeCity Club of Portland, supra note 16, at 29. 183See id. 184See Adams, supra note 5, at 451; Lazos Vargas, supra note 26, at 41819; Magleby, supra note 16, at 2325, 36. 185See Collins & Oesterle, supra note 18, at 5152; David B. Frohnmayer & Hans A. Linde, Initiating Laws in the Form of Constitutional Amendments: An Amicus Curiae Brief, 34 Willamette L. Rev. 749, 75359 (1998), Gillette, supra note 27, at 61. 186SeeCity Club of Portland, supra note 16, at 2627; Lazos Vargas, supra note 26, at 41819; Magleby, supra note 16, at 2325, 36. 187SeeCity Club of Portland, supra note 16, at 27; Lazos Vargas, supra note 26, at 41819; Magleby, supra note 16, at 2325, 36. 188SeeCity Club of Portland, supra note 16, at 30; Frohnmayer & Linde, supra note 185, at 75359; Gillette, supra note 27, at 61. 189 Or. Const. art. IV, § 1(2)(d). 190SeeCity Club of Portland, supra note 16, at 30; Frohnmayer & Linde, supra note 185, at 756; Hans A. Linde, Taking Oregons Initiative Toward a New Century, 34 Willamette L. Rev. 391, 41113 (1998). 191See Frohnmayer & Linde, supra note 185, at 756. Seegenerally Linde, supra note 190. 192See Collins & Oesterle, supra note 18, at 55. 193See id. at 53; Magleby, supra note 16, at 19; Schuman, supra note 19, at 947. 194See Collins & Oesterle, supra note 18, at 5657. 195See id.; Adams, supra note 5, at 452. 196See Collins & Oesterle, supra note 18, at 56; Magleby, supra note 16, at 34. 197See Collins & Oesterle, supra note 18, at 5658; Magleby, supra note 16, at 3435. 198See Collins & Oesterle, supra note 18, at 61; Schuman, supra note 19, at 947. One of the most celebrated ideas to emerge from Ross Perots 1992 presidential campaign was the electronic Town Hall, a system of direct democracy using sophisticated video and data transmission technology to allow voters nationwide to debate and then vote on legislation. Schuman, supra note 19, at 947. However, concerns over how to limit the scope of such a device has limited the political progress of the national referendum. See Magleby, supra note 16, at 4243. 199SeeCity Club of Portland, supra note 16, at 11. 200Id. 201Id. 202Id. 203See Collins & Oesterle, supra note 18, at 5563; Magleby, supra note 16, at 2940. 204See Collins & Oesterle, supra note 18, at 57; Magleby, supra note 16, at 3334. 205SeeCity Club of Portland, supra note 16, at 23; Collins & Oesterle, supra note 18, at 57; Magleby, supra note 16, at 3334. 206See Adams, supra note 5, at 455; Collins & Oesterle, supra note 18, at 57; Magleby, supra note 16, at 33. 207 Collins & Oesterle, supra note 18, at 57. 208 Magleby, supra note 16, at 35. 209See Julian N. Eule, Judicial Review of Direct Democracy, 99 Yale L.J. 1503, 1509 (1990); Magleby, supra note 16, at 40. 210See Magleby, supra note 16, at 3334. 211See id. at 40; City Club of Portland, supra note 16, at 23. 212SeeCity Club of Portland, supra note 16, at 2324. 213 Magleby, supra note 16, at 38. 214See id. at 30 215See id. at 38. Conversely, on noncontroversial measures, most voters face an information vacuum. Id. 216See Graves, supra note 42. 217SeeCity Club of Portland, supra note 16, at 23; Magleby, supra note 16, at 38. 218SeeCity Club of Portland, supra note 16, at 3134; Leroy J. Tornquist, Direct Democracy in OregonSome Suggestions for Change, 34 Willamette L. Rev. 675, 677 (1998). 219City Club of Portland, supra note 16, at 23. 220Id. 221See id. 222See Magleby, supra note 16, at 38; Tornquist, supra note 218, at 677. 223SeeCity Club of Portland, supra note 16, at 1819; Brent Hunsberger, Effects of Measure 7 Remain Up for Debate,Oregonian, Nov. 20, 2000, at A1. 