The Rights We Give Up under “Marsy’s Law”

Walter OlsonI ’vewritten before about the set of state constitutional amendments known as “Marsy’s Law,” promoted as a bill of rights for crime victims. While the details vary from state to state, common provisions found in the package can deprive persons accused of crimes of information that is of legitimate use in mounting their defense, seal off access to information about crim e that the public has valid reasons to want to know, and even in some states work tosuppress the identities of police who shoot civilians, so long as the officers allege that they were themselves victimized as part of the episode. In an unsettling paradox, the laws bestow valuable rights on persons it designates as crime victims before any legal process determines whether a  crime has in fact been committed against them and if so by whom.Critics have gone to court to challenge Marsy ’s Law enactments, with at best spotty success. Wisconsin’s high court has nowupheld the law against one such challenge. It ruled that the package did not violate the state ’s “single‐​subject” rule for constitutional amendments presented as ballot measures; high courts in Pennsylvania and Montana had struck down their state’s enactments on that ground, but application of single‐​subject rules isanything but predictable. And it ruled that the language presented to voters was not improperly misleading, though it could easily have left voters with the impression that the existing rights of cri...
Source: Cato-at-liberty - Category: American Health Authors: Source Type: blogs