

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

This photo shows the empty floor of the Oregon State Senate.
"Oregonians deserve legislators who will show up and do their jobs—and when they don't, there must be consequences," said one advocacy group.
Oregon's Supreme Court on Thursday disqualified 10 state senators from reelection for participating in last year's Republican-led walkout that paralyzed the Legislature for six weeks, delaying key Democratic bills on abortion, healthcare, and gun control.
The ruling upholds last year's decision by Oregon Secretary of State LaVonne Griffin-Valade, a Democrat, barring the 10 lawmakers—nine Republicans and 1 Independent—from the 2024 ballot because they had accumulated more than 10 unexcused absences in violation of Measure 113, a state constitutional amendment approved by 68% of voters in 2022 following a series of Republican walkouts.
"I've said from the beginning my intention was to support the will of the voters," Griffin-Valade said in a statement Thursday. "It was clear to me that voters intended for legislators with a certain number of absences in a legislative session to be immediately disqualified from seeking reelection."
Five of the sanctioned lawmakers challenged Griffin-Valade's interpretation of Measure 113's language stating a lawmaker who misses 10 or more sessions is banned from running in "the term following the election after the member's current term is completed."
As The Associated Press explained:
The debate was over when that ineligibility kicks in: If a senator's term ends in January 2025, they would typically seek reelection in November 2024. The "election after the member's current term is completed" would not be until November 2028, the Republican senators argued, so they could run for reelection this year and then hold office for another term before becoming ineligible.
The court disagreed, saying that while the language of the amendment was ambiguous, the information provided to voters in the ballot title and explanatory statement made clear that the intent was to bar truant lawmakers from holding office in the next term.
"If we were required to choose between petitioners' and the secretary's interpretations based on the text alone, petitioners would have a strong argument that their reading is the better one," the court's opinion states.
"But we do not review the text in a void," the ruling adds. "We instead seek to understand how voters would have understood the text in the light of the other materials that accompanied it. And those other materials expressly and uniformly informed voters that the amendment would apply to a legislator's immediate next terms of office, indicating that the voters so understood and intended that meaning."
The 2023 walkout—which, at six weeks set a record in Oregon—paralyzed the Legislature and held up Democratic-led bills expanding abortion access, protecting gender-affirming healthcare, and banning so-called ghost guns. Oregon is one of only four U.S. states requiring the presence of two-thirds of its state lawmakers for a quorum.
"It is critical to our democracy that elected officials uphold the will of voters, not disrupt our constitutional rights or halt the democratic process when it does not align with their personal beliefs," the ACLU of Oregon said in response to Thursday's ruling.
The Oregon League of Conservation Voters said on social media that "Oregonians deserve legislators who will show up and do their jobs—and when they don't, there must be consequences."
"Voters were clear when they overwhelmingly passed Measure 113, and we're glad the Oregon Supreme Court agrees," the green group added.
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Oregon's Supreme Court on Thursday disqualified 10 state senators from reelection for participating in last year's Republican-led walkout that paralyzed the Legislature for six weeks, delaying key Democratic bills on abortion, healthcare, and gun control.
The ruling upholds last year's decision by Oregon Secretary of State LaVonne Griffin-Valade, a Democrat, barring the 10 lawmakers—nine Republicans and 1 Independent—from the 2024 ballot because they had accumulated more than 10 unexcused absences in violation of Measure 113, a state constitutional amendment approved by 68% of voters in 2022 following a series of Republican walkouts.
"I've said from the beginning my intention was to support the will of the voters," Griffin-Valade said in a statement Thursday. "It was clear to me that voters intended for legislators with a certain number of absences in a legislative session to be immediately disqualified from seeking reelection."
Five of the sanctioned lawmakers challenged Griffin-Valade's interpretation of Measure 113's language stating a lawmaker who misses 10 or more sessions is banned from running in "the term following the election after the member's current term is completed."
As The Associated Press explained:
The debate was over when that ineligibility kicks in: If a senator's term ends in January 2025, they would typically seek reelection in November 2024. The "election after the member's current term is completed" would not be until November 2028, the Republican senators argued, so they could run for reelection this year and then hold office for another term before becoming ineligible.
