Please disable your Ad Blocker to better interact with this website.


A bunch of anti-gun residents of the state of Washington collected enough signatures to get their gun control initiative on November’s ballot.

However, the wording was deemed confusing and misleading by gun rights groups who filed a legal challenge to prevent the measure from being on the ballot. The wording on the petitions did not differentiate between existing law and proposed law, making it difficult for signers to understand what they were signing.

A judge agreed and order the initiative removed with the current wording.

take our poll - story continues below

Should Joe Biden drop out of the Presidential race because of his inappropriate touching of women?

  • Should Joe Biden drop out of the Presidential race because of his inappropriate touching of women?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Keep and Bear updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

So, the anti-gunners reworded the initiative to comply with the complaint.

On Friday, the Washington State Supreme Court ruled to overturn the lower court’s ruling, opening up the way for I-1639 to be the November ballot.

(Townhall) – The Washington State Supreme Court on Friday overturned a lower court’s decision on the state’s controversial gun control ballot initiative, I-1639. The Court ruled unanimously that the initiative must appear on the November ballot.

The National Rifle Association (NRA) and the Second Amendment Foundation, along with a handful of individuals, previously challenged the initiative’s state constitutionality. According to NRA and SAF, the ballot initiative’s supporters didn’t follow state laws regarding proper formatting.

“The problem with the petitions is that they failed to underline new law and strike through removed law so that the reader could not know the current law, added law and subtracted law,” Alan Gottlieb, Founder and Executive Director of SAF, previously told Townhall.

“If they are so careless about knowing what is, or is not, shown on their own petitions, how is anyone else supposed to know? They’re asking people to sign an initiative that is difficult, if not impossible to read,” Gottlieb said…

The Washington State Supreme Court is known for being very liberal, politically, which has impacted some of their rulings.

Actually, most of the state courts in Washington are liberal, which is why it was a surprise the lower court ruled to ban the initiative from the ballot to begin with.

Alan Gottlieb, Founder and Executive Director of the Second Amendment Foundation, says that even if people are able to read the fine print on the initiative, it is not the same as that submitted to the state.

It’s quite possible that if I-1639 is passed by the people that it could still face a legal battle before taking effect.




Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please hover over that comment, click the ∨ icon, and mark it as spam. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.

Become an Insider!

Enter your email address below to stay in the loop and read our latest and greatest updates!

Send this to a friend