Hoosiers who show up to vote this November will have a rare opportunity weigh in on two statewide ballot measures.
Unlike many of its neighboring states, Indiana’s constitution leaves most governing decisions squarely in the hands of elected officials with only very limited pathways for policy questions to be put before voters for an up or down vote. And while perhaps not as provocative as certain other states’ ballot initiatives on marijuana legalization or data center regulation, the two measures on the Indiana ballot this year are important in their own right.
The first is the Indiana Bailable Offenses and Substantial Risk Standard Amendment, which will appear on the ballot as follows, with options to vote “yes” or “no”:
Currently, under the Constitution of the State of Indiana, a person charged with murder or treason is not entitled to be released on bail if the proof is evident or the presumption strong. Shall the Constitution of the State of Indiana be amended to provide that a person charged with an offense other than murder or treason is not entitled to bail if: (1) the proof is evident or the presumption strong; and (2) the state proves by clear and convincing evidence that no release conditions will reasonably protect the safety of any other person or the community.
If a majority of Hoosiers who cast a ballot in November vote “yes,” this measure will give judges leeway to deny bail to people who are charged with crimes other than murder and treason based on public safety considerations. Article 1, Section 17 of the state constitution already permits bail denial for murder and treason charges, and that will remain so regardless of the fate of this amendment.
The second ballot measure would ease residency requirements for city and town court judges. Designed to address Indiana’s rural attorney shortage, this amendment – if it is approved by a majority of voters on the November ballot – would allow municipal judges to live in a neighboring county to the one in which the court they serve on is located. Currently, under Article 6, Section 6 of the state constitution, they must live in the county where the court is located, so this amendment would create more flexibility for filling judicial positions.
Both measures are legislatively referred constitutional amendments (LRCAs), which means that the legislature voted to have the state’s citizens decide if they should go into effect as amendments to the state constitution.
LRCAs are the only form of statewide ballot measure permitted in Indiana, and Article 16 of the state constitution sets a high bar for even LRCAs to come before voters: Before a proposed constitutional amendment is placed on the ballot, it must first be approved twice by the state legislature, in two successive years with a general election held in between. According to Ballotpedia, a total of just 13 LRCAs have come before Indiana voters in the last 30 years, and 2026 marks the first time since 2004 that there are multiple LRCAs for voters to consider on a single ballot.
This situation is different from other states where LRCAs have an easier path to the ballot and other ballot measure types are allowed. For example, Arizona voters saw 13 measures on their ballot in 2024 alone, and they will get to vote on at least 10 more ballot measures this coming November. This includes six LRCAs on topics ranging from voter ID requirements to photographic traffic enforcement. It also includes four legislatively referred statutes – or laws passed by the state legislature that go into effect only if a majority of the state’s voters approve them. Should voters approve them, these statues will affect local governments’ ability to tax groceries, school districts’ use of funds for direct educational instruction, the designation of drug cartels as terrorist organizations, and a requirement that schools and athletics associations restrict restrooms and locker rooms based on sex.
In yet other states, this year’s ballot measures include constitutional amendments and statutes that came not out of the state legislature, but from citizen initiatives. In states where they are allowed, citizen-initiated constitutional amendments (CICA) and citizen-initiated statutes (CIS) get on the ballot when a sufficient number of petition signatures are gathered in support of the proposal. For example, among the seven statewide ballot measures certified to appear on Colorado’s November 2026 ballot so far, only one is a legislatively referred statute. The other six are CICAs and CISs that got on the ballot thanks to the collection of signatures from more than 124,000 Colorado voters for each measure.
It’s been nearly 130 years since South Dakota became the first state to allow for ballot measures in 1898, and the question of whether Indiana should provide more opportunities for Hoosiers to weigh in directly on policy questions has bubbled up periodically since then.
In recent years, the use of a ballot initiative to legalize recreational marijuana in Ohio in 2023 brought the issue to the fore. Two days after a majority of Ohio voters approved the measure, the Indy Star pointed out that while Ohio is among the “23 states [where] citizens have the ability to get questions on the ballot through a petition process … Indiana is not one of them” – and therefore unlikely to follow its eastern neighbor’s lead on the marijuana question. A commentary column in the Indiana Capital Chronicle suggested that the larger matter of ballot measures in Indiana could gain traction as leading Democrats in the state were seeking to make it a campaign issue.
The question of ballot measures in Indiana may raise its head again, as a grassroots organization is now gathering signatures to put an initiative banning data centers on the ballot for Ohio voters to consider in 2027. When the petition got started back in March, an Indy Star column asked, “A group of Ohio residents are trying to ban most data center construction through a ballot initiative. Could its Hoosier neighbors try the same method?” It’s not currently possible under the state’s constitutional provisions, but perhaps sometime in the future Hoosiers will get a say on the policy questions of the day.