E. BIPA violates Plaintiffs' fundamental right 44. to due process. BIPA violates Plaintiffs' fundamental right to due process because it is unconstitutionally vague. Article II, Section 17 of Montana's Constitution protects due process. Mont. Const. art. II, $ 17 ("No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without the due process of law."). 45. Due process mandates the "basic principle" that "an enactment is void for vagueness if its prohibitions are not clearly defined." City of Whitefish tt. O'Shaughnessy (1985), 216 Mont. 433, 440, 704 P.2d 1021, 1025. 46. "A vagueness challenge to a statute may be maintained under two different theories: (l) because the statute is so vague that it is rendered void on its face; or (2) because is vague as applied in a particular situation." it Dugan,I66. 47. Plaintiffs have pled both theories: (1) BIPA is unconstitutionally vague so lhat any person of '\easonable intelligence" would not understand what is prohibited and (2) BIPA is vague as applied to Plaintiffs. Idat\65. 48. BIPA's vagueness is especially conceming as it "abuts upon sensitive areas of basic First Amendment freedoms" and "operales to inhibit the exercise of those freedoms." City of Whitefish,216 Mont. at440,704 P.2d at 1025. 49. BIPA is unconstitutionally vague on its face since it "fails to give a person of ordinary intelligence fair notice that his contemplated conduct is forbidden." Dugan,l67. 50. For example, half the statutory exemptions are not clearly defined. BIPA defines "acquaintance" as "an individual known by the voter." Mont. Code Ann. $ 13-35702(1). 52