Montana C-48, Search Warrant for Electronic Data Amendment (2022)
| Montana C-48, Search Warrant for Electronic Data Amendment | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Election date November 8, 2022 | |
| Topic Law enforcement | |
Status Approved | |
| Type Constitutional amendment | Origin State legislature |
The Montana C-48, the Search Warrant for Electronic Data Amendment, was on the ballot in Montana as a legislatively referred constitutional amendment on November 8, 2022.[1] The ballot measure was approved.
A "yes" vote supported amending the state constitution to require a search warrant to access electronic data or electronic communications. |
A "no" vote opposed amending the state constitution to include electronic data or communications in the section that governs searches and seizures. |
Election results
|
Montana C-48 |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Result | Votes | Percentage | ||
|
|
365,091 | 82.33% | ||
| No | 78,334 | 17.67% | ||
Overview
What did C-48 do?
- See also: Text of measure
C-48 added language to the Montana Constitution that requires a search warrant to access electronic data or electronic communications. The amendment also states that electronic data and electronic communications would be secure from unreasonable searches and seizures.[2]
Have other states included similar protections for electronic data?
- See also: Related ballot measures
At the time of the election, Michigan and Missouri were the only states to provide explicit protection from unreasonable searches and seizures in their respective state constitutions. In 2020, Michigan voters passed Proposal 2, which amended the state constitution to require a search warrant to access a person's electronic data and electronic communications. In 2014, Missouri approved Amendment 9, which added electronic communications and data to Missouri constitutional prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizures.
How did C-48 get on the ballot?
- See also: Path to the ballot
C-48 needed a two-thirds (66.67 percent) supermajority vote in both the Montana State Senate and the Montana House of Representatives to be referred to the ballot. Senate Bill 203 (SB 203) was introduced on February 9, 2021, by Sen. Kenneth Bogner (R). The state Senate approved the bill on February 23, 2021, in a vote of 50 to 0. On April 22, 2021, the state House approved the bill in a vote of 76-23 with one absent. One Republican representative and 22 Democratic representatives voted against it.
Sen. Bogner, the amendment's sponsor, said, "Senate Bill 203 is about updating Montana’s Constitution to reflect life in the 21st Century and make it explicitly clear that our digital information is protected from unreasonable government searches and seizures. Today, so much of our private lives—financial information, communication with family and friends, medical information, and much, much more—is contained on and transferred electronically among many devices and computer systems. The government should need a warrant before accessing or gathering Montanans electronic data or communications."[3]
Text of measure
Ballot question
The ballot question was as follows:[2]
| “ |
An act submitting to the qualified electors of Montana an amendment to Article II, section 11, of the Montana Constitution to explicitly include electronic data and communications in search and seizure protections. [ ] YES on Constitutional Amendment [ ] NO on Constitutional Amendment[4] |
” |
Constitutional changes
- See also: Article II, Montana Constitution
The measure amended section 11 of Article II of the state constitution. The following underlined text was added, and struck-through text was deleted:[2]
|
Searches and Seizures The people shall be secure in their persons, papers, electronic data and communications, homes and effects from unreasonable searches and seizures. No warrant to search any place, |
Readability score
- See also: Ballot measure readability scores, 2022
Using the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) and Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) formulas, Ballotpedia scored the readability of the ballot title for this measure. Readability scores are designed to indicate the reading difficulty of text. The Flesch-Kincaid formulas account for the number of words, syllables, and sentences in a text; they do not account for the difficulty of the ideas in the text. The state legislature wrote the ballot language for this measure.
The FKGL for the ballot title is grade level 21, and the FRE is -2. The word count for the ballot title is 31.
Support
Supporters
Officials
- State Sen. Kenneth Bogner (R)
- State Sen. Jason Ellsworth (R)
- State Rep. Daniel Zolnikov (R)
Organizations
Arguments
Opposition
If you are aware of any opponents or opposing arguments, please send an email with a link to [email protected].
Arguments
Campaign finance
If you are aware of a committee registered to support or oppose this measure, please email [email protected].
