The group behind a constitutional amendment to strengthen the state's Freedom of Information Act filed a lawsuit Tuesday in attempt to side step approval from the attorney general and instead ask for approval from the Arkansas Supreme Court.
Arkansas Citizens for Transparency contends in the lawsuit that Attorney General Tim Griffin has gone beyond his authority by blocking the group's attempt to get approval of ballot language for its proposed amendment.
Under Arkansas law, the attorney general has the authority to approval, reject or rewrite the official language, referred to as the ballot title and popular name, for a proposed constitutional amendment or initiated act.
The group has submitted three versions of a constitutional amendment to the attorney general's office for approval, two which have been rejected and the other still pending review. The lawsuit asks the Supreme Court to compel Griffin to sign off on the ballot language or rewrite it.
"The Attorney General's rejection of the ballot title and popular name demonstrates that he has either a complete lack of understanding of his role in the initiative process or he is intentionally thwarting the effort of the petitioner to get this amendment approved for the ballot so that the voters of the state can decide its merits," the lawsuit states.
The group needs official approval of its ballot language before it can begin collecting signatures for its petition to get the measures on the ballot.
To make the ballot, a voter-driven constitutional amendment needs 90,704 verified signatures from registered voters, which need to be turned in to the secretary of state's office by July 5. The lawsuit argues Griffin's repeated rejections of ballot language for the proposed amendment is limiting Arkansas Citizens for Transparency's time to collect signatures.
The group's proposed constitutional amendment would make it more difficult for the legislature to make the Arkansas Freedom of Information Act less transparent, requiring a two-thirds vote in both chambers to amend the law, which would not take effect until after voters signed off through a referendum in the next general election.
An immediate change to the state's sunshine law would need a nine-tenths vote in both chambers to take effect under the proposed amendment. However, voters would get a chance to overturn it at the next general election through a referendum.
"I am confident in our review and analysis of ballot submissions and look forward to the Arkansas Supreme Court's review in this case," Griffin said in a statement responding to the lawsuit.
Griffin's office is also set to release an opinion on the group's constitutional amendment on Wednesday and on its proposed initiated act on Thursday.
The initiated act, which is a companion to the group's amendment on the Freedom of Information Act, would create an Arkansas Transparency Commission to assist Arkansans with their records request. The proposal also would set a definition for a public meeting and allow judges to assess civil penalties against government bodies that don't comply with records requests. Griffin, a Republican, also has previously rejected ballot language for the group's initiated act.
Arkansas Citizens for Transparency formed in response to the effort to overhaul the Freedom of Information Act during September's special session. The group includes former state legislator Nate Bell, Democratic state Sen. Clarke Tucker of Little Rock, Arkansas Press Association Executive Director Ashley Kemp Wimberley and attorneys David Couch, John E. Tull III, Robert Steinbuch and Jennifer Standerfer.
During the special session Republican Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders backed a bill that would have exempted large categories of government records from disclosure, including communications between her and cabinet secretaries. But after public pushback, including from Republican and conservative groups and voters, Sanders and the General Assembly agreed to a scaled down bill that exempts only "records that reflect the planning or provision of security services provided" to the state's constitutional officers.