Marsy’s Law for Florida launched a statewide television and digital advertising campaign, asking voters to support Amendment 6, which would “place clear, enforceable victims’ rights in the state constitution.”
The amendment, which also would raise judges’ retirement age from 70 to 75, has been ruled off the ballot after a court challenge, but that decision is being appealed.
The crime victims’ bill of rights section “would provide victims with rights that are equal to, not greater than, the rights already provided to the accused and convicted,” the group said in a press release.
But Circuit Judge Karen Gievers faulted the amendment’s ballot title and summary for not telling “voters that years of settled law and provisions that comprise the criminal justice system and the juvenile justice system will be significantly changed.”
The amendment also is being separately challenged for being “bundled,” or a combination of distinct issues. It was one of several amendments proposed by the 2017-18 Constitution Revision Commission.
“Marsy’s Law for Florida has been embraced by Floridians from every walk of life – from state leaders to local elected officials to law enforcement to the victims and families who have experienced the trauma of crime firsthand,” said Greg Ungru, Marsy’s Law for Florida State Director.
“Through our campaign efforts we will be educating, informing and adding to the widespread, bipartisan support that already exists for Amendment 6.”
Videos began airing this week on television stations and running on digital and social media platforms in markets across the state, the organization said.
All amendments must receive at least 60 percent approval on the November general election ballot to be added to the state constitution.
August 31, 2018 at 10:37 pm
The article does not explain Amendment 6!
Roy D Beman
September 2, 2018 at 8:20 am
This is not an explanation! I want specifics.
September 4, 2018 at 9:11 am
If you google “Marsy’s Law”, it’s an expansion of victim’s rights, like restitution, and being able to be heard at every level of the court process. It was first started in California. I, for one, am completely for expanding victim’s rights, but I don’t like how they bundled it in with raising the retirement age for judges and other provisions that should be on their own.
September 5, 2018 at 7:24 pm
Comments are closed.