• Investing
  • Stock
Round Table Thoughts
  • Economy
  • Editor’s Pick
Home Economy Ohio Supreme Court orders rewrite of constitutional amendment ballot language
Economy

Ohio Supreme Court orders rewrite of constitutional amendment ballot language

by June 13, 2023
by June 13, 2023 0 comment
Share
0
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsapp

The Ohio Supreme Court on Monday ordered a state panel back to work to fix language describing an August ballot proposal aimed at making it harder to amend the state’s constitution, after justices determined elements of the wording would mislead voters.

Republican Secretary of State Frank LaRose immediately reconvened the Ohio Ballot Board for Tuesday afternoon.

Monday’s ruling was a partial victory for One Person One Vote, the campaign opposing Issue 1, which calls for raising the threshold for passing future constitutional amendments in Ohio from a simple majority to 60%. Amid loud protests, Statehouse Republicans advanced the issue and timed it to thwart an abortion rights issue in the works for this fall. That’s despite passing a law eliminating most August elections mere months earlier.

The high court ruled unanimously that the ballot board was wrong to describe the measure as increasing the standards to qualify ‘any’ constitutional amendment for the ballot. That’s because it imposes its steep new signature-gathering requirements only on citizen-initiated amendments, not on amendments advanced by the Ohio General Assembly. If passed, it would up the number of Ohio counties where ballot campaigns must gather names from 44 to all 88.

The ballot language also misdescribes the percentage of electors required in each county to qualify a citizen-led issue for the ballot. It’s 5% of those who voted in the last gubernatorial election, not 5% of all voters in that county.

Democrats pointed out the error to the ballot board, chaired by LaRose as state elections chief, but LaRose opted not to fix it in the moment. His fellow Republican, Attorney General Dave Yost, conceded to the mistake in court filings, but sought to minimize it as a mere technicality.

Justices disagreed, and ordered the ballot board to correct the error.

Where the court diverged was over whether it’s fair to say the proposal will be ‘elevating’ the standards for qualifying and passing future constitutional amendments in Ohio. One Person One Vote had argued that the term carries a positive connotation that could bias voters toward a ‘yes’ vote. They pushed for ‘raising’ or ‘heightening’ as more neutral verbs.

The Supreme Court’s four-member Republican majority ruled that ‘elevating’ could stay — on grounds that the other verbs suggested by opponents share overlapping definitions.

‘Distinguishing between them requires parsing minute differences in connotation,’ Chief Justice Sharon Kennedy wrote for the majority. ‘But such wordsmithing should be left to Secretary LaRose because it is not for this court to choose between words of the same meaning.’

The court’s three Democratic justices dissented, arguing that the phrasing doesn’t meet the required impartiality test.

‘Some might, not implausibly, call this restricting or curtailing or diminishing or limiting the power of the people to amend the Constitution,’ Justice Michael P. Donnelly wrote in a dissent joined by Justices Jennifer Brunner and Melody Stewart. ‘Instead, respondent Secretary of State Frank LaRose styles this as ‘elevating’ the standards to amend the Constitution. This word creates prejudice in favor of the measure.’

In a separate opinion, Brunner also argued that the measure places ‘onerous’ new requirements on citizen-led ballot initiatives that should be more clearly spelled out.

<!–>

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

–>

You Might Also Like
  • Mayor Eric Adams says NYC has ‘no more room’ for asylum seekers
  • GOP senator demands federal standard for AI content identification
  • Democrat, Republican join forces to ban members of Congress from trading stocks while on taxpayers’ dime
  • Biden campaign to stay on TikTok even after president signs law to force sale or ban app in US
Share
0
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsapp

previous post
Congress on the Diamond: A look at the highs and lows of a DC tradition
next post
McCarthy rips CNN for hiring James Clapper, Andrew McCabe: ‘Are you prepared to defend your network?’

You may also like

DeSantis hits back at ‘DC Republican’ Tim Scott over Florida...

July 29, 2023

Georgia Supreme Court undecided on fate of appeals judge accused...

March 16, 2023

Whatever happened to … the investigations into the Chinese spy...

July 14, 2023

FLASHBACK: RFK Jr. endorsed Hillary Clinton multiple times, praised her...

October 26, 2023

Support for Biden impeachment inquiry grows with a notable level...

