Separate-vote requirement for constitutional amendments

Laws governing ballot measures
State
• Laws governing state initiative processes
• Laws governing state recall processes
• Changes to ballot measure law in 2024
• Difficulty analysis of changes to laws governing ballot measures
Local
• Laws governing local ballot measures
Learn about Ballotpedia's election legislation tracker.
2024 » « 2022

A separate-vote requirement is a constitutional provision featured in 32 state constitutions requiring that proposed constitutional amendments placed on statewide ballots must be decided by voters as separate ballot questions. In some states, constitutional amendments have been overturned after courts found that the amendments violated the state constitution's separate-vote requirement.

There is a similar rule called the single-subject rule that requires ballot initiatives, not legislative referrals, to address a single subject, topic, or issue. Of the 26 states with some type of statewide citizen-initiated measure, 16 have a single-subject rule. Of the 32 states that have a separate-vote requirement, 14 have a single-subject rule.

HIGHLIGHTS

Separate-vote requirements and Marsy's Law Amendments: In Montana (2017) and Pennsylvania (2021), state supreme courts held that Marsy's Law, a type of crime victims' rights amendment, violated the states' separate-vote requirements. In Wisconsin (2023), the Wisconsin Supreme Court upheld a 2020 Marsy's Law Amendment finding that it did not violate the state's separate-vote requirement.

Requirements by state

Thirty-two states have a separate-vote requirement in their state constitutions for proposed constitutional amendments. The following map shows which states have the requirement:

