this post was submitted on 07 Sep 2024
237 points (99.2% liked)

News

23014 readers
7 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Ruling, which may be reviewed by appellate court, could strike reproductive rights measure off November ballot

A Missouri judge has ruled that a ballot measure asking voters whether abortion rights should be enshrined in the state constitution is invalid, potentially jeopardizing an election scheduled for November.

In a ruling issued on Friday, Cole county circuit judge Christopher Limbaugh said that the reproductive rights petition – also known as Amendment 3 – led by Missourians for Constitutional Freedom did not comply with state law.

Abortion rights activists are hopeful an appellate court could reverse Limbaugh’s decision, but for now it remains unclear whether voters will be able to decide the issue as scheduled on 5 November, the same day as the presidential election.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 34 points 1 month ago (2 children)

According to Limbaugh, his decision came as a result of the campaign’s “failure to include any statute or provision that will be repealed, especially when many of these statues are apparent”.

Is that a requirement of amendments in Missouri?
What if an amendment doesn't repeal any current statute, but makes new law?

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 month ago

Straight to jail.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

What the actual fuck is this? A constitution neither defines nor repeals laws, it defines rights and powers, of the citizenry, and the government. Is there just more to the story that the article isn't covering?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

For a narrow definition of law that may be the case.
But it could also be thought of as a set of laws, which specifically govern law-makers.

In this case it's making certain pre-existing statutes illegal, effectively nullifying them.
Why this judge thinks those statues need to be specifically mentioned, I don't understand. As a judge you'd think that would be their job.