Justice O’Connor says Issue 2 “inappropriate” for Ohio Constitution
Recommended article from the Columbus Dispatch on Issue 2, link that references a Findlay Courier article, link that says in part:
Ohio Supreme Court Justice Maureen O’Connor said Thursday that State Issue 2 is an “inappropriate use” of a constitutional amendment.
O’Connor took time to answer questions about State Issue 2 after speaking to the Hancock County Republican Party during its fall dinner, where she was keynote speaker. The dinner was held at the University of Findlay.
She said Ohio’s Constitution is a “much bigger document.” Decisions like how farm animals should be treated, which is the focus of Issue 2, are policy decisions and best left to lawmakers, she said.
“Policy needs to evolve as our society changes,” said O’Connor.
Proponents of State Issue 2, however, understand that a successful constitutional amendment will take “an arm and a leg” to overturn, she said.
What’s also interesting in the article for those of you following judicial politics is Justice O’Connor’s comments on the move towards a merit based system of appointing judges instead of electing them…
Have lately heard on both radio and on another blog, discussion of why all the “constitutional amendments”. Good question, interesting discussions, and then the light bulb went off. Of course, our legislators are, in effect, hiding behind all these amendments. If the majority of voters approve one or another “constitutional amendment”, say issue 2 or the casino one (issue 3), the lawmakers have no “blood on their hands” so to speak.
In other words, they don’t have the sword of damocles (sp?) over their head from possible unhappy voters in their district. It’s ingenious (from a legislator’s point of view) – they toss all these possible “amendments” at us in the hopes of getting various issues passed, and voila… they can’t be blamed for this or that legislation.
Cowards. Sneaky cowards. (IMHO)
October 19th, 2009 at 5:32 pmSo why is gambling need to be a constitutional amendment then?
October 19th, 2009 at 5:56 pmThat’s a good question, Ohio Insurance, it’s why some of us don’t support Issue 3.
October 19th, 2009 at 9:53 pmThe answer to too much democracy is not more democracy.
Justice O’Connor is correct to a point; we elect legislatures to legislate. The “people” should not be directly involved in these matters.
On a side note, the fact that we have so many laws and are continually passing more is a historical sign that we as a society are becoming evermore corrupt.
Why would we need all of these laws if we as a society weren’t in effect, rotting from the core outward?
October 20th, 2009 at 4:54 pmThis amendment is a sham! I am not sure about Justice O’Connor speaking out against this. I don’t recall a justice ever doing this. I am also not sure if the Ohio Surpreme Court can overturn this. If this is approved, I hope they can!
But I am inclined to believe that this will get rejected by voters! Weird amendments like this tend not to get approved by Ohioans. Remember in 1998 the amendment that would forbade Hunters to hunt Morning Doves? Remember all those ridiculous voting and SOS amendments in 2005.
October 21st, 2009 at 10:37 amThis is a progressive lead attempt (also pushed by the fed gov) to give human rights to animals making farming much more expensive in order to nudge the folks toward a vegetarian diet. This is just another attempt by government to control our every activity.
October 21st, 2009 at 11:24 am“progressive led” I meant to say.
October 21st, 2009 at 11:27 amThis is a tough one… NA, I agree that could be another attempt to lead people to the governments whims by virtue of a constitutional amendment.
On the other hand, I have to agree with the rationale that it purports to do- which is to help ensure a safe food supply. (Let’s hope)
One can never be certain what will happen down the road with any amendment or legislative action.
October 21st, 2009 at 11:46 amWhat we do know is unless we as citizens keep informed and involved, then the government will run rough-shod over us in perpetuity!