Missoulian mailbag
Thinkstock

Regarding Marcy's Law:

The petition was approved by the Montana attorney general and secretary of state. No one mentioned it "violated the separate-vote requirement." Now, the Montana Supreme Court overturned it. What happened to "(The people) may alter or abolish the constitution... whenever they deem it necessary" (Article II, section 2, Montana Constitution)?

The same, "Surprise! We void it" was pulled in 1999 after the people voted for Constitutional Initiative 75, the People's Right to Vote on Taxes. Why? "It violated the separate-vote requirement." CI-75 “improperly amends three constitutional sections without separate votes." You'd think that one of the thousands of legal beagles was proficient in adding the number of constitutional sections an initiative may affect.

Seems any time the people want to increase their power over government, the Supremes cry foul. Usually after wasting taxpayer money and time. But there isn't anything “foul” with legislating from the bench. Especially if it means agreeing with government over the people. A government no longer of, by and for the people!

Regarding Marsy's Law altering "the public’s right to know about law enforcement and court cases without fully informing citizens of that change"? It seems that's an ongoing practice all over Montana.

Elena Gagliano,

Philipsburg

0
0
0
0
0
You must be logged in to react.
Click any reaction to login.