Nancy Lee Wilson and Paula Jean Casey

Summary

Justice Wood concurred because, in an original-jurisdiction ballot-title challenge, the court should address all alleged defects rather than grant relief on only one selected charge. She reasoned that comprehensive review gives ballot-title sponsors guidance and protects citizens from having initiatives rejected piecemeal across multiple election cycles. Chief Justice Brill, concurring separately, likewise would have addressed the principal challenges to provide guidance concerning the amendment's broader constitutional effects.