Marsy's Law (Illinois)

Last updated
Crime Victims' Bill of Rights
2014
Amendment of Section 8.1 of Article I of the Illinois Constitution
Results
Choice
Votes %
Check-71-128-204-brightblue.svgYes2,653,47578.45%
Light brown x.svgNo728,99121.55%
Valid votes3,382,46692.24%
Invalid or blank votes284,7427.76%
Total votes3,667,208100.00%
2014-illinois-marsys-law.svg
Yes
  80–90%
  70–80%
  60–70%
  50–60%

Marsy's Law for Illinois, formally called the Illinois Crime Victims' Bill of Rights, amended the 1993 Rights of Crime Victims and Witnesses Act by establishing additional protections for crime victims and their families. Voters approved the measure as a constitutional amendment on November 4, 2014. It became law in 2015.

Contents

The law is modeled after a piece of 2008 California legislation called Marsy's Law.

Overview

The Illinois Crime Victims' Bill of Rights amended the Constitution of Illinois to include protections for crime victims, including information on hearings, restitution and other protections. [1] It was modeled after 2008 California legislation called Marsy's Law, named after Marsy Nicholas, a California college student who was murdered by an ex-boyfriend in 1983. [2]

Illinois' Marsy's Law was one of several efforts to expand Marsy's Law across the U.S. following its successful adoption in California. Voters in South Dakota [3] [4] and Montana [5] adopted their own versions of Marsy's Law in 2016, but the Montana measure was held unconstitutional by the Montana Supreme Court before it was implemented. [6] There are efforts to introduce similar Marsy's Laws in Hawaii [7] and Nevada. [8] The ballot measure in Illinois received close to $4.3 million in financial support from Henry Nicholas, the brother of Marsy Nicholas and the sponsor of the original campaign in California. [9] [10]

History

In April 2014, Illinois lawmakers in the state's House and Senate agreed to place a referendum on the fall ballot to amend the Illinois state constitution. [1] [11] The proposed amendment to Section 8.1 of Article I of the Illinois Constitution, the Crime Victims' Bill of Rights, appeared on the ballot of the November 4, 2014, general election. Seventy-eight percent of voters who answered the question approved the referendum. [9]

The state House approved HB 1121, the implementation bill reconciling the 1993 Rights of Crime Victims and Witnesses Act with the constitutional amendment, on April 23, 2015. [12] [13] A month later, the state Senate approved the bill. [12] [13] Marsy's Law became effective immediately when Governor Bruce Rauner signed the legislation on August 20, 2015. [14]

The editorial boards of the Chicago Tribune , [15] The Southern Illinoisan , [16] Herald & Review , [17] Rock River Times , [18] The Pantagraph [19] and Rockford Register Star [20] encouraged voters to approve the Marsy's Law amendment. The Chicago Tribune editorial board wrote that the measure gives victims legal standing to assert rights. "Because of the limits in the existing constitutional text," the editorial board wrote, "this change cannot be made by passing a law — only by revising the constitution." The Daily Herald (Arlington Heights) , [21] The News-Gazette (Champaign-Urbana) [22] and Quad-City Times [23] editorial boards opposed the amendment. Whereas The News-Gazette and Quad-City Times said the referendum offered no new protections, [22] [23] the Daily Herald said the constitution change "adds little aside from some enforcement provisions to rights already granted" and could increase court costs. [21]

Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan supported Marsy's Law by saying victims are "owed a voice". [1] The Illinois Family Institute sided with supporters of the amendment who said it would help enforce existing laws. [24]

Opponents of Marsy's Law included House Majority Leader Barbara Flynn Currie, Illinois State Bar Association and defense attorneys (The Illinois Association of Criminal Defense Attorneys) . [1] [25] Currie said the proposal would slow court proceedings. [1] The bar association argued the changes should be made through statutes, rather than amendments to the state constitution. [26]

Provisions of the law

The Illinois Crime Victims' Bill of Rights amended the 1993 Rights of Crime Victims and Witnesses Act by establishing additional protections for victims of crimes and their families. [14] The law says crime victims have the right to be free from harassment, intimidation and abuse throughout the court process. [14] The law ensures victims receive timely notice of all court proceedings and the accused's conviction, sentence, imprisonment and release. [14] Additionally, the law allows victims the right to communicate with prosecution; to be heard at proceedings on post-arraignment release decisions, pleas, or sentencings; to attend trials and other court proceedings, and to have an advocate attend hearings with them; restitution; and to have their safety and the safety of their family considered in bail decisions and conditions of release. [14]