.sbtotaltable {
width: 50%;
}
.sbtotaltable th {
font-size:1.2em;
}
.sbtotaltable td {
text-align:center;
}
.sbtotalheader {
background-color: black !important;
color:white !important;
font-size:1.0em;
font-weight:bold;
}
.sbtotaltotal {
font-weight:bold;
}
| Cash Contributions | In-Kind Contributions | Total Contributions | Cash Expenditures | Total Expenditures | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Support | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 |
| Oppose | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 |
Background
Carpenter v. United States (2018)
In Carpenter v. United States (2018), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 decision that law enforcement must obtain a warrant to access cell phone tracking data. Chief Justice John Roberts authored the opinion for the majority and said, "The Government's acquisition of the cell-site records was a search within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment . . . [and] the Government must generally obtain a warrant supported by probable cause."[5]
Justice Anthony Kennedy dissented from the court's opinion and judgment, joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito. Kennedy argued that the court's ruling "puts needed, reasonable, accepted, lawful, and congressionally authorized criminal investigations at serious risk in serious cases, often when law enforcement seeks to prevent the threat of violent crimes. And it places undue restrictions on the lawful and necessary enforcement powers exercised not only by the Federal Government but also by law enforcement in every State and locality throughout the Nation."[5]
Riley v. California (2014)
In Riley v. California (2014), a unanimous U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a warrant is necessary to search a suspect's cellphone during an arrest. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote that while a police officer can inspect the "physical aspects of a phone to ensure that it will not be used as a weapon," a police officer cannot search a phone's data without a warrant. Chief Justice Roberts stated, "Modern cell phones are not just another technological convenience. With all they contain and all they may reveal, they hold for many Americans 'the privacies of life'… The fact that technology now allows an individual to carry such information in his hand does not make the information any less worthy of the protection for which the Founders fought. Our answer to the question of what police must do before searching a cell phone seized incident to an arrest is accordingly simple—get a warrant."[6]
Related ballot measures
As of November 2022, Michigan and Missouri were the only states to provide explicit protection from unreasonable searches and seizures in their respective state constitutions.
- Michigan Proposal 2 (2020): The constitutional amendment requires a search warrant to access a person's electronic data and electronic communications.
- Missouri Amendment 9 (2014): The constitutional amendment added electronic communications and data to the Missouri Constitution's prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizures.
In 2018, New Hampshire approved a similar amendment that stated, "An individual's right to live free from governmental intrusion in private or personal information is natural, essential, and inherent."[7]
Ballot measures in Montana
- A total of 65 measures appeared on statewide ballots in Montana from 1996 to 2020.
- From 1996 to 2020, the number of measures on statewide ballots during even-numbered years ranged from two to eight.
- Between 1996 and 2020, an average of between five measures appeared on the ballot in Montana during even-numbered election years.
- Between 1996 and 2020, about 64.6% (42 of 65) of the total number of measures that appeared on statewide ballots were approved, and about 35.4% (23 of 65) were defeated.
Path to the ballot
- See also: Amending the Montana Constitution
To put a legislatively referred constitutional amendment before voters, a two-thirds (66.67%) vote of all members of the Montana State Legislature was required.
Senate Bill 203 (SB 203) was introduced on February 9, 2021, by Sen. Kenneth Bogner (R). The state Senate approved the bill on February 23, 2021, in a vote of 50 to 0. On April 22, 2021, the state House approved the bill in a vote of 76-23 with one absent.[1]
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
How to cast a vote
- See also: Voting in Montana
Click "Show" to learn more about voter registration, identification requirements, and poll times in Montana.
