87. A $500 fine could be prohibitive for families living at the poverty line on the reservatlon. 88. The vagueness of the statute, coupled with penalties attached to the law, has deterred most ballot collection on reservations. 89. BIPA imposes "a fine of $500 for each ballot unlawfully collected." Mont. Code Ann. $ 13-3s-70s. 90. Further, improperly filling out the form runs the risk of a perjury charge. (Ballot collectors must afflrm the veracity of the information they supply on the registry form "under penalty of perjury."). 91. Perjury is punishable by up to 10 years in prison and a $50,000 fine. Mont. CodeAnn. $ 45-7-201. 92. Allowing BIPA to stay in effect will "inevitably lead citizens to steer far wider of the unlawf.rl zone than if the boundaries of the forbidden rueas were clearly marked," meaning that even ballot collection arguably permitted by BIPA will be avoided in elections because individuals will fear investigation and prosecution under BIPA. Ciry of F. l4rhi teJi s h, 2 I 6 Mont. at 4 40, 7 04 P .2d at 1 02516. BIPA does not meet strict scrutiny and the law must be enjoined. 93. BIPA infringes on Plaintiffs' fundamental rights, and this Court should enjoin the law. Fundamental rights enjoy "the highest level of protection by the courts." Kloss v. Edward D. Jones & Co.,2002 MT 129, fl 51, 310 Mont. 123, 54 P.3d l. 94. As BIPA infringes on fundamental rights, it must meet strict scrutiny. Mont. Cannabis Indus. Ass'n v. State,2012 MT 201, fl 16, 366 Monr. 224,286 P.3d 1161; see also ,(/oss, !f 51. 57