State constitutions with a separate-vote requirement

State	Constitutional citation	Text of constitutional provision
Arizona	Article 21, Arizona Constitution	"If more than one proposed amendment is submitted at any election, the proposed amendments shall be submitted in such a manner that the electors may vote for or against such proposed amendments separately."
Arkansas	Article 19, Arkansas Constitution	"They shall be so submitted as to enable the electors to vote on each amendment separately."
California	Article XVIII, California Constitution	"Each amendment shall be so prepared and submitted that it can be voted on separately."
Colorado	Article XIX, Colorado Constitution	"If more than one amendment be submitted at any general election, each of said amendments shall be voted upon separately and votes thereon cast shall be separately counted the same as though but one amendment was submitted; but each general assembly shall have no power to propose amendments to more than six articles of this constitution. ... No measure proposing an amendment or amendments to this constitution shall be submitted by the general assembly to the registered electors of the state containing more than one subject, which shall be clearly expressed in its title."
Florida	Article XI, Florida Constitution	"The power to propose the revision or amendment of any portion or portions of this constitution by initiative is reserved to the people, provided that, any such revision or amendment, except for those limiting the power of government to raise revenue, shall embrace but one subject and matter directly connected therewith."
Georgia	Article X, Georgia Constitution	"When more than one amendment is submitted at the same time, they shall be so submitted as to enable the electors to vote on each amendment separately, provided that one or more new articles or related changes in one or more articles may be submitted as a single amendment."
Hawaii	Article XVII, Hawaii Constitution	"... each amendment shall be submitted in the form of a question embracing but one subject; and provided further, that each question shall have designated spaces to mark YES or NO on the amendment."
Idaho	Article XX, Idaho Constitution	"If two or more amendments are proposed, they shall be submitted in such manner that the electors shall vote for or against each of them separately."
Indiana	Article 16, Indiana Constitution	"If two or more amendments shall be submitted at the same time, they shall be submitted in such manner that the electors shall vote for or against each of such amendments separately."
Iowa	Article X, Iowa Constitution	"If two or more amendments shall be submitted at the same time, they shall be submitted in such manner that the electors shall vote for or against each of such amendments separately."
Kansas	Article 14, Kansas Constitution	"When more than one amendment shall be submitted at the same election, such amendments shall be so submitted as to enable the electors to vote on each amendment separately."
Kentucky	Mode of Revision, Kentucky Constitution	"If two or more amendments shall be submitted at the same time, they shall be submitted in such manner that the electors shall vote for or against each of such amendments separately, but an amendment may relate to a single subject or to related subject matters and may amend or modify as many articles and as many sections of the Constitution as may be necessary and appropriate in order to accomplish the objectives of the amendment."
Louisiana	Article XIII, Louisiana Constitution	"A proposed amendment shall have a title containing a brief summary of the changes proposed; shall be confined to one object; and shall set forth the entire article, or the sections or other subdivisions thereof, as proposed to be revised or only the article, sections, or other subdivisions proposed to be added. However, the legislature may propose, as one amendment, a revision of an entire article of this constitution which may contain multiple objects or changes. A section or other subdivision may be repealed by reference. When more than one amendment is submitted at the same election, each shall be submitted so as to enable the electors to vote on them separately."
Maryland	Article XIV, Maryland Constitution	"When two or more amendments shall be submitted to the voters of this State at the same election, they shall be so submitted as that each amendment shall be voted on separately."
Minnesota	Article IX, Minnesota Constitution	"If two or more amendments are submitted at the same time, voters shall vote for or against each separately."
Mississippi	Article XV, Mississippi Constitution	"... if more than one (1) amendment shall be submitted at one (1) time, they shall be submitted in such manner and form that the people may vote for or against each amendment separately; and, notwithstanding the division of the Constitution into sections, the Legislature may provide in its resolution for one or more amendments pertaining and relating to the same subject or subject matter, and may provide for one or more amendments to an article of the Constitution pertaining and relating to the same subject or subject matter, which may be included in and voted on as one (1) amendment ."
Missouri	Article XII, Missouri Constitution	"No such proposed amendment shall contain more than one amended and revised article of this constitution, or one new article which shall not contain more than one subject and matters properly connected therewith. ... More than one amendment at the same election shall be so submitted as to enable the electors to vote on each amendment separately."
Montana	Article XIV, Montana Constitution	"If more than one amendment is submitted at the same election, each shall be so prepared and distinguished that it can be voted upon separately."
Nebraska	Article XVI, Nebraska Constitution and Article III, Nebraska Constitution	"When two or more amendments are submitted at the same election, they shall be so submitted as to enable the electors to vote on each amendment separately."
New Jersey	Article IX, New Jersey Constitution	"If more than one amendment be submitted, they shall be submitted in such manner and form that the people may vote for or against each amendment separately and distinctly."
New Mexico	Article XIX, New Mexico Constitution	"If two or more amendments are initiated by the legislature, they shall be so submitted as to enable the electors to vote on each of them separately. Amendments initiated by an independent commission created by law for that purpose may be submitted to the legislature separately or as a single ballot question, and any such commission-initiated amendments that are not substantially altered by the legislature may be submitted to the electors in the separate or single ballot question form recommended by the commission."
Ohio	Article XVI, Ohio Constitution	"When more than one amendment shall be submitted at the same time, they shall be so submitted as to enable the electors to vote on each amendment, separately."
Oklahoma	Article XXIV, Oklahoma Constitution	"No proposal for the amendment or alteration of this Constitution which is submitted to the voters shall embrace more than one general subject and the voters shall vote separately for or against each proposal submitted; provided, however, that in the submission of proposals for the amendment of this Constitution by articles, which embrace one general subject, each proposed article shall be deemed a single proposal or proposition."
Oregon	Article XVII, Oregon Constitution	"When two or more amendments shall be submitted in the manner aforesaid to the voters of this state at the same election, they shall be so submitted that each amendment shall be voted on separately."
Pennsylvania	Article XI, Pennsylvania Constitution	"When two or more amendments shall be submitted they shall be voted upon separately."
South Carolina	Article XVI, South Carolina Constitution	"If two or more amendments shall be submitted at the same time, they shall be submitted in such manner that the electors shall vote for or against each of such amendments separately."
South Dakota	Article XXIII, South Dakota Constitution	"A proposed amendment may amend one or more articles and related subject matter in other articles as necessary to accomplish the objectives of the amendment, however no proposed amendment may embrace more than one subject. If more than one amendment is submitted at the same election, each amendment shall be so prepared and distinguished that it can be voted upon separately."
Utah	Article XXIII, Utah Constitution	"The revision or amendment of an entire article or the addition of a new article to this Constitution may be proposed as a single amendment and may be submitted to the electors as a single question or proposition. Such amendment may relate to one subject, or any number of subjects, and may modify, or repeal provisions contained in other articles of the Constitution, if such provisions are germane to the subject matter of the article being revised, amended or being proposed as a new article."
Washington	Article XXIII, Washington State Constitution	"That if more than one amendment be submitted, they shall be submitted in such a manner that the people may vote for or against such amendments separately."
West Virginia	Article XIV, West Virginia Constitution	"If two or more amendments be submitted at the same time, the vote on the ratification or rejection shall be taken on each separately, but an amendment may relate to a single subject or to related subject matters and may amend or modify as many articles and as many sections of the constitution as may be necessary and appropriate in order to accomplish the objectives of the amendment."
Wisconsin	Article XII, Wisconsin Constitution	"... if more than one amendment be submitted, they shall be submitted in such manner that the people may vote for or against such amendments separately."
Wyoming	Article 20, Wyoming Constitution	"If two or more amendments are proposed, they shall be submitted in such manner that the electors shall vote for or against each of them separately."

