Wyoming High Court Nixes Term Limits

Wyoming High Court Nixes Term Limits

May 4, 2004

Legislative term limits never made it out of the gate in Wyoming. The state’s supreme court today found the limits unconstitutional. They would have taken effect with this year’s elections, barring 13 legislators from running for reelection. The decision came just in the nick of time—the candidate filing period begins on May 13.

Background on Wyoming’s Term Limits

Wyoming’s term limits law was passed via a citizen initiative in 1992, with a passage rate of 77%. In most states with term limits, the limits are part of the state’s constitution. However, Wyoming does not have an initiative process for amending the constitution, so Wyoming’s limits were statutory. The limits were due to take effect in November 2004, with 13 legislators “termed out,” or ineligible to run for office. The case against the state’s term limits law was brought by two incumbent legislators and two voters.

The Court’s Opinion

The Wyoming Supreme Court essentially found that term limits were an additional qualification for holding legislative office, and held that it is unconstitutional to establish such qualifications by statute. Qualifications for office must be laid out in the state constitution. In this aspect, the Wyoming term limits case is similar to those that invalidated term limits in Massachusetts and Washington in the 1990s.

The court did not address whether term limits themselves are constitutional; rather, it judged the manner in which they were imposed. In fact, the same is true in all cases in which term limits laws have been overturned by courts (Massachusetts, Oregon, Washington and now Wyoming). In each of these cases, term limits were overturned because the manner in which they were passed somehow violated a constitutional provision. In none of these cases did the courts rule on whether term limits are a good idea, or are constitutional.

The Wyoming court further noted that the fact that 77% of Wyoming’s voters approved the initiative had no bearing on the validity of the law. Wyoming’s initiative law states that the people are barred from making certain laws in the same manner that the legislature is barred from making certain laws. “The fact that seventy-seven percent of the voters favored a particular measure does not make that measure constitutional. Either we live under a constitutional government or we do not.”

The court’s conclusion:

1.   The term limit law (Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 22-5-103), as it applies to candidates for the state legislature, whether adopted by initiative or legislative action, is unconstitutional and unenforceable because it violates Wyo. Const. art. 1, § 3, and art. 3, §§ 2 and 52(g).

2.   We decline to address the question of whether the term limit law also violates the appellant electors’ right to vote under Wyo. Const. art. 6, § 2.

3.   The reserved powers of the people under the Wyoming Constitution do not include the right to alter the government by initiative or by statute with regard to the time period any one person can hold a state legislative office.

4.   We decline to address the affirmative defenses of laches and the statutes of limitations as certified questions, but have answered them as part of the appeals in this matter.

Helpful Links

Read the court’s opinion.

Visit NCSL’s main term limits page for more information on term limits.

Jennie Drage Bowser tracks term limits, and may be reached at 303-364-7700 or elections-info@ncsl.org.