You know, there are signs you can get a good college education in SD. South Dakota Student Federation comes out against Amendment E

Ryan Brunner, executive Director of the South Dakota Student Federation just dropped me a note. And it's a great example of how you can comptete with anyone in the world with an SDSU Education. (And the other schools are pretty good too).

The South Dakota Student Federation, representing nearly 31,000 South Dakota students unanimously passed a resolution urging South Dakota voters to reject Amendment E. AND it's on the SD Regent's agenda tomorrow as well.

Here's the resolution introduced at SDSU, and carried forth to the federation where it was passed by all:
Title of Resolution: Opposition to Amendment E; the Judicial Accountability Initiated Law.

Text of Resolution:

WHEREAS, a constitutional amendment (Judicial Accountability Initiated Law) will be submitted to South Dakota voters in November 2006, designated Amendment E; and

WHEREAS, if approved by the voters, Amendment E would allow lawsuits against all South Dakota judges, jurors, prosecutors, citizen boards, including county commissioners, school board members, city council members, public utilities commissioners, members and all other citizen boards, including the Student Association Senate, and that such lawsuits would expose our citizens to personal liability, putting them at risk; and

WHEREAS, Amendment E would authorize and encourage jury nullification in South Dakota, which was previously rejected overwhelmingly by South Dakota voters in 2002; and

WHEREAS, Amendment E would prohibit summary judgment, a legal remedy currently available and used to quickly and inexpensively rid our courts of frivolous lawsuits; and

WHEREAS, Amendment E would permit convicted felons, whose convictions have been affirmed by our Supreme Court, to sue the prosecutors who prosecuted the felons, the jurors who voted to convict the felons, and the judges who sentenced the felons, thus burdening our courts and citizens with countless expensive and needless lawsuits; and

WHEREAS, if approved, Amendment E would replace the Judicial Qualifications Commission, which hears complaints and investigates allegations of judicial misconduct, by establishing a new entity to investigate complaints with an initial budget of two million six hundred fifty thousand dollars, plus the cost of a facility, with authority to hire as many employees as it deemed appropriate without legislative appropriation, consultation, review, or approval; and

WHEREAS, if approved, Amendment E would likely violate the federal Constitution, and would be devastating to the South Dakota economy, harming economic development and driving existing businesses from South Dakota:

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that SDSU Student Federation strongly urges all students and South Dakota voters to protect our citizen boards, our system of justice, our economy, and our citizens from frivolous lawsuits that would be authorized by the Judicial Accountability Initiated Law, and to vote against Amendment E.
Take THAT Amendment E. You've now been schooled in Government by the people.

Comments

dmand123 said…
Interesting.... when the amendment clearly states only JUDGES will be held liable for deliberate violations!! Read the amendment!!
Anonymous said…
No it doesn't. It says anyone making "quasi judicial" judgments - that is far broader than just judges.

Popular posts from this blog

Breaking News: After the television commercial salvo fired at them, Vote Yes For Life Fires back.

Heidepreim: Republicans are the party of hate

The Day in politics - October 24th