Supreme Court of Arkansas

April Forrester

June 23, 20112011 Ark. LEXIS 257

Summary

The dissent would invalidate section 3 of amendment 89 because combining the interest-rate increase with other lending and economic provisions deprived voters of the opportunity to vote on each amendment separately and constituted logrolling. It would also reject the challenge to the ballot title, but on the ground that a specific legislative direction controlled over the generally applicable statute. No holding is stated because this is a dissent.