The D.C. Democratic Party has filed a lawsuit aiming to keep a ranked choice voting and open primaries from getting onto the city’s ballot for next year, saying that both changes to how D.C. runs its elections would run afoul of the city’s charter and the U.S. Constitution.

In a 33-page lawsuit filed in D.C. Superior Court, attorneys for the party’s leadership say the D.C. Board of Elections improperly gave the green light to a proposed ballot initiative that, if approved by voters, would call on the D.C. Council to adopt ranked choice voting and open primaries by 2026. The party is asking a D.C. judge to nullify the board’s ruling, which would effectively kill the ballot initiative.

Under ranked choice voting, voters can rank multiple candidates in any given race in their order of preference; if no one candidate wins an outright majority, the worst-performing contender is dropped and votes are recalculated using voters’ second choices, and so on until one candidate wins a majority of support. And under open primaries, the city’s 85,000 independent voters would be allowed to participate in a partisan primary of their choice; currently, they’re only allowed to vote in general elections.

Proponents argue ranked-choice voting moves away from the current system where winners in crowded fields can win with a fraction of the vote, often forcing voters to choose candidates they think can win instead of those they might really support. They also say the system of voting — which is used in New York City, Maine, Alaska, and was recently tested in Arlington County, Virginia — forces candidates to reach out to more voters, creates more civil campaigns, and results in winners who have a broader base of support.

As for open primaries, the initiative’s proponents say it would allow D.C. voters who are not registered with a political party to vote in primary elections, where many of the city’s political races are ultimately decided because of the overall dominance of Democrats in local elections. Some states, including Arizona, Colorado, Massachusetts, and West Virginia, currently have semi-open primaries.

But in the lawsuit, Democratic Party attorney Johnny Barnes argues that both proposed changes would violate local law and the constitution. He writes that open primaries would violate the Home Rule Charter’s requirement that the mayor, D.C. Council, and attorney general be elected on a partisan basis, and would violate Democrats’ constitutional rights to freely associate by allowing non-Democrats to influence the outcomes of primary elections.

Barnes also says the ballot initiative would unlawfully require the city to spend money implementing ranked choice voting (ballot initiatives can’t force the city to spend any money), and would additionally violate the city’s Human Rights Act because it would discriminate against Black and low-income voters who could be confused by ranked choice voting.

And in a non-legal argument, Barnes says in the lawsuit that had ranked choice voting been allowed when the city gained home rule in 1975, Marion Barry may never have become mayor. “Imagine the local history in the District of Columbia, for the past 45 years, had the outcome of elections been determined by open primaries and ranked choice voting!” he writes.

In its ruling late last month, the elections board rejected all those arguments, citing a legal analysis from D.C. Attorney General Brian Schwalb’s office opining that the initiative could be placed on the ballot. That analysis noted the implementation of ranked choice voting and open primaries would be contingent on the council choosing to allocate money for them, that partisan primaries would still exist in D.C., and that any claims of disparate impacts on Black and low-income voters were speculative.

The D.C. Democratic Party does not find itself alone in opposing the proposed ballot initiative. Congressional Republicans have introduced legislation to prohibit the city from adopting ranked choice voting, and the D.C. Republican Party has similarly come out against any changes to how the city runs its elections.

“Adding rank-choice voting and open primaries now will bring significant confusion and embarrassment to the District of Columbia elections. Until we have much cleaner voter rolls and strong, reliable voting systems, we should not experiment with voting, particularly when people from all parties question the reliability and fairness of our elections administration,” said D.C. GOP Chairman Patrick Mara in a statement last month.

The record of ranked choice voting in the Washington region has been mixed. While Takoma Park has successfully used it for local elections for years, a recent test run in the June Democratic primary in Arlington County drew concerns from some residents and elected officials. While many people there said the system worked well, the Arlington County Board decided not to use ranked choice voting for November’s general election over concerns that some Black and Latino voters had been confused about how to vote and how votes would ultimately be counted. Last month, elected officials in Rockville opted to keep a question on ranked choice voting off an advisory referendum to be held in November, largely over concerns that most voters still do not understand how it works.

Proponents of ranked choice voting contend that the system is less confusing than critics claim, and the outcomes of elections decided using the system more closely reflect the will of the majority of voters.

A first court date in the lawsuit has been scheduled for November. Even if the lawsuit is unsuccessful, proponents of the ballot initiative will still have work to do in order to put the question of ranked choice voting and open primaries before voters: they have to collect signatures from 5% of registered voters across the city, including 5% in five of the city’s eight wards.