224SeeCity Club of Portland, supra note 16, at 3134; Tornquist, supra note 218, at 677; Hunsberger, supra note 223. 225SeeCity Club of Portland, supra note 16, at 25. In preparation for a measures inclusion in the Oregon voters pamphlet, the secretary of state is required to make a dollar estimate of the financial impact of the measure. Id. The statement does not point out the measures effect on the functioning of government operations, nor does it state the dollar amount or its impact as a proportion of the total estimated general fund. Id. Moreover, a failure to file a fiscal impact statement does not prevent the measure from going on the ballot, and the amount of the estimate is not subject to judicial review. Id. 226See id.; Tornquist, supra note 218, at 677. 227See Richard Colby & David Anderson, Rules Greet Measure 7 Claims,Oregonian, Nov. 29, 2000, at D1; Hunsberger, supra note 223. 228See Colby & Anderson, supra note 227. 229See Stern v. Halligan, 158 F.3d 729, 735 (3rd Cir. 1998) (holding that township decree that landowners connect their property to municipal water supply was supported by the landowners participation in the broader social contract); Hunsberger, supra note 223. 230See Charles E. Beggs, Court Hears Arguments on Property Compensation Measure,Associated Press Newswires, Sept. 10, 2001; Colby & Anderson, supra note 227; Hunsberger, supra note 223. 231See Hunsberger, supra note 223. 232See Beggs, supra note 230; Dave Hogan & Tomoko Hosaka, Judge Tosses Measure 7,Oregonian, Feb. 23, 2001, at A1. 233See Graves, supra note 42. 234SeeAnti-Gay Rights, supra note 8, at 165. 235See Alliance that Battled Measure 9 Looks to the Future, supra note 41; Graves, supra note 42; Hosaka, supra note 116. 236See All Things Considered,supra note 29. The American Civil Liberties Union was poised to challenge Measure 9 in the 2000 general election on the grounds that it violated the free speech and equal protection clauses of the Constitution. See id. The groups believed that the similarities between the OCA initiative and Colorados Amendment 2 were great enough that Measure 9 could not have survived federal constitutional review. See id. 237See Hosaka, supra note 116. 238SeeAnti-Gay Rights, supra note 8, at 1718. 239See Magleby, supra note 16, at 35. 240Id. 241Id. 242SeeAnti-Gay Rights, supra note 8, at 18. 243See id. at 1821. 244See Hosaka, supra note 116. 245See id.; Anti-Gay Rights, supra note 8, at 17; Rubenstein, supra note 60; Sarasohn, Lon Mabon Discovers, supra note 70; Sarasohn, Rural Oregon Ponders,supra note 70. 246Anti-Gay Rights, supra note 8, at 17. 247 Rubenstein, supra note 60. 248Id. 249See Collins & Oesterle, supra note 18, at 56; Linde, supra note 190, at 39598. 250See Collins & Oesterle, supra note 18, at 56. 251See Linde, supra note 190, at 39598. See generally Gregory Kafoury, Raiding the Initiative: Corporations vs. Citizens, 34 Willamette L. Rev. 729 (1998). Linde characterizes the change as a shift of direct democracy from people to money, and the deliberate undermining of representative government. See Linde, supra note 190, at 395. 252SeeCity Club of Portland, supra note 16, at 2627; Magleby, supra note 16, at 30. 253 Magleby, supra note 16, at 30. 254Id. 255Id. 256SeeCity Club of Portland, supra note 16, at 1920. 257Id. 258See Rubenstein, supra note 60. 259 Hosaka, supra note 116. 260See Graves & Hosaka, supra note 105. 261See Collins & Oesterle, supra note 18, at 58. 262See id. 263SeeCity Club of Portland, supra note 16, at 21. 264See id. 265See Bell, supra note 21, at 14, 29; Collins & Oesterle, supra note 18, at 5960; Linde, supra note 30, at 34. 266See Bell, supra note 21, at 14, 29; Collins & Oesterle, supra note 18, at 5960; Linde, supra note 30, at 34. 