Since the court in Anderson already affirmed the validity of electronic signatures in Title 20 through statutory rules of construction and common law principles, it will likely have to address the constitutional challenges it declined to reach in that case when it is visited with new challenges to the State’s ban on e-signatures in ballot petitions and initiatives. This Note offers an alternative to the uniform operation of laws analysis, which plaintiffs have recently employed against the Lieutenant Governor and S.B. 165. Free speech analysis supplies parameters that are more closely suited to address the type of constitutional wrong that the Lieutenant Governor committed and that the legislature has recently upheld.
Boyer, Daniel W.
"In the Turbulent Wake of Anderson v. Bell: Protecting Core Political Speech and Utahn's Right to Initiative,"
Utah OnLaw: The Utah Law Review Online Supplement: Vol. 2013
, Article 21.
Available at: https://dc.law.utah.edu/onlaw/vol2013/iss1/21