Court Decision: Ohio’s Ban on Foreign Ballot Initiative Contributions Stands

The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals has delivered a pivotal decision affecting Ohio’s electoral landscape, and the implications are profound.

At a Glance

Federal appeals court upholds Ohio’s ban on foreign contributions to ballot campaigns.
Law does not violate First Amendment rights, Judges Thapar and McKeague rule.
Law focuses on preventing foreign influence in Ohio’s elections.
Initial halt by a federal judge due to concern over First Amendment implications.
The law empowers the Ohio Attorney General for investigations.

Sixth Circuit Court’s Landmark Ruling

The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals has affirmed an Ohio statute forbidding foreign nationals and green card holders from financially contributing to state ballot initiatives. This ruling saw a 2-1 decision from a panel of judges and underscores the critical need to protect election processes from foreign sway. The court has determined that the law does not infringe upon the First Amendment, providing significant judicial backing to the state’s legislative efforts.

The law was initially challenged when a federal judge cited potential violations of free-speech rights among lawful permanent residents. Ohio’s representatives, Attorney General Dave Yost and Secretary of State Frank LaRose, opted to appeal this ruling. The Sixth Circuit Court permitted temporary enforcement of the ban to facilitate thorough deliberations of the case.

BREAKING: The U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals lifted the trial court’s stay on Ohio’s ban on foreign contributions to campaigns.

(Foreign contributions to candidates have long been prohibited under Ohio law.)

— Attorney General Dave Yost (@DaveYostOH) September 25, 2024

Historical Context and Legislative Intent

Republican state legislators prompted the creation of this law, supported by Governor Mike DeWine. The law arose partly in response to a nonprofit, funded by a foreign entity, that backed an Ohio abortion rights amendment campaign. The same organization also contributed to a campaign advocating for a redistricting reform amendment appearing on the November ballot.

“This ruling has no impact on our campaign to end gerrymandering in Ohio because our campaign has not and will not accept any contributions from foreign nationals, with or without HB1. That was already the law in Ohio,” said Chris Davey from Citizens Not Politicians.

Judge Stephanie Dawkins Davis voiced her dissent, expressing concern that the law unfairly burdens lawful permanent residents’ First Amendment rights and criticizing Ohio’s broad interpretation of “foreign national” compared to federal standards.

#ELB: “Sixth Circuit Allows Enforcement of Ohio Law Barring Foreign Expenditures on Ballot Initiatives” https://t.co/fQjnQtyiss

— Rick Hasen (@rickhasen) October 8, 2024

Implications for Ohio’s Electoral Process

This ruling prepares Ohio’s Attorney General to conduct investigations into foreign donation violations, a shift from previous procedures managed by the state election commission. The decision stands as a testament to the state’s priority to shield its electoral system from foreign disruptions and underscores the argument that non-citizens’ influence aligns contrary to Ohio’s self-governance.

“Therefore, we have no trouble concluding that Ohio has a compelling interest in preventing foreign influence in its elections, and that Ohio’s interest extends to preventing independent expenditures by non-citizens,” said Judge Amul Thapar.

Ohio’s decision sets a precedent and methodology for states aiming to protect election integrity, highlighting the thin line between safeguarding democracy and ensuring freedom of speech. The larger debate continues over balancing national interests with constitutional rights as other states observe Ohio’s methods and outcomes.