267SeeDavid B. Magleby, Direct Legislation: Voting on Ballot Propositions in the United States 18486 (1984); Collins & Oesterle, supra note 18, at 5960. 268SeeMagleby, supra note 267, at 185; Collins & Oesterle, supra note 18, at 5960. 269See Collins & Oesterle, supra note 18, at 59; Eule, supra, note 209, at 1527. 270SeeMagleby, supra note 267, at 186; Collins & Oesterle, supra note 18, at 5960. 271See Bell, supra note 21, at 29; Linde, supra note 30, at 34. 272 See Anti-Gay Rights, supra note 8, at 165; Rubenstein supra note 60; Sarasohn, Lon Mabon Discovers, supra note 70; Sarasohn, Rural Oregon Ponders,supra note 70. 273 Bell, supra note 21, at 29. 274 Eule, supra note 209, at1527. 275 Bell, supra note 21, at 14. 276Id. 277See id. at 1617. 278Id. at 16. 279Id. at 1617. 280 Linde, supra note 30, at 38. 281Id.See generally Pierce v. Soc. of Sisters, 286 U.S. 510(1925). 282See Bell, supra note 21, at 1617. 283See Elizabeth R. Leong, Note,Ballot Initiatives & Identifiable Minorities: A Textual Call to Congress, 28 Rutgers L.J. 677, 690 (1997). Seegenerally Linde, supra note 30; Debra F. Salz, Discrimination-Prone Initiatives and the Guarantee Clause: A Role for the Supreme Court, 62Geo. Wash. L. Rev. 100 (1993). 284U.S. Const. art. IV, § 4 285 Salz, supra note 283, at 103. 286Id. 287SeeThe Federalist, supra note 31, No. 51, at 333 (James Madison). 288See Salz, supra note 283, at 10304. 289SeeThe Federalist, supra note 31, No. 10, at 5859 (James Madison). 290Id. at 58. 291See Eule, supra note 209, at 1539. 292SeeThe Federalist, supra note 31, No. 10, at 54 (James Madison). 293Id. 294SeeThe Federalist, supra note 31, No. 51, at 334 (James Madison). 295SeeThe Federalist, supra note 31, No. 63, at 40304 (James Madison). The passage also emphasizes the difference between a republic and an Athenian direct democracy: What bitter anguish would not the people of Athens have often avoided if their government had contained so provident a safeguard against the tyranny of their own passions? Id. at 404. 296See id. at 40304. 297SeeThe Federalist, supra note 31, No. 49, at 323 (James Madison). 298SeeThe Federalist, supra note 31, No. 51, at 333, No. 63, at 40304 (James Madison). 299SeeThe Federalist, supra note 31, No. 10, at 5859, No. 49, at 323, No. 51, at 33334, No. 63, at 40304 (James Madison). 300See Collins & Oesterle, supra note 18, at 48. 301See Luther v. Borden, 48 U.S. 1, 42 (1849). 302Seeid. This principle was established in Luther v. Borden, where the court held, Under [the Guarantee Clause] of the constitution it rests with Congress to decide what government is the established one in a State. For as the United States guarantee to each state a republican government, Congress must necessarily decide what government is established in the State before it can determine whether it is republican or not. Id. 303See generally Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186, 227 (1962). 304Seegenerally Pac. States Tele. & Tele. Co. v. Oregon, 223 U.S. 118 (1912). 305See id. at 151. 306See 369 U.S. at 22627. 307 Linde, supra note 30, at 3940. Judge Linde argues that the Guarantee Clause is nevertheless law and should be applied by state courts in spite of lacking federal jurisdiction. See id. However, no state has invalidated an initiative on this basis. See id. 308See generally 517 U.S. 620 (1996) (holding that a citizen-initiated amendment that prohibited legislative, executive, or judicial action from protecting homosexual persons from discrimination was a violation of the equal protection clause). 309See id. at 63132. 