For a challenge to be added to the ballot, a petition must be submitted to the Secretary of State of Washington containing the signatures of registered voters equivalent to 4% of those who voted in the last gubernatorial election.

Subsequent to this, a number of individuals requested the signature lists used to bring the question to referendum, as these were historically considered matters of public record relating to the passage of legislation.

The PRA survived exacting scrutiny because the Court felt the state had a sufficiently important government interest in "preserving electoral integrity."

Ultimately, the Court concluded that "public disclosure of referendum petitions in general is substantially related to the important interest of preserving the integrity of the electoral process."

Justice Clarence Thomas, in the lone dissenting opinion, argued that the PRA severely burdens the First Amendment right to free speech and "chills participation in the referendum process."