HARRISBURG, Pa. (AP) — A judge ruled Wednesday that votes in a referendum next week about enshrining victims' rights in Pennsylvania's constitution will not be tallied or certified while a legal challenge is pending.
Commonwealth Court Judge Ellen Ceisler issued a preliminary injunction that was requested by the voters and the state League of Women Voters who sued over the proposal.
>>LEARN MORE: Marsy's Law for Pennsylvania
The amendment would put into the state constitution a set of rights for victims, including to be notified about, attend and weigh in during plea hearings, sentencings and parole proceedings.
It also guarantees "a prompt and final conclusion" of the case and post-conviction proceedings and the right to full restitution.
>>RELATED: Group hopes to highlight importance of victims’ rights with Marsy's Law in Pennsylvania
Ceisler said she granted the injunction because the amendment would have immediate, profound and in some cases irreversible consequences for the rights of accused people and the criminal justice system.
"If approved by a majority of the electorate, every stage of the criminal proceedings, including bail hearings, pretrial proceedings, trials, guilty pleas, sentencing proceedings, and parole and pardon reviews, will be put into doubt," Ceisler wrote.
TRENDING NOW:
- 2019 Trick-or-Treat times in Western PA
- Charges against Steelers' Anthony Chickillo withdrawn in alleged assault of his girlfriend
- More than 150 animals being rescued from 2 local homes, church building
- VIDEO: Police searching for convicted sex offender accused of assaulting teen girl
- DOWNLOAD the Channel 11 News app for breaking news alerts
The amendment is part of a national Marsy's Law campaign for victims' rights, named for a 1983 California murder victim.
Jennifer Riley, who runs the Marsy's Law for Pennsylvania effort, described the decision as dismaying but said her organization was confident the election results will ultimately be certified.
The proposed amendment, which is on Tuesday's ballot, passed the Legislature overwhelmingly.
In the lawsuit, voters and the League of Women Voters alleged that the amendment improperly combines several changes that should be voted on separately, and that the ballot language does not fully inform voters of the issues involved, describing it as "a brief and incomplete summary" of the amendment. Opponents have also argued the amendment could impinge on defendants' right to a fair and speedy trial, and that it contains vague, formulaic language.
>>RELATED: Marsy's Law advocate visits Pittsburgh to stump for new law
Supporters say the amendment will strengthen rights already in other laws by putting them into the constitution and that it gives victims the express ability to ask a judge to enforce those rights.
During a hearing last week, lawyers for the League of Women Voters put on one witness, a criminal defense lawyer who warned the amendment would give victims the right to refuse discovery requests by the accused. He predicted that would make it more difficult for defense lawyers to get information they need to immediately start investigating social media posts, email records and text messages.
The attorney general's office, representing the defendant, acting Secretary of State Kathy Boockvar, said an injunction would confuse voters and may affect the result. Boockvar's lawyers said the referendum's various elements all related to the single purpose of advancing victims' rights.
Thousands of absentee, overseas and military ballots have already been received.
Associated Press
/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/cmg/XCUXZC2XYZHCRGNNGKFEX6U3LQ.png)
