State House Sound Bites

Capitol reporter Katie Meyer covers Pennsylvania politics and issues at the Pennsylvania state capitol.

The State House Sound Bites Podcast is now called State of the State and is a part of PA Post, a digital-first, citizen-focused news organization to hold Pennsylvania’s government accountable to its citizens.

Marsy's Law backers prep for final PA push. But some are still skeptical.

Written by Katie Meyer, Capitol Bureau Chief | Dec 17, 2018 9:08 PM
10capitol.jpg

In order to pass as an amendment, Pennsylvania's version of Marsy's Law has to make it through the legislature one more time without having its language changed. (Photo by AP)

 

(Harrisburg) -- When a new state legislative session starts next month, a group of crime victim advocates plans to hit the ground running to finish a longstanding effort.

They want an amendment that would ensure victims' legal rights in the state constitution, just as defendants' rights are.

But not everyone is convinced it's a good idea.

The effort to pass Marsy's Law started in California a decade ago. The constitutional amendments are now on the books in 11 states.

But the law has sometimes gotten flack for its unintended consequences. Earlier this month, for instance, a South Dakota police officer invoked it to stay anonymous in a case in which he'd used deadly force. He is considered a victim because the suspect allegedly fired at police.

Pennsylvania Victim Advocate Jennifer Storm said that wouldn't happen here.

The language being considered would put the commonwealth's current victims' rights laws and practices into the constitution. Those don't include anonymity. They do include, for example, the ability to submit legal statements at sentencing.

"Victims aren't getting anything new, other than enforcement," Storm said.

The amendment would include a few practices not currently governed by law. One of the more contentious provisions would allow victims to "refuse an interview, deposition or other discovery request made by the accused or any person acting on behalf of the accused."

The ACLU, which opposes Marsy's Law, has said that is overly broad and could hurt defendants' cases.

Storm and other Marsy's Law backers argue that allowing victims to refuse pretrial discovery is common practice in Pennsylvania, and so defendants should not be impacted by that provision of the amendment.  

Pennsylvania ACLU Legislative Director Elizabeth Randol added that while the group is fine with the substance of current victims' rights laws, enshrining them in the constitution makes them harder to change if an unexpected consequence arises.

"As an amendment, it sets up competing sets of rights between victims versus defendants," Randol argued.

The Marsy's Law amendment passed the General Assembly this past session, and now needs one more passage by lawmakers before it goes to voters for a referendum.

Governor Tom Wolf has said he supports it.

Published in News, State House Sound Bites

back to top