Buster's Blog: Vote No On Ohio Issue 1

Welcome to Buster's Blog

Monday, October 16, 2017

Vote No On Ohio Issue 1

Ohio's Issue 1 is one of those things that sounds good at first, but loses its luster once you learn more about it.

It's a state constitutional amendment all about "victim's rights" -- and what could be bad about that, right? Who could possibly be opposed to victim's rights?

Ohio Issue 1 is a version of "Marsy's Law" -- a cookie-cutter law based on a single incident in California in 1983. The Ohio ballot effort is solely funded by one individual, Henry Nicholas, Marsy's brother. It has already been enacted in five states, and it has no organized opposition in Ohio.

Issue 1 repeals one section of the Ohio constitution -- a 1994 amendment designed to protect crime victims -- and replaces it with another amendment which includes an expanded definition of "victim," and a more specific list of victim's rights, including a new right of victims to refuse discovery/evidence requests from the defense, and a new right of victims to intervene and appeal throughout the court proceedings. (See the Ballotpedia.org link for an in-depth look at Issue 1.)

No one is opposed to victim's rights, but . . .

Virtually all these "rights" are already present in either our constitution or in state law.
The accused have rights, too. This may actually tip the balance of rights toward the accuser.
Both the Ohio Prosecuting Attorneys Association and the Ohio Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers are opposed to Issue 1.
Ohio's Office of Management & Budget says the amendment's expanded definition of "victim" to include family members and the expanded rights of victims to intervene in the process and personally appeal decisions will add to court time and court costs.
A constitutional amendment is a serious and virtually permanent step. It should be reserved for only the most serious and broadly important matters. Issue 1 doesn't meet this standard. It's a well-intentioned but unnecessary overkill.