310See generally Williams v. Pryor, 240 F.3d 944, (11th Cir. 2001) (holding that an Alabama statute prohibiting the use of certain sexual devices did not involve the kind of anti-discrimination concerns addressed in Romer); Zehner v. Trigg, 133 F.3d 459, 464 (7th Cir. 1997) (finding no such broad restriction as in Romer where inmates were denied specific remedial rights in asbestos suit); Equal. Found. of Greater Cincinnati Inc. v. City of Cincinnati, 128 F.3d 289, 295 (6th Cir. 1997) (holding that a city amendment removing homosexual persons from antidiscrimination protection survived Romer because it was narrower in scope and impact); Imprisoned Citizens Union v. Shapp, 11 F.Supp. 2d 586, 595 (E.D. Pa. 1998) (upholding prison officials consent decrees because Romer only applies to facial challenges against statutes in their entirety); Bailey v. City of Austin, 972 S.W.2d 180, 190 (Tex. App. 1998) (holding that referendum amendment that eliminated employee benefits for domestic partners because it did not target a discrete group, but applied to all city employees). 311See 128 F.3d at 291. 312Id. at 297. 313See Equal. Found. of Greater Cincinnati Inc. v. City of Cincinnati, 525 U.S. 943, 943 (1997). 314See 972 S.W.2d at 189. 315See id. at 186. 316 Lazos Vargas, supra note 26, at 505. 317Seegenerally Romer v. Evans, 517 U.S. 620 (1996); Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186 (1962); Pac. States Tele. & Tele. Co. v. Oregon, 223 U.S. 118 (1912); Equal. Found., 128 F.3d 289. 318SeeEqual. Found., 128 F.3d at 291. 319See Anti-Gay Rights, supra note 8, at 17; Rubenstein, supra note 60; Sarasohn, Lon Mabon Discovers, supra note 70; Sarasohn, Rural Oregon Ponders,supra note 70. 320See id. 321See Bell, supra note 21, at 29; Linde, supra note 30, at 3134. 322Seesupra notes 147260 and accompanying text. 323See supra notes 204260 and accompanying text. 324See Magleby, supra note 16, at 30, 38; Analyzing the Ads, supra note 67. 325See supra notes 261320 and accompanying text. 326See generally Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186 (1962); Pac. States Tele. & Tele. Co. v. Oregon, 223 U.S. 118 (1912). 327See Collins & Oesterle, supra note 18, at 4950. 328See id. 329See id. 330See Romer v. Evans, 517 U.S. 620, 63132 (1996); Baker, 369 U.S. at 22627; Pac. States, 223 U.S. at 151; Equal. Found. of Greater Cincinnati v. City of Cincinnati, 128 F.3d 289, 291 (6th Cir. 1997). 331See generally Hustler v. Falwell, 485 U.S. 46 (1988) (free speech); Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973) (reproductive rights); Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966) (privilege against self-incrimination); Brown v. Bd. of Educ., 347 U.S. 483 (1954) (civil rights). 332See generallyRoe, 410 U.S. at 113; Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967); Brown, 347 U.S. at 483. 333SeeThe Federalist, supra note 31, No. 51, at 334 (James Madison). 334SeeBaker, 369 U.S. at 227 (holding that any reliance on the Guarantee Clause would be futile). 335See Eule, supra note 209, at 1542. 336 Linde, supra note 30, at 32. 337Id. 338SeeThe Federalist, supra note 31, No. 51, at 334, No. 63, at 40304 (James Madison). 339Seesupra notes 36119 and accompanying text. 340SeeThe Federalist, supra note 31, No. 51, at 334, No. 63, at 40304 (James Madison). 341SeeThe Federalist, supra note 31, No. 63, at 404 (James Madison); Bell, supra note 21, at 1617; Linde, supra note 30, at 38. 342SeeThe Federalist, supra note 31, No. 10, at 5859, No. 49, at 323, No. 51, at 33334, No. 63, at 40304 (James Madison); Linde, supra note 30, at 32. See generally Salz, supra note 283. 343See generally Salz, supra note 283.