December 14, 2023

US secretly sends long-range ATACMS missiles to Ukraine, Kyiv forces...

October 18, 2023

Marjorie Taylor Greene announces bill to defund Special Counsel Jack...

June 13, 2023

Trump verdict puts US among infamous countries that prosecuted opposition...

June 1, 2024

Younger voters help boost Trump’s edge over Biden in latest...

December 19, 2023

France, Germany urge its citizens to depart Iran, cancel flights...

April 15, 2024

    Stay updated with the latest news, exclusive offers, and special promotions. Sign up now and be the first to know! As a member, you'll receive curated content, insider tips, and invitations to exclusive events. Don't miss out on being part of something special.


    By opting in you agree to receive emails from us and our affiliates. Your information is secure and your privacy is protected.

    Recent Posts

    • Krispy Kreme stock plunges after doughnut chain pauses McDonald’s rollout, pulls outlook

      May 8, 2025
    • Don’t Buy Robinhood Stock… Until You See This Chart Setup

      May 8, 2025
    • UnitedHealthcare sued by shareholders over reaction to CEO’s killing

      May 8, 2025
    • The Unpredictable Stock Market: How to Make Sense of It

      May 8, 2025
    • AMD CEO calls China a ‘large opportunity’ and warns against strict U.S. chip controls

      May 7, 2025

    Popular Posts

    • 1

      Trump-era China sanctions ended by Biden may be...

      June 27, 2024 2,632 views
    • 2

      Walz’s honeymoon with China gets fresh scrutiny as...

      August 9, 2024 2,339 views
    • 3

      Biden appointee played key role in recruiting Chinese...

      June 25, 2024 2,320 views
    • 4

      Shein’s global ambitions leaves some cybersecurity experts fearful...

      July 10, 2024 2,303 views
    • 5

      Harris VP pick spent years promoting research facility...

      August 29, 2024 2,186 views

    Categories

    • Economy (7,009)
    • Editor's Pick (2,066)
    • Investing (538)
    • Stock (2,530)

    Popular Posts

    • 1

      Trump-era China sanctions ended by Biden may be revived under new House GOP bill

      June 27, 2024
    • 2

      Walz’s honeymoon with China gets fresh scrutiny as Harris camp blasts ‘lying’ critics

      August 9, 2024
    • 3

      Biden appointee played key role in recruiting Chinese businesses to Delaware: ‘Longtime friends’

      June 25, 2024
    • 4

      Shein’s global ambitions leaves some cybersecurity experts fearful of Chinese spy threats

      July 10, 2024
    • 5

      Harris VP pick spent years promoting research facility that collaborated with ‘Chinese military company’

      August 29, 2024

    Latest News

    • Krispy Kreme stock plunges after doughnut chain pauses McDonald’s rollout,...

      May 8, 2025
    • Don’t Buy Robinhood Stock… Until You See This Chart Setup

      May 8, 2025
    • UnitedHealthcare sued by shareholders over reaction to CEO’s killing

      May 8, 2025

    Categories

    • Economy (7,009)
    • Editor's Pick (2,066)
    • Investing (538)
    • Stock (2,530)

    Disclaimer: RoundTableThoughts.com, its managers, its employees, and assigns (collectively “The Company”) do not make any guarantee or warranty about what is advertised above. Information provided by this website is for research purposes only and should not be considered as personalized financial advice. The Company is not affiliated with, nor does it receive compensation from, any specific security. The Company is not registered or licensed by any governing body in any jurisdiction to give investing advice or provide investment recommendation. Any investments recommended here should be taken into consideration only after consulting with your investment advisor and after reviewing the prospectus or financial statements of the company.

    Copyright © 2024 RoundTableThoughts.com. All Rights Reserved.

    Round Table Thoughts
    • Investing
    • Stock
    Round Table Thoughts
    • Economy
    • Editor’s Pick

    Read alsox

    Consumer Sentiment Remained Weak in November

    November 23, 2022

    Cotton endorses Trump, says ‘everything has...

    January 4, 2024

    DOJ seizes more classified docs from...

    January 22, 2023
    Sign In

    Keep me signed in until I sign out

    Forgot your password?

    Password Recovery

    A new password will be emailed to you.

    Have received a new password? Login here