## Facts

- The Arkansas Constitution prohibited lotteries by providing that no lottery may be authorized and lottery tickets may not be sold.
- Sponsors proposed a constitutional amendment (Proposed Amendment 3) authorizing the General Assembly to establish, operate, and regulate state lotteries.
- The amendment dedicated lottery proceeds (after operating expenses and prizes) to scholarships and grants for Arkansas residents attending qualifying in-state two- and four-year public and private nonprofit institutions.
- The amendment characterized lottery proceeds as cash funds held in trust outside the state treasury and not subject to legislative appropriation.
- The Attorney General approved the proposed popular name and ballot title, which stated the amendment would authorize state lotteries to fund scholarships and grants and would amend Ark. Const. art. 19, § 14.
- The Secretary of State certified the measure for the November 4, 2008 general-election ballot.
- A voter and advocacy organization filed an original action in the Arkansas Supreme Court seeking to declare the popular name and ballot title insufficient and to enjoin placement on the ballot.

## Issues

1. Whether the ballot title was misleading for failing to adequately disclose that the amendment would change the existing constitutional prohibition on lotteries.
2. Whether the ballot title was insufficient for failing to define “state lottery” and thereby failing to disclose the possible breadth of authorized games.
3. Whether the ballot title was misleading for failing to address potential implications for casino gambling or other forms of gaming.
4. Whether, taken as a whole, the popular name and ballot title were intelligible, honest, and impartial and gave voters a fair understanding of the amendment’s scope and import.

## Decision

- The Arkansas Supreme Court exercised original jurisdiction under Amendment 7 and Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 6-5(a).
- The court denied the petition for declaratory and injunctive relief.
- The court held the popular name and ballot title were sufficient and permitted the measure to remain on the ballot.
- The court concluded the ballot title adequately conveyed that art. 19, § 14 was being amended to allow state lotteries for scholarship funding.
- The court held a ballot title need not define “state lottery” or list every game potentially encompassed by the term.
- The court held the ballot title was not required to address speculative future consequences for casino gambling or other gaming-related litigation.

## Legal Principles

- Under Amendment 7, a ballot title must be intelligible, honest, and impartial, and must convey an intelligible idea of the scope and import of the proposal.
- A ballot title is sufficient if it fairly apprises voters of the proposal’s general purposes when read together with the popular name.
- A ballot title need not include every detail, define every term, or predict every possible statutory or judicial construction or downstream legal consequence.
- The court reviews only ballot-title sufficiency and does not decide the proposal’s merits or wisdom.

## Conclusion

The court upheld the sufficiency of the popular name and ballot title for a constitutional amendment authorizing state lotteries to fund scholarships and grants, rejecting claims that the title had to define “state lottery,” warn of broader gaming implications, or more explicitly describe the change to the existing lottery prohibition.


Cox v. Daniels, 288 S.W.3d 591 (Ark. 2008)