in the Ohio Constitution if passed – regardless of what the ballot says – doesn’t use the words “citizens of the State” but just the “State” when describing what state government can and cannot allow. The court agreed with the amendment’s backers in their challenge of the ballot language, saying the ballot board’s use of “citizens of the state” was misleading.
The Supreme Court opinion was unsigned, although the seven justices – four Republicans and three Democrats – unanimously agreed that the words “citizens of the State” were misleading. Some of the justices wrote concurring opinions, arriving at their own legal reasoning for the judgement. Others wrote partial dissents.
Backers of the amendment, in its request before the Supreme Court to invalidate the phrase “citizens of the State,” argued that it raises questions for the average voter about how the amendment would affect their rights. “Accordingly, the ballot language approved by the ballot board would not accurately tell the voters what they are being asked to vote on,” the judgment says. “Instead of describing a proposed amendment that would establish a right to carry out reproductive decisions free from government intrusion, the ballot language’s use of the term ‘citizens of the State’ would mislead voters by suggesting that the amendment would limit the rights of individual citizens to oppose abortion.
Law Law Latest News, Law Law Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Source: washingtonian - 🏆 74. / 68 Read more »
Source: CBSNews - 🏆 87. / 68 Read more »
Source: CBSNews - 🏆 87. / 68 Read more »