Lawsuits

The following is a selection of case law and litigation about separate-vote requirements.

Whether an amendment containing multiple rights violates the separate-vote requirement

• Wisconsin Justice Initiative v. Wisconsin Elections Commission (2023): The Wisconsin Supreme Court upheld the Marsy's Law Crime Victims Rights Amendment, which voters approved in 2020. The court ruled that the amendment was validly approved in a 6-1 ruling. "Employing this test, we have no difficulty concluding Marsy’s Law did not violate the constitutional prohibition on submitting multiple amendments as one,” Justice Brian Hagedorn wrote in the majority opinion. “The amendment broadly protects and expands crime victims’ rights. This is plain from the text and history of its adoption.”

• League of Women Voters of PA and Haw v. Degraffenreid (2021): The Pennsylvania Supreme Court overturned the Marsy's Law Crime Victims Rights Amendment, finding that "[the law was] a collection of amendments which added a multiplicity of new rights to our Constitution, and, because those new rights were not interrelated in purpose and function, the manner in which it was presented to the voters denied them their right to consider and vote on each change separately. Many or all of these newly enumerated rights are independent of the others, and could operate independently. In short, they are not functionally interrelated. Indeed, we can easily envision a voter supporting one or more of these rights without approving of all of them."

• Montana Association of Counties v. Montana (2017): The Montana Supreme Court struck down Montana Marsy's Law Crime Victims Rights Initiative as unconstitutional. In a 5-2 decision, the court said that the initiative violated the separate-vote requirement of the Montana Constitution. The court said that by requiring a single yes or no vote on multiple issues, voters were not given the chance to be heard on each proposed constitutional change. Specifically, the court concluded that the initiative affected existing constitutional provisions regarding the right to know, the right to participate, the right to bail, the Supreme Court’s authority to regulate attorney conduct, and other constitutional rights related to criminal trials. The Court said that each of these changes was substantive and not closely related, and therefore a separate vote on each change was necessary to comply with the separate-vote requirement. The court did not say that the initiative violated the single-subject requirement set forth in Article V, Section 11, of the Montana Constitution. Instead, the court said that the single-subject requirement applies to bills from the legislature and not to constitutional amendments. The separate-vote requirement was found to apply to initiatives.

Single subject rules and separate-voter requirements

• State ex rel. Loontjer v. Gale (2014): The Nebraska Supreme Court ruled "that the single subject rule for voter initiatives and the separate-vote provision for the Legislature's proposed amendments should be construed as imposing the same ballot requirements: A voter initiative or a legislatively proposed constitutional amendment may not contain two or more distinct subjects for voter approval in a single vote. ... Like single-subject rules [for constitutional amendments, a separate-vote provision is often said too be aimed at the practice of logrolling. which "is the practice of combining dissimilar propositions into one proposed amendment so that voters must vote for or against the whole package even though they would have voted differently had the propositions been submitted separately."

• Armatta V. Kitzhaber (1996): The Oregon Supreme Court ruled that the separate-vote requirement "establishes, at a minimum, that the separate-vote requirement prevents the combining of several proposed amendments, which have been labeled from their inception as separate amendments, into one proposed amendment subject to a single vote" and "by contrast [to the single-subject rule], focuses upon the form of submission of an amendment, as well as the potential change to the existing constitution, by requiring that two or more constitutional amendments be voted upon separately. That is, in addition to speaking to the form of submission, the separate-vote requirement addresses the extent to which a proposed amendment would modify the existing constitution. That is significantly different from the wording of the single-subject requirement, which focuses in isolation only upon the text of a proposed amendment in requiring that it embrace a single subject."

See also

• Amending state constitutions
• Laws governing ballot measures
• List of ballot measures by year
• Frequently asked ballot measure questions