Constitutional changes

The amendment changed Section 8.1 of the Illinois Constitution of 1970. Section 8.1 was originally adopted with the 1992 ratification of the Crime Victim Rights Amendment. [27] Section 8.1 was amended to read:

Section 8.1: Crime Victims' Rights:

a) Crime victims, as defined by law, shall have the following rights:

1) The right to be treated with fairness and respect for their dignity and privacy and to be free from harassment, intimidation, and abuse throughout the criminal justice process.
2) The right to notice and to a hearing before a court ruling on a request for access to any of the victim's records, information, or communications which are privileged or confidential by law.
3) The right to timely notification of all court proceedings.
4) The right to communicate with the prosecution.
5) The right to be heard at any post-arraignment court proceeding in which a right of the victim is at issue and any court proceeding involving a post-arraignment release decision, plea, or sentencing.
6) The right to be notified of the conviction, the sentence, the imprisonment, and the release of the accused.
7) The right to timely disposition of the case following the arrest of the accused.
8) The right to be reasonably protected from the accused throughout the criminal justice process.
9) The right to have the safety of the victim and the victim's family considered in denying or fixing the amount of bail, determining whether to release the defendant, and setting conditions of release after arrest and conviction.
10) The right to be present at the trial and all other court proceedings on the same basis as the accused, unless the victim is to testify and the court determines that the victim's testimony would be materially affected if the victim hears other testimony at the trial.
11) The right to have present at all court proceedings, subject to the rules of evidence, an advocate and other support person of the victim's choice.
12) The right to restitution.

b) The victim has standing to assert the rights enumerated in subsection (a) in any court exercising jurisdiction over the case. The court shall promptly rule on a victim's request. The victim does not have party status. The accused does not have standing to assert the rights of a victim. The court shall not appoint an attorney for the victim under this Section. Nothing in this Section shall be construed to alter the powers, duties, and responsibilities of the prosecuting attorney.

c) The General Assembly may provide for an assessment against convicted defendants to pay for crime victims' rights.

d) Nothing in this Section or any law enacted under this Section creates a cause of action in equity or at law for compensation, attorney's fees, or damages against the State, a political subdivision of the State, an officer, employee, or agent of the State or of any political subdivision of the State, or an officer or employee of the court.

e) Nothing in this Section or any law enacted under this Section shall be construed as creating :1) a basis for vacating a conviction or (2) a ground for any relief requested by the defendant [28]

Results

In order to be approved, measure required either 60% support among those specifically voting on the amendment or 50% support among all ballots cast in the 2014 Illinois elections. [29] The measure ultimately achieved both. [29]

For the proposed amendment of Section 8.1 of Article I of the Illinois Constitution [30] [29] [31]
OptionVotes % of votes
on measure		 % of all ballots
cast
Yes2,653,47578.472.10
No728,99121.619.81
Total votes3,382,46610091.90
Voter turnout45.07%

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Constitution of Oregon</span> Governing document of the state of Oregon, enacted in 1857

The Oregon Constitution is the governing document of the U.S. state of Oregon, originally enacted in 1857. As amended the current state constitution contains eighteen sections, beginning with a bill of rights. This contains most of the rights and privileges protected by the United States Bill of Rights and the main text of the United States Constitution. The remainder of the Oregon Constitution outlines the divisions of power within the state government, lists the times of elections, and defines the state boundaries and the capital as Salem.

In the politics of the United States, the process of initiatives and referendums allow citizens of many U.S. states to place legislation on the ballot for a referendum or popular vote, either enacting new legislation, or voting down existing legislation. Citizens, or an organization, might start a popular initiative to gather a predetermined number of signatures to qualify the measure for the ballot. The measure is placed on the ballot for the referendum, or actual vote.

