User uShare Login | Register
Login
Register

Along with posting photos, videos, and stories, your uShare account lets you post Classified Ads, recipes on What's For Dinner, and Announcements.


68° View Weather Current Conditions Sioux Falls Change Location
Set Weather Options

RADAR LOCATION

TEMPERATURE LOCATION

KELOLAND.com | Sioux Falls News & Weather, South Dakota News & Weather, Minnesota and Iowa News

[0] My Saved Articles
Find local businesses
on the KELO Pages!

 

Amendment E

November 3, 2006, 10:00 PM by Angela Kennecke

The fact that the passage of Amendment E is leading the polls has many, who usually remain neutral on election issues, alarmed. That includes two political science professors who say it could dramatically change government. 

The "Vote No on E Campaign" claimes Amendment E would make jurors vulnerable to criminals who hold a grudge.

Those claims sparked a lawsuit from the amendment's supporters. But the state supreme court already ruled with the attorney general's description of the law; anyone making judical decisions could be sued under Amendment E.

"I think it was originally sold as something to make judges more accountable, but it does seem to have an impact on school boards, city councils and jurors," Augustana Political Science Professor Brent Lerseth said.

Amendment E would allow anyone unhappy with a verdict to sue the decision maker. Currently under South Dakota law, rulings can be appealed and misconduct can result in someone being removed from a school board or city council or other office. But they can't be forced to pay monetary damages. Amendment E would change that, even for citizens serving on juries. 

"Something like that would have a fundamental major impact on decision making if that is something that decision makers always have to take into account," Lerseth said.

The professors say E threatens the independence of the entire judiciary system.

"This is holding them accountable for discretionary decisions they might have made and very seriously threatens integrity and independence of judiciary," South Dakota State Political Science Professor Bob Burns said.

The fact that E is retroactive, allowing for someone to sue for damages from before E went into affect, could also be unconstitutional.

"Article one section ten of U-S constitution specifically prohibits states from approving ex post facto legislation," Burns said.

This week South Dakota's congressional delegation, along with Stephanie Herseth's opponent, Bruce Whalen, and the candidates for governor issued a joint statement in opposition to Amendment E.

Previous Story

Next Story


RELATED STORIES


Sponsored
 

You may also like

Woman Says Man Drugged Her at Concert, Hopes Story Helps Others

5/19/2015 6:05 PM

It was supposed to be an unforgettable concert, but a woman says she cannot remember it because she believes someone drugged her.

Full Story | Watch
Chicken Doesn’t Recognize Boy After Hair Cut

5/19/2015 12:22 PM

Video of a young boy getting a hug from a chicken is collecting a flock of fans.

Full Story
Former Sioux Falls Teacher Sentenced To 15 Years

5/22/2015 11:04 AM

In February, Drueppel admitted she had a relationship with a student while working as a teacher at a Sioux Falls middle school.

Full Story
Police Officer Killed In Omaha Shooting

5/21/2015 5:42 AM

Police in Omaha, Nebraska, say a shootout between officers and a convicted felon has left an officer and the suspect dead.

Full Story
Elementary School's Playground Destroyed By Fire

5/23/2015 5:14 PM

Sioux Falls Fire Rescue put out a fire on the playground of Hawthorne Elementary Saturday afternoon that damaged the school.

Full Story


Events