COLUMBUS, Ohio — On Wednesday, the Ohio Supreme Court dealt a significant setback to Republican Attorney General Dave Yost by ruling that he had exceeded his powers when he dismissed a ballot petition concerning a voting-related amendment, merely based on his disagreement with its title.

In a unanimous ruling, the court supported a coalition of civil rights groups advocating for the “Ohio Voters Bill of Rights” and instructed Yost to reassess his decision from January within the next ten days.

However, the justices did not instruct Yost to send the constitutional amendment straight to the state Ballot Board, as the plaintiffs had requested. Instead, they mandated him to fulfill his responsibilities by examining the coalition’s summary to ensure it is fair and accurate.

The coalition, which includes members such as the NAACP’s Ohio chapter, the A. Philip Randolph Institute, and Ohio Organizing Collaborative, aimed to get the measure on the ballot this year. Their proposed amendments aim to address the stricter photo ID laws enacted in Ohio last year, as well as the reduced timeframes for returning and correcting ballots after Election Day, among other voting regulatory changes.

Following Yost’s second disapproval of their certification petition—where he characterized the title as “highly misleading and misrepresentative” of what the measure entails—the groups initiated legal action. Notably, Yost admitted that his office had previously approved similar language, having certified a Nursing Facility Patients’ Bill of Rights in 2021 and another version of the Ohio Voters Bill of Rights in 2014.

In his rejection, Yost argued that “recent authority from the Ohio Supreme Court” allowed him to evaluate petition titles in addition to the content of the summaries, which had been his traditional role. He cited a recent high court ruling related to a local drag ban measure’s petition title.

Nevertheless, the Ohio Supreme Court clarified that Yost does not possess such authority under the state law, reaffirming the limits of his power regarding the assessment of ballot petition titles.