The current Constitution of the State of Maryland, which was ratified by the people of the state on September 18, 1867, forms the basic law for the U.S. state of Maryland. It replaced the short-lived Maryland Constitution of 1864 and is the fourth constitution under which the state has been governed. It was last amended in 2022.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Constitution of Tennessee</span> Basic governing document of the U.S. state of Tennessee

The Constitution of the State of Tennessee defines the form, structure, activities, character, and fundamental rules of the U.S. State of Tennessee.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">U.S. state constitutional amendments banning same-sex unions</span>

Prior to the Supreme Court's decision in Obergefell v. Hodges (2015), U.S. state constitutional amendments banning same-sex unions of several different types passed, banning legal recognition of same-sex unions in U.S. state constitutions, referred to by proponents as "defense of marriage amendments" or "marriage protection amendments." These state amendments are different from the proposed Federal Marriage Amendment, which would ban same-sex marriage in every U.S. state, and Section 2 of the Defense of Marriage Act, more commonly known as DOMA, which allowed the states not to recognize same-sex marriages from other states. The amendments define marriage as a union between one man and one woman and prevent civil unions or same-sex marriages from being legalized, though some of the amendments bar only the latter. The Obergefell decision in June 2015 invalidated these state constitutional amendments insofar as they prevented same-sex couples from marrying, even though the actual text of these amendments remain written into the state constitutions.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Constitution of Connecticut</span>

The Constitution of the State of Connecticut is the basic governing document of the U.S. state of Connecticut. It was approved by referendum on December 14, 1965, and proclaimed by the governor as adopted on December 30. It comprises 14 articles and has been amended 31 times.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">1998 Alaska Measure 2</span> Referendum banning same-sex marriage

Ballot Measure 2 of 1998 is a ballot measure, since ruled unconstitutional, that added an amendment to the Alaska Constitution that prohibited the recognition of same-sex marriage in Alaska. The Ballot measure was sparked by the lawsuit filed by Jay Brause and Gene Dugan, after the two men were denied a marriage license by the Alaska Bureau of Vital Statistics. In Brause v. Bureau of Vital Statistics, 1998 WL 88743, the Alaska Superior Court ruled that the state needed compelling reason to deny marriage licenses to same-sex couples and ordered a trial on the question. In response, the Alaska Legislature immediately proposed and passed Resolution 42, which became what is now known as Ballot Measure 2. Ballot Measure 2 passed via public referendum on November 3, 1998, with 68% of voters supporting and 32% opposing. The Bause case was dismissed following the passage of the ballot measure.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2008 Oregon elections</span>

On November 4, 2008, the U.S. state of Oregon held statewide general elections for three statewide offices, both houses of the Oregon Legislative Assembly, and twelve state ballot measures. The primary elections were held on May 20, 2008. Both elections also included national races for President of the US, US Senator, and US House Representatives. Numerous local jurisdictions — cities, counties, and regional government entities — held elections for various local offices and ballot measures on these days as well.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Abortion law in the United States by state</span>

The legality of abortion in the United States and the various restrictions imposed on the procedure vary significantly, depending on the laws of each state or other jurisdiction, although there is no uniform federal law. Some states prohibit abortion at all stages of pregnancy, with few exceptions; others permit it up to a certain point in a woman's pregnancy, while some allow abortion throughout a woman's pregnancy. In states where abortion is legal, several classes of restrictions on the procedure may exist, such as parental consent or notification laws, requirements that patients be shown an ultrasound before obtaining an abortion, mandatory waiting periods, and counseling requirements.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">1982 California Proposition 8</span>

Proposition 8, a law enacted by California voters on 8 June 1982 by the initiative process, restricted the rights of convicts and those suspected of crimes and extended the rights of victims. To do so, it amended the California Constitution and ordinary statutes.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Marsy's Law</span> California law regarding victim legal rights and parole boards

Marsy's Law, the California Victims' Bill of Rights Act of 2008, enacted by voters as Proposition 9 through the initiative process in the November 2008 general election, is an amendment to the state's constitution and certain penal code sections. The act protects and expands the legal rights of victims of crime to include 17 rights in the judicial process, including the right to legal standing, protection from the defendant, notification of all court proceedings, and restitution, as well as granting parole boards far greater powers to deny inmates parole. Critics allege that the law unconstitutionally restricts defendant's rights by allowing prosecutors to withhold exculpatory evidence under certain circumstances, and harms victims by restricting their rights to discovery, depositions, and interviews. Passage of this law in California led to the passage of similar laws in Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Kentucky, Nevada, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Ohio and Wisconsin, and efforts to pass similar laws in Hawaii, Iowa, Montana, Idaho, South Dakota, and Pennsylvania. In November 2017, Marsy's Law was found to be unconstitutional and void in its entirety by the Supreme Court of Montana for violating that state's procedure for amending the Montana Constitution. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court reached the same conclusion as Montana under its own state constitution in 2021.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Marcella Leach</span> American victims rights advocate

