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.


67° 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


 
Find Local Businesses on KELO Pages!

You may also like

SF Drug Ring Involved 220 lbs. Of Marijuana

8/27/2014 5:48 PM

Her boyfriend was killed during a botched robbery in December in northwest Sioux Falls. Faith Rasmussen and her mother, Theresa, have now pleaded guil...

Full Story | Watch
SF Mother, Daughter Admit To Large Drug Conspiracy

8/27/2014 10:54 AM

Faith Rasmussen, 21, and her 55-year-old mother Theresa Rasmussen admit they were bringing marijuana from California to South Dakota and distributing ...

Full Story
Lead Woman Pleads Guilty To Having Sex With Child

8/30/2014 11:39 AM

A Lead woman has pleaded guilty to having sex with a 12-year-old boy.

Full Story
Speeding Suspect Arrested For Auto Theft, Other Charges

8/27/2014 10:05 PM

Sioux Falls Police have a man in custody after a driver attempted to elude authorities during a traffic stop.

Full Story
High School Football Scoreboard: Aug. 29

8/29/2014 11:00 PM

South Dakota Football Aberdeen Central 7, Sioux Falls Washington 6 Aberdeen Roncalli 42, Redfield/Doland 0 Alcester-Hudson 34, Baltic 6 And...

Full Story


Events