Michigan voters approved the Money Out of Politics ballot measure with over 80% support on November 4, 2026. The Mackinac Center for Public Policy filed a federal lawsuit less than 24 hours after the election to block parts of the measure on First Amendment grounds.
First Amendment Arguments
The specific First Amendment arguments used to challenge the Money Out of Politics ballot measure center around the reporting requirements for “electioneering communications” within 100 days of an election. The Mackinac Center argues that these requirements would force the organization to disclose its donor list to the state, violating the privacy of its supporters. The Center claims that it does not endorse candidates or issues, but some of its research and advocacy could be labeled “electioneering communications” under the proposal, which would require it to disclose its finances as a “political committee.”
Background And History
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution prevents Congress from making laws respecting an establishment of religion, prohibiting the free exercise of religion, or abridging the freedom of speech, the freedom of the press, the freedom of peaceable assembly, and the right to petition the government for redress of grievances. The amendment has been applied to states through the Fourteenth Amendment, and its protections have been expanded through various court decisions. In this case, the Mackinac Center is arguing that the reporting requirements for electioneering communications would impose an undue burden on its freedom of speech.
How It Works
The Money Out of Politics ballot measure aims to limit election spending in Michigan by prohibiting regulated state utility companies and their executives from donating to campaigns for many Michigan offices or political action committees. However, the Mackinac Center is not challenging this provision. Instead, it is challenging the reporting requirements for electioneering communications, which it claims would require it to disclose sensitive information about its donors and finances. The Center argues that this would have a chilling effect on its ability to engage in public discourse and advocate for its issues.
What It Means Now
The lawsuit filed by the Mackinac Center has significant implications for the implementation of the Money Out of Politics ballot measure. If the court rules in favor of the Center, it could limit the ability of the state to enforce the reporting requirements for electioneering communications. This could have far-reaching consequences for the regulation of election spending in Michigan and potentially other states. As Patrick Wright, the Mackinac Center’s Vice President for Legal Affairs, said, “We think that the law needs to be defined and its scope understood rather quickly.” The case is currently pending in federal court, and its outcome will be closely watched by advocates on both sides of the issue. By nightfall, the fate of the Money Out of Politics ballot measure will remain uncertain, pending the court’s decision.
Sources
- First Amendment to the United States Constitution
- REGISTER NOW: The State of The First Amendment
- Money out of Politics ballot measure faces First Amendment challenge
- 120th Congress must protect the First Amendment right to a free press – Committee to Protect Journalists
- Musk’s Minnesota Deepfake Fight Could Define AI’s First Amendment
- Federal judge rules Houston violated First Amendment rights of Food Not Bombs activists
Photo: Jack McHugh (CC BY 3.0)