Marcella Nicholas Leach was an American victims' rights advocate based in Southern California and the mother of businessman Henry Nicholas. After the murder of her daughter, Marsalee (Marsy) Nicholas in 1983, she helped build Justice for Homicide Victims, one of California's early victims' rights organizations. Her late daughter is the namesake for Marsy's Law, the California Constitutional Amendment and Victims' Bill of Rights, which appeared on the November, 2008, ballot as Proposition 9.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2014 Illinois elections</span>

A general election was held in the U.S. state of Illinois on November 4, 2014. All of Illinois' executive officers were up for election as well as a United States Senate seat, and all of Illinois' eighteen seats in the United States House of Representatives. Primary elections were held on March 18, 2014.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">1996 Virginia ballot measures</span>

The 1996 Virginia State Elections took place on Election Day, November 5, 1996, the same day as the presidential, U.S. Senate, and U.S. House elections in the state. The only statewide elections on the ballot were five constitutional referendums to amend the Virginia State Constitution. Because Virginia state elections are held on off-years, no statewide officers or state legislative elections were held. All referendums were referred to the voters by the Virginia General Assembly.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2018 Kentucky elections</span>

Kentucky state elections in 2018 were held on Tuesday, November 6, 2018, with the primary elections being held on May 22, 2018. These midterm elections occurred during the presidency of Republican Donald Trump and the governorship of Republican Matt Bevin, alongside other elections in the United States. All six of Kentucky's seats in the United States House of Representatives, nineteen of the 38 seats in the Kentucky State Senate, all 100 seats in the Kentucky House of Representatives, and one of the seven seats on the Kentucky Supreme Court were contested. Numerous county and local elections were also contested within the state.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">1992 Illinois elections</span>

Elections were held in Illinois on Tuesday, November 3, 1992.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2022 Illinois elections</span>

A general election was held in the U.S. state of Illinois on November 8, 2022. The elections for United States Senate and United States House of Representatives, Governor, statewide constitutional officers, Illinois Senate, and Illinois House were held on this date.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Illinois Right to Vote Amendment</span> Amendment to the Constitution of Illinois, USA

On November 4, 2014, Illinois voters approved the Illinois Right to Vote Amendment, a legislatively referred constitutional amendment to the Constitution of Illinois. The amendment was designed to provide that no person shall be denied the right to register to vote or cast a ballot in an election based on race, color, ethnicity, language, national origin, religion, sex, sexual orientation or income.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Illinois Crime Victim Rights Amendment</span>

On November 3, 1992, Illinois voters approved the Crime Victim Rights Amendment, a legislatively referred constitutional amendment which added Article I, Section 8.1 to the Illinois Constitution of 1970. This amendment guaranteed crime victims certain rights, including the right to receive information about cases in which they are involved.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2022 Kansas abortion referendum</span>

