Massachusetts High Court Reviews 'Jungle Primary' Ballot Proposal
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court heard arguments June 4 on the 'jungle primary' ballot initiative.
Why it matters: Election law changes can shift compliance standards, create new litigation risks, and affect legal strategies for parties, candidates, and advisory lawyers. This reform could alter voter participation and party influence, requiring general counsel and election law practitioners to reassess risk and compliance in campaigns.
- The Supreme Judicial Court heard the measure's constitutionality on June 4, 2024.
- The initiative would put all candidates on a single ballot, with the top two advancing to November.
- Attorney General Andrea Campbell certified the ballot question in September 2023.
- Key opponents include the state Democratic and Republican parties, warning of impact on party structure.
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court heard oral arguments on June 4 regarding whether a proposed 'jungle primary' ballot initiative meets constitutional requirements for November's ballot. Under this system, all candidates for a given office appear on a single primary ballot, and the top two finishers—regardless of party—advance to the general election.
Attorney General Andrea Campbell certified the initiative in September 2023, prompting immediate debate among legal and political stakeholders. Proponents argue the format increases voter choice and curbs partisan extremity, referencing similar models adopted in California and Washington in prior years.
- On June 4, justices grilled attorneys on the technical framing of the question, signaling a close review of legal sufficiency before it can proceed to voters.
- The proposal is formally titled "An Act Establishing an Open Top-Two Primary" and is backed by the group Voter Choice Massachusetts.
- The Massachusetts Democratic and Republican parties oppose the measure, asserting in court filings that it would undermine the clarity of party nominations and increase voter confusion. No party chair was quoted directly at hearing, but both parties' legal representatives pressed these points.
- Historically, only about 46% of certified Massachusetts initiatives gain voter approval, underlining the high bar for passage (state statistics).
Legal teams advising campaigns or institutional clients will need to monitor the SJC's ruling closely, as changes would introduce new compliance regimes and litigation prospects for future elections.
By the numbers:
- 46.1% — Approval rate for Massachusetts ballot initiatives since 1919
- 34 — Number of initiative petitions certified by AG in September 2023
Yes, but: The justices have not yet set a date for their decision, leaving uncertainty for campaign strategy and legal advisory planning.
What's next: A Supreme Judicial Court opinion is expected before key ballot printing deadlines in late summer.