| How to cast a vote in Montana | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Poll timesIn Montana, polling place hours vary throughout the state. Most polling places open at 7:00 a.m. and close at 8:00 p.m., although in areas with fewer than 400 registered voters, polling places may open as late as 12:00 p.m. An individual who is in line at the time polls close must be allowed to vote.[8] Registration
To register to vote in Montana, each applicant must be a citizen of the United States, a resident of Montana for at least 30 days prior to the election, and at least 18 years old by the day of the election. People serving a felony sentence in a penal institution and those who have been declared by a court to be of unsound mind are not eligible to vote.[9] Citizens can register to vote in person by completing a registration application at their county election office. They can register by mailing the application to their county election administrator or submitting it when applying for or renewing a driver’s license or state ID. Citizens may also register to vote at their county election offices, certain designated locations, or at their designated polling location on Election Day.[9] Automatic registrationMontana does not practice automatic voter registration. Online registration
Montana does not permit online voter registration. Same-day registrationMontana allows same-day voter registration. Residency requirementsIn order to register to vote in Montana, applicants must have lived in the state for at least 30 days prior to the election. Verification of citizenshipMontana does not require proof of citizenship for voter registration. An individual applying to register to vote must attest that they are a U.S. citizen under penalty of perjury. All 49 states with voter registration systems require applicants to declare that they are U.S. citizens in order to register to vote in state and federal elections, under penalty of perjury or other punishment.[10] As of November 2024, five states — Alabama, Arizona, Georgia, Kansas, and New Hampshire — had passed laws requiring verification of citizenship at the time of voter registration. However, only two of those states' laws were in effect, in Arizona and New Hampshire. In three states — California, Maryland, and Vermont — at least one local jurisdiction allowed noncitizens to vote in some local elections as of November 2024. Noncitizens registering to vote in those elections must complete a voter registration application provided by the local jurisdiction and are not eligible to register as state or federal voters. Verifying your registrationThe site My Voter Page, run by the Montana secretary of state’s office, allows residents to check their voter registration status online. Voter ID requirementsMontana requires voters to present identification while voting. Montana's voter identification requirements are outlined in Section 13-13-114 of Montana Code, as amended when SB 169 was signed into law on April 19, 2021. The law states, "Before an elector is permitted to receive a ballot or vote, the elector shall present to an election judge one of the following forms of identification showing the elector's name:"[11]
On March 27, 2024, the Montana Supreme Court ruled that the portion of SB 169 that precluded the use of student ID for voter identification was unconstitutional. See here for more. | |||||
See also
External links
Footnotes
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 Montana State Legislature, "Overview of SB 203," accessed February 24, 2021
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 Montana State Legislature, "Text of SB 203" accessed February 24, 2021
- ↑ Sidney Herald, "Proposed constitutional amendment will protect Montanans' privacy in the digital age," accessed August 9, 2021
- ↑ 4.0 4.1 4.2 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source. Cite error: Invalid
<ref>tag; name "quotedisclaimer" defined multiple times with different content Cite error: Invalid<ref>tag; name "quotedisclaimer" defined multiple times with different content - ↑ 5.0 5.1 United States Supreme Court, "Carpenter v. United States Opinion," June 22, 2018
- ↑ Supreme Court of the United States, "Riley v. California," accessed May 17, 2017
- ↑ New Hampshire General Court, "Constitutional Amendment Concurrent Resolution 16," accessed February 23, 2018
- ↑ Montana Secretary of State, "Elections & Voter Services: 2022 Polling Places", accessed August 18, 2024
- ↑ 9.0 9.1 Montana Secretary of State, “How to Register to Vote,” accessed August 18, 2024
- ↑ Under federal law, the national mail voter registration application (a version of which is in use in all states with voter registration systems) requires applicants to indicate that they are U.S. citizens in order to complete an application to vote in state or federal elections, but does not require voters to provide documentary proof of citizenship. According to the U.S. Department of Justice, the application "may require only the minimum amount of information necessary to prevent duplicate voter registrations and permit State officials both to determine the eligibility of the applicant to vote and to administer the voting process."
- ↑ Montana Code Annotated 2021, "Section 13-13-114." accessed August 18, 2024
 |
State of Montana Helena (capital) |
|---|---|
| Elections |
What's on my ballot? | Elections in 2024 | How to vote | How to run for office | Ballot measures |
| Government |
Who represents me? | U.S. President | U.S. Congress | Federal courts | State executives | State legislature | State and local courts | Counties | Cities | School districts | Public policy |