The 2022 Kansas abortion referendum was a rejected legislatively referred constitutional amendment to the Kansas Constitution that appeared on the ballot on August 2, 2022, alongside primary elections for statewide offices, with early voting from July 13. If enacted, the amendment would have declared that the Kansas Constitution does not guarantee a right to abortion, giving the Kansas state government power to prosecute individuals involved in abortions, and further declared that the Kansas government is not required to fund abortions.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 5 Tareen, Sophia (20 October 2015). "Illinois voters to face a rare 5 ballot questions". The Associated Press . Retrieved 2 November 2015.
  2. ↑ Colker, David (27 March 2015). "Marcella Leach dies at 85; advocate for Marsy's Law on victims' rights". Los Angeles Times . Retrieved 2 November 2015.
  3. ↑ "South Dakota Constitution, Article VI, Section 29". South Dakota Legislative Research Council . Retrieved 8 July 2018.
  4. ↑ Mercer, Bob (26 October 2015). "Panel studying child sexual abuse seems inclined to favor victim-rights amendment". Rapid City Journal . Retrieved 2 November 2015.
  5. ↑ Carter, Troy (25 October 2015). "Elections 2016: Montana ballot measures proposed on marijuana, guns, criminal justice". Bozeman Daily Chronicle . Retrieved 2 November 2015.
  6. ↑ O'Brien, Edward (1 November 2017). "Montana Supreme Court Declares Marsy's Law Unconstitutional". Montana Public Radio . Retrieved 8 July 2018.
  7. ↑ "Hawaii lawmakers consider crime victims' right-to-know bill". KHON-TV . 3 March 2015. Retrieved 2 November 2015.
  8. ↑ Corona, Marcella (12 June 2015). "Bills to help child above, revenge porn victims". Reno Gazette-Journal . Retrieved 7 December 2015.
  9. 1 2 Essley Whyte, Liz (5 February 2015). "Big business gave heavily to thwart ballot measures in 2014". Time . Retrieved 2 November 2015.
  10. ↑ Mickadeit, Frank (20 April 2010). "On victims' day, Henry Nicholas recalls sister". Orange County Register . Retrieved 11 December 2015.
  11. ↑ Chuck Sudo (11 April 2014). "Voters Rights, Crime Victims' Bill Of Rights Amendments Added To Illinois' General Election". Chicagoist. Archived from the original on 3 March 2016. Retrieved 2 November 2015.
  12. 1 2 "Bill Status of HB1121 99th General Assembly". Illinois General Assembly . Retrieved 2 November 2015.
  13. 1 2 Ruch, Amber (26 May 2015). "Marsy's Law legislation unanimously passes IL Senate". KFVS-TV . Retrieved 5 November 2015.
  14. 1 2 3 4 5 "Public Act 099-0413" (PDF). Illinois General Assembly . Retrieved 2 November 2015.
  15. ↑ "Vote yes on the Illinois constitutional amendments". Chicago Tribune . 27 October 2014. Retrieved 2 November 2015.
  16. ↑ "Voice of The Southern: Vote yes on Crime Victims' Bill of Rights". The Southern Illinoisan . 30 October 2014. Retrieved 2 November 2015.
  17. ↑ "Two amendments that deserve passage". Herald & Review . 19 October 2014. Retrieved 2 November 2015.
  18. ↑ "Nov. 4 General Election endorsements". Rock River Times . 29 October 2014. Retrieved 2 November 2015.
  19. ↑ "Editorial: Constitutional proposals worth your vote". The Pantagraph . 19 October 2014. Retrieved 2 November 2015.
  20. ↑ "Our View: Support victims' rights". Rockford Register Star . 30 October 2014. Retrieved 2 November 2015.
  21. 1 2 "Endorsement: No on well-meaning but uncertain amendments". Daily Herald (Arlington Heights) . 19 October 2014. Retrieved 2 November 2015.
  22. 1 2 "Phony issues on the ballot". The News-Gazette (Champaign-Urbana) . 24 October 2014. Retrieved 2 November 2015.
  23. 1 2 "Six times 'no'". Quad-City Times . 31 October 2014. Retrieved 2 November 2015.
  24. ↑ "Illinois Family Institute recommends 4 "No", 1 "yes" on November ballot questions". Illinois Review. 9 October 2014. Retrieved 7 December 2015.
  25. ↑ Dismer, Elise (10 April 2014). "Senate puts victims-rights amendment on Nov. 4 ballot". Chicago Sun Times . Retrieved 7 December 2015.[ permanent dead link ]
  26. ↑ Lecci, Stephanie (8 September 2014). "Illinois voters to consider constitutional amendment on crime victims' rights". KWMU . Retrieved 7 December 2015.
  27. ↑ "Article I, Illinois Constitution". Ballotpedia. Retrieved 1 February 2022.
  28. ↑ "Illinois Marsy's Law Crime Victims' Bill of Rights Amendment (2014)". Ballotpedia. Retrieved 1 February 2022.
  29. 1 2 3 "Illinois Constitution - Amendments Proposed". www.ilga.gov. Illinois General Assembly. Retrieved 26 March 2020.
  30. ↑ "Election Results: General Election—11/4/2014". Illinois State Board of Elections. 4 November 2014. Retrieved 2 November 2015.
  31. ↑ "Voter Turnout". www.elections.il.gov. Illinois State Board of Elections. Retrieved 22 March 2020.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.