‘Two Seattle property owners, Mark Elster and Sarah Pynchon, brought a lawsuit against the city last year, claiming the vouchers system was violating their constitutional right to free speech by forcing them — through their tax dollars — to support candidates they didn’t like.
‘“Elster and Pynchon argue the Democracy Voucher Program is not viewpoint-neutral because the vouchers will be distributed among qualified municipal candidates unevenly and according to majoritarian preferences,” Gonzalez wrote, referring to the plaintiffs.’
Wait minute. Did the court add this weird “majoritarian preferences” language on its own? Is that actually how it was framed in the complaint?
Can the state’s supreme court ruling be appealed in federal court?
Hmmm. Perhaps it goes to USSC. I see either way that arguments and rulings become fodder in the school choice battle.
I pulled the complaint. They satted “By distributing such funds at the whim of majoritarian interests, the program disfavors minority viewpoints.”
It can be found here: https://pacificlegal.org/wp-content/uploads/pdf/elster-v-city-of-seattle-washington/Elster-Complaint-6-28-17.pdf