The court disagreed, saying that while the language of the amendment was ambiguous, the information provided to voters in the ballot title and explanatory statement made clear that the intent was to bar truant lawmakers from holding office in the next term.
"If we were required to choose between petitioners' and the secretary's interpretations based on the text alone, petitioners would have a strong argument that their reading is the better one," the court's opinion states.
"But we do not review the text in a void," the ruling adds. "We instead seek to understand how voters would have understood the text in the light of the other materials that accompanied it. And those other materials expressly and uniformly informed voters that the amendment would apply to a legislator's immediate next terms of office, indicating that the voters so understood and intended that meaning."
The 2023 walkout—which, at six weeks set a record in Oregon—paralyzed the Legislature and held up Democratic-led bills expanding abortion access, protecting gender-affirming healthcare, and banning so-called ghost guns. Oregon is one of only four U.S. states requiring the presence of two-thirds of its state lawmakers for a quorum.
"It is critical to our democracy that elected officials uphold the will of voters, not disrupt our constitutional rights or halt the democratic process when it does not align with their personal beliefs," the ACLU of Oregon said in response to Thursday's ruling.
The Oregon League of Conservation Voters said on social media that "Oregonians deserve legislators who will show up and do their jobs—and when they don't, there must be consequences."
"Voters were clear when they overwhelmingly passed Measure 113, and we're glad the Oregon Supreme Court agrees," the green group added.
Oregon's Supreme Court on Thursday disqualified 10 state senators from reelection for participating in last year's Republican-led walkout that paralyzed the Legislature for six weeks, delaying key Democratic bills on abortion, healthcare, and gun control.
The ruling upholds last year's decision by Oregon Secretary of State LaVonne Griffin-Valade, a Democrat, barring the 10 lawmakers—nine Republicans and 1 Independent—from the 2024 ballot because they had accumulated more than 10 unexcused absences in violation of Measure 113, a state constitutional amendment approved by 68% of voters in 2022 following a series of Republican walkouts.
"I've said from the beginning my intention was to support the will of the voters," Griffin-Valade said in a statement Thursday. "It was clear to me that voters intended for legislators with a certain number of absences in a legislative session to be immediately disqualified from seeking reelection."
Five of the sanctioned lawmakers challenged Griffin-Valade's interpretation of Measure 113's language stating a lawmaker who misses 10 or more sessions is banned from running in "the term following the election after the member's current term is completed."
As The Associated Press explained:
The debate was over when that ineligibility kicks in: If a senator's term ends in January 2025, they would typically seek reelection in November 2024. The "election after the member's current term is completed" would not be until November 2028, the Republican senators argued, so they could run for reelection this year and then hold office for another term before becoming ineligible.
The court disagreed, saying that while the language of the amendment was ambiguous, the information provided to voters in the ballot title and explanatory statement made clear that the intent was to bar truant lawmakers from holding office in the next term.
"If we were required to choose between petitioners' and the secretary's interpretations based on the text alone, petitioners would have a strong argument that their reading is the better one," the court's opinion states.
"But we do not review the text in a void," the ruling adds. "We instead seek to understand how voters would have understood the text in the light of the other materials that accompanied it. And those other materials expressly and uniformly informed voters that the amendment would apply to a legislator's immediate next terms of office, indicating that the voters so understood and intended that meaning."
The 2023 walkout—which, at six weeks set a record in Oregon—paralyzed the Legislature and held up Democratic-led bills expanding abortion access, protecting gender-affirming healthcare, and banning so-called ghost guns. Oregon is one of only four U.S. states requiring the presence of two-thirds of its state lawmakers for a quorum.
"It is critical to our democracy that elected officials uphold the will of voters, not disrupt our constitutional rights or halt the democratic process when it does not align with their personal beliefs," the ACLU of Oregon said in response to Thursday's ruling.
The Oregon League of Conservation Voters said on social media that "Oregonians deserve legislators who will show up and do their jobs—and when they don't, there must be consequences."
"Voters were clear when they overwhelmingly passed Measure 113, and we're glad the Oregon Supreme Court agrees," the green group added.