The U.S. Supreme Court case Meyer v. Grant in 1987 revolved around the First Amendment rights of citizens to petition their government and engage in political speech. The state of Colorado had a law that made it illegal for paid circulators to gather signatures for ballot initiatives, which was challenged by proponents of an initiative who wanted to hire such circulators due to lack of volunteers. The court ruled unanimously (8-0) that this prohibition violated the First Amendment's protections on free speech, as it limited the ability for citizens to make their voices heard through popular initiatives and referenda processes - key aspects of democratic governance at state level. This ruling affirmed that paying individuals does not corrupt or unduly influence these processes but rather can enhance them by enabling more widespread participation when volunteer resources are insufficient.

In the dissenting opinion for Meyer, Colorado Secretary of State, et al. v. Grant et al., Justice White disagreed with the majority's view that a state law prohibiting payment to petition circulators violated First Amendment rights. He argued that this prohibition was not an infringement on free speech but rather a regulation aimed at preventing fraud and ensuring integrity in the political process. According to him, paying individuals per signature could incentivize them to engage in fraudulent behavior or misrepresentations just to collect more signatures and earn more money. Therefore, he believed that such restrictions were justified as they served significant government interests without substantially limiting political discussion.