The Ohio Supreme Court on Monday ordered a state panel back to work to fix language describing an August ballot proposal aimed at making it harder to amend the state’s constitution, after justices determined elements of the wording would mislead voters.
opted not to fix it in the moment. His fellow Republican, Attorney General Dave Yost, conceded to the mistake in court filings, but sought to minimize it as a mere technicality.diverged was over whether it’s fair to say the proposal will be “elevating” the standards for qualifying and passing future constitutional amendments in Ohio. One Person One Vote had argued that the term carries a positive connotation that could bias voters toward a “yes” vote.
“Today’s win for Ohio is a win for the democratic process,” Derek Lyons, CEO and president of the Washington, D.C.-based Restoring Integrity and Trust in Elections, said in a statement. “The
日本 最新ニュース, 日本 見出し
Similar News:他のニュース ソースから収集した、これに似たニュース記事を読むこともできます。
Ohio Supreme Court: ballot board must fix language describing August supermajority questionThe Ohio Supreme Court on Monday ordered a state panel back to work to fix language describing an August ballot proposal aimed at making it harder to amend the state's constitution.
続きを読む »
Ohio Supreme Court orders partial rewrite of ballot language for constitution issueThe court ordered the Ballot Board to redo some of the language and maintained other parts that opponents said are misleading.
続きを読む »
Ohio Supreme Court says Issue 1 ballot language must be rewrittenOn Monday, the Ohio Supreme Court handed down a ruling that ordered the ballot language for Issue 1 to be rewritten.
続きを読む »
State Issue 1 ballot language must be rewritten, Ohio Supreme Court rulesThe Ohio Supreme Court on Monday told the state ballot board that it must rewrite summary language for State Issue 1 to remove an error describing new signature requirements if the issue passes in August.
続きを読む »
Ohio court rules that ballot question at center of abortion debate must be rewrittenThe Ohio Supreme Court ruled that a ballot question at the center of the state's abortion debate must be rewritten.
続きを読む »
2 Supreme Court Justices who benefitted from affirmative action divide on its futureBoth justices have now staked out starkly opposite positions on whether the policy should be allowed to continue, facing off in a pair of blockbuster cases that will be decided this month and address the future of race in college admissions.
続きを読む »