Oregon Supreme Court Bans 10 GOP Senators From Reelection Runs

Five lawmakers sued over the secretary of state’s decision — Sens. Tim Knopp, Daniel Bonham, Suzanne Weber, Dennis Linthicum and Lynn Findley. They were among the 10 GOP senators who racked up more than 10 absences.

“We obviously disagree with the Supreme Court’s ruling,” said Knopp, the Senate minority leader. “But more importantly, we are deeply disturbed by the chilling impact this decision will have to crush dissent.”

“Today’s ruling by the Oregon Supreme Court means that legislators and the public now know how Measure 113 will be applied, and that is good for our state,” he said in a statement.

Political advocacy groups that backed Measure 113 had similar reactions.

“Walkouts allow a relatively small number of lawmakers to nullify the will of the majority, and that is to the detriment of our democracy,” Alejandro Queral, executive director of the Oregon Center for Public Policy, said in an emailed statement.

During oral arguments before the Oregon Supreme Court in December, attorneys for the senators and the state wrestled over the grammar and syntax of the language that was added to the state constitution after Measure 113 was approved by voters.

The amendment says a lawmaker is not allowed to run “for the term following the election after the member’s current term is completed.”

The debate was over when that ineligibility kicks in: If a senator’s term ends in January 2025, they would typically seek reelection in November 2024. The “election after the member’s current term is completed” would not be until November 2028, the Republican senators argued, so they could run for reelection this year and then hold office for another term before becoming ineligible.

The court disagreed, saying that while the language of the amendment was ambiguous, the information provided to voters in the ballot title and explanatory statement made clear that the intent was to bar truant lawmakers from holding office in the next term.

“Those other materials expressly and uniformly informed voters that the amendment would apply to a legislator’s immediate next terms of office, indicating that the voters so understood and intended that meaning,” the justices wrote.

The senators’ lawsuit was filed against Secretary of State LaVonne Griffin-Valade, who last August said the boycotting senators were disqualified from seeking reelection. She directed her office’s elections division to implement an administrative rule based on her stance.

All parties in the suit had sought clarity on the issue before the March 2024 filing deadline for candidates who want to run in this year’s election.

Knopp, the Senate minority leader, said he didn’t plan to appeal the decision or join a separate federal lawsuit filed by three Republican senators challenging their disqualification from the ballot. A federal judge in December ruled against the three lawmakers, and they have appealed the decision to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.