Ohio Supreme Court Strikes Down Frank LaRose’s Push for Fraudulently Worded Bellefontaine Drag Ban

In a victory for the LGBTQ+ community, the Ohio Supreme Court has decided unanimously to invalidate a ballot initiative to ban public drag performances in Bellefontaine, on grounds that the ballot language was changed after the fact.

Several states and local communities throughout the United States have passed laws and ordinances banning public drag performances via legislative processes. But some residents of Bellefontaine sought to have their 14,000-person west-central Ohio locale become the first in the country to put the issue up for a public vote. 

In August five electoral protestors (Victoria Maddox, Katelyn Roby, Sarah Lewis, Chris Hildreth Blair and Marshall Blair Hildreth) claimed the language on the ballot measure petition was fraudulently changed after voters signed it. 

The five protestors filed a formal complaint with the Logan County Board of Elections, showing discrepancies between certified copies of public records on file and pictures of the petition when it was circulated for signatures. 

But Secretary of State Frank LaRose and the BOE denied the protestors’ complaint, allowing the petition to be placed on the November ballot.

The Republican-leaning Ohio Supreme Court’s decision on Sunday reverses LaRose’s ruling and blocks the ballot measure from moving forward. 

In its decision, the Court also denounced LaRose and the Logan County Board of Elections (BOE), who sided against the five electoral protesters. 

“Secretary LaRose and the board of elections abused their discretion and disregarded the law in overruling relators’ protest,” the Court wrote.

Tim Steinhelfer, an attorney representing the five electoral protesters, said his clients are ecstatic. 

“We never doubted it for a second,” Steinhelfer said. “We obviously welcome this news. It is because of my clients’ bravery in standing up to these powerful interests that we were able to win this tremendous victory.” 

A Months-Long Battle

This case started with a drag queen atop a jet ski. 

Some residents who were upset by the inclusion of the fully clothed drag queen in the 2022 Bellefontaine Christmas Parade began collecting signatures to ban the appearance of drag queens in public. 

In August, these residents turned in their petition at the BOE with 796 signatures. The following week, the electoral protestors filed their complaint, with photographs of the original circulated ballot taken while signatures were being collected as proof. 

On September 7, the bipartisan BOE heard the electoral protest and voted first to remove the petition from the November ballot. That vote tied 2-2. These split votes sent the matter to Secretary of State Frank LaRose to break the tie.

In a September 19 decision sent to the BOE, LaRose sided with the original petition to place the drag ban on the November ballot. He cited that the only relevant issue was whether the full and complete title of the proposed ordinance was contained on the petitions, which he determined to have lawfully been presented.

“Based upon the evidence provided to my Office, it is my view that the initiative petition and the part-petitions presented to voters were compliant with the law,” LaRose wrote in his decision.

The Court Weighs In

In their appeal to the Ohio Supreme Court, the electoral protestors sought a writ of mandamus—an order from a higher court requiring a lower court to take a particular action. The petitioners argued that LaRose and the Logan BOE were not properly fulfilling their duties and were abusing their discretion with their decision to put the issue on the ballot. 

The Court agreed with the electoral protestors.  

Steinhelfer explained that in seeking a writ of mandamus, his clients had to present “clear and convincing evidence,” a much higher standard than the normal threshold of a “preponderance of evidence.” 

He further said that the granting of such writs is extremely rare and is only successful when officials egregiously abuse their discretion, as he said LaRose did here. 

“The Supreme Court looked to the actual substance of this argument,” Steinhelfer said. “LaRose presented a legal theory that the Court was not willing to entertain.”

In its decision, the Court directly repudiated LaRose’s minimization of the language of the petition being changed after signatures had been collected.

“Secretary LaRose tries to downplay the significance of the new language, arguing that it is merely a “header” and that its inclusion is a ‘technical defect’ in the petition. We reject these arguments,” the Court wrote.

The Buckeye Flame has reached out to LaRose’s office for comment and this article will be updated if a response is received.

With the Supreme Court’s decision, Steinfelfer said there are no grounds for LaRose or the BOE to appeal.

“The Supreme Court is the court of last resort. This was based on state law and there is no federal issue,” Steinhelfer said. 

LGBTQ+ advocates praised the decision.

“Equality Ohio is thrilled that the Ohio Supreme Court’s decision will keep fear and government overreach off the ballot this November in Bellefontaine,” said Jen Scott, Equality Ohio Statewide Field Manager. “Bellefontaine is a city that prides itself on being loveable—which means inclusivity for all. We look forward to collaborating with local organizers to deepen the positive and loving environment that was momentarily challenged by this ballot initiative.” 🔥