[ad_1]
Three contested constitutional amendments – one banning greyhound racing, another requiring Miami-Dade County electors to elect a sheriff and one on victims' rights – will be put to a vote despite lawsuits challenging their language. ruled on Friday the Supreme Court. A fourth amendment, which would have paved the way for the expansion of charter school supervision by the state, has been reduced to nil, which means that Floridians must now vote 12 instead of 13 in November.
The decisions – two of which overturned lower court decisions – will provide clarification to officials who need to print ballots by mail in time for the elections, although another case is being held. an appeal may call into question three other amendments. put on the ballot. All the disputed amendments were drafted by the Constitutional Review Commission, which has the power to make constitutional amendments to voters when it meets every 20 years.
Each of the proposed constitutional amendments on the ballot must be approved by at least 60% of the electorate to become law.
The state Supreme Court issued its decisions two days after the judges had heard the arguments for and against Amendment 6, which added rights to the victims of offenses and amended the requirements for them. judges. The amendment brings together several proposals that would raise the required retirement age for judges from 70 to 75 years and change the way judges rely on certain state agencies. The main section of the "Bill of Rights" for victims, inspired by Marsy's California law, would add rights, including disclosure of information to victims. He has been supported by leading Republican and Democratic lawmakers, but has also been criticized for potentially flooding the justice system with additional responsibilities.
The amendment was briefly rejected by a circuit court judge in Leon County last month, prompting the state to appeal the decision to the state's Supreme Court. Plaintiffs' lawyers in the case argued on Wednesday that voters should not be allowed to consider the amendment because it was written in language that misled voters. They cited what they said were omissions in the language used for the polls that did not sufficiently describe the effects of the changes. But the lawyers on behalf of the state claimed that the wording fairly described the purpose of the amendment, and the High Court accepted in a narrow decision 4-3.
In a brief order, the Supreme Court of the State announced that Amendment 6 would remain on the ballot and that it would justify its decision "at a later date".
The High Court also issued two detailed opinions retaining amendments 10 and 13 on the ballot on Friday. Last month, the High Court heard arguments on Amendment 13, which would ban greyhound racing by 2020, after the Florida Greyhound Association filed a lawsuit to denounce the ban.
There are about a dozen racing circuits in Florida, and the practice has drawn criticism from animal rights advocates who say the sport is inhuman. A Leon County Circuit Court Judge decided last month to amend the vote amendment, agreeing with arguments that the language used for the ballot did not sufficiently reflect the scope of the amendment. But the judges of the state Supreme Court ruled 6 to 1 to restore it and ruled that the circuit court had made a mistake.
The judges also decided to keep the amendment 10 Friday, which would require the election of some agents at county level, after its confirmation by a lower court.
Amendment 10, which links four proposals related to government operations, has particular implications for Miami-Dade County. The most controversial part of the amendment would require five county level offices – including tax collectors, real estate appraisers, election supervisors, sheriffs and court clerks. instance – to be elected. Although most counties already hold elections for all these positions, some do not. Miami-Dade, for example, is the only county that does not elect a sheriff and has a named police chief.
Opponents of the proposal argued that this would violate the county's charter and that its publication on the state ballot would allow non-Mauritian voters to override those of the county. But supporters have said that requiring the election of positions across the state would bring public responsibility to play this role. (The other proposals in the amendment would automatically establish the state's legislative session in January rather than March, in even years, would create a counter-terrorism office and constitutionally require the Department of Veterans Affairs.)
The counties of Miami-Dade, Broward and Volusia, who would be among those affected, challenged the amendment in the state Supreme Court, arguing that the amendment did not inform voters enough that it would change the structure of the state. their local governments. But the judges did not agree that the wording of the ballot was imprecise and unanimously decided to keep it on the ballot.
In doing so, they also refused to recognize another facet of some of the amendments that were used to challenge them in court: how many proposals were grouped into blocks. Although the constitution of the state has a limit of "single subject" for constitutional amendments submitted to voters through citizen initiatives, it does not apply the same standard to those proposed by the CRC, which judges have noted in their opinion.
This counter-argument may not be a good omen for another case involving three other "bundled" amendments that could also reach higher jurisdiction. Last month, Supreme Court Chief Justice Harry Lee Anstead and former Florida Election Commissioner Robert Barnas pleaded for the elimination of the six CRC amendments. to vote on specific proposals.
A judge of the circuit court of the county of Leon decided this week to reject three of these amendments – 7, 9 and 11 -. The state said that it is challenging the decision.
[ad_2]
Source link
