North Carolina Voters Could Add Crime Victims’ Rights to the State Constitution
Vote to see how others feel about this issue
What the Initiative Does
The North Carolina Marsy's Law Crime Victims Rights Amendment would amend Section 27 of Article I of the North Carolina Constitution, which addresses crime victims’ rights, with a version of Marsy’s Law. This would provide crime victims with the right to:
- Receive reasonable, accurate, and timely notice of court proceedings;
- Be reasonably heard at any court proceeding involving the plea, conviction, adjudication, sentencing, or release of the accused;
- Be present at any proceeding involving a plea, sentencing, parole, release of the defendant, and any proceeding in which the victim's rights are implicated, except for the defendant's initial appearance;
- Be paid restitution in a reasonably timely manner, when ordered by the court;
- Receive information about the conviction, adjudication, or final disposition and sentence of the accused;
- Receive notification of escape, release, proposed parole or pardon of the accused; and
- Present the victim’s views and concerns to the governor or agency considering taking an action that could release the accused.
Argument in Favor
Accused criminals shouldn’t have more rights than crime victims. Adding Marsy’s Law to the North Carolina Constitution would ensure that victims’ rights are respected as the criminal justice process plays out and they aren’t forgotten by the system.
Argument Against
North Carolina law already provides statutory rights to victims. Rather than adding those rights to the state constitution in a way that will be expensive and difficult to implement, North Carolinians should focus on ensuring that the existing protections for victims of crime are upheld.
In-Depth
Marsy’s Law for North Carolina is leading the campaign in support of this ballot measure. Former Gov. Pat McCrory (R) also supports this ballot measure. Former Gov. McCrory says, “victims too often feel abandoned and we need to give them a voice.” Matthew Hebb, state political director for the Marsy’s Law campaign, argues that this amendment aims only to give crime victims the rights they deserve, saying, “We’re not asking for special rights. We’re just asking for co-equal rights for crime victims.”
Former North Carolina Supreme Court Justice Bob Orr argues that Marsy’s Law is a movement to empower victims of crime:
“Marsy’s Law is a movement … to provide victims of crime with the same fundamental rights that the defendants and perpetrators of those crimes now have. Marsy’s Law is providing rights to victims of crime to have a voice in the criminal justice system, to be heard, to be informed, and to have a say in what happens.”
North Carolina Gov. Roy Cooper (D) and the American Civil Liberties Union of North Carolina oppose this ballot measure. Gov. Cooper calls this amendment “unnecessary.” Sarah Gillooly, North Carolina state policy director for the ACLU, calls this proposal “a misguided set of empty promises” that would cost taxpayers $30 million a year to implement. Drew Findling, president of the National Association of Criminal Defense Attorneys, adds that Marsy’s Law amendments are at odds with the presumption of innocence:
“What’s most disturbing about it is it really crashes head-on with the presumption of innocence. The presumption of innocence is abandoned when you immediately take the position that there is a victim of a crime.”
Mark Rabil, a Wake Forest University law professor and director of the school’s Innocence and Justice Clinic, calls Marsy’s Law amendments a “sea change in the adversary system as we know it” that fundamentally changes the U.S. criminal justice system, arguing that:
“Obviously everybody agrees victims should have rights. But the way I see the goal of Marsy’s Law is so much more than that… The bottom line is they’re giving victims and victims’ families constitutional party status that can override the constitutional rights of a defendant to a fair trial and the right of districts attorneys to pursue cases in ways they perceive to be fair.”
The effort to institute Marsy’s Law across the U.S. is primarily backed by Henry Nicholas, co-founder of Broadcom Corporation, whose sister, Marsalee “Marsy” Nicholas, was murdered by her ex-boyfriend. A week after his sister’s death, Henry and his mother encountered Marsy’s ex-boyfriend at a grocery store after he was released on bail — they hadn’t been made aware of his release.
Due to this experience, Henry founded Marsy’s Law for All, the national organization advocating for Marsy’s Law. The organization’s mission is to “amend state constitutions that don’t offer protections to crime victims and, eventually, the U.S. Constitution to give victims of crime rights equal to those already afforded to the accused and convicted."
As of 2018, six states have enacted Marsy’s Law amendments: California, Montana, South Dakota, North Dakota, Ohio, and Illinois. A seventh state, Montana, initially approved a Marsy’s Law amendment, but it was struck down in 2017 as unconstitutional by the state supreme court.
Summary by Lorelei Yang
(Photo Credit: iStockphoto.com / LPETTET)
The Latest
-
🌎 Are You Ready To Take Action Against Climate Change?Scientists claim that last year "smashed" the record for the hottest year by a large margin , offering a "dramatic testimony" of read more... Environment
-
Should U.S. Implement a New Tax on AI to Fund Worker Benefits?The debate As technology advances, artificial intelligence (AI) becomes more integrated into our society. While leaders in AI read more... Artificial Intelligence
-
SCOTUS Hears Arguments of Abortion Pill Mifepristone CaseUpdated March 27, 2024, 12:30 p.m. EST On Tuesday, March 26, the Supreme Court heard arguments about the mifepristone case, read more... Women's Health
-
IT: ⛑️ It's American Red Cross Giving Day, and... How will you give back today?Welcome to Wednesday, March 27th, philanthropists and entrepreneurs... It's American Red Cross Giving Day - a time to ensure the read more...