Plaintiffs in turn agree that protecting the integrity of the initiative process is a legitimate objective which the legislature is entitled to promote through appropriately crafted legislation. But plaintiffs point out that defendants have shown no evidence of fraud linked to the payment per signature method of compensating signature gatherers.
Plaintiffs insist that, pursuant to
Meyer, defendants must establish some evidence justifying the regulatory infringement on the exercise of First Amendment rights in order to meet their burden under the applicable strict scrutiny standard of review.