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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
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. 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.
Can someone explain this for me? I'm tired and the article is both missing context and full of double negative legal filings and rulings. I'm not sure what actually happened and who is on the side of ending qualified immunity.
Many Ohioan voters wanted to change the law to get rid of qualified immunity. So they crafted proposals, and eight different times, the attorney general ruled that their proposed law was technically disqualified and couldn't be considered at all. After each of those times, the authors went back and changed the wording to try to make it fit what the attorney general said. But he kept ruling against them, no matter what they did, so they had to file a lawsuit arguing that he was disqualifying the proposals because he didn't like the idea, and not because the proposals were technically deficient.
The attorney general lost, they won, so now they can move forward in the lawmaking process.
The attorney general loved qualified immunity, he did not want to see it disappear, and he worked very hard to protect it. Now that he lost, there is reasonable chance that qualified immunity in Ohio will be taken away, as we have seen in several other states in recent years.
Voters: "Bad police get punished."
Yost: "I don't understand. Is this English? What are these words!"
The next step is to make it so police officers are insured with liability insurance. And if a certain officer is a bad seed and the system wants to protect him, but his insurance won’t cover him, it comes out of their pensions. See how thin that blue line gets when everyone’s retirement is on the line for the thugs actions.
Yes, and track those payouts in a federal database. There is already a Department of Transportation clearing house for truck driver background checks and drug test results, just add police officers to it.
Thank you, that was very helpful.
But if qualified immunity is taken away, does that mean police can be held responsible for their actions?
We'll see. Ending qualified immunity means they can be charged, but doesn't mean that they will be charged. It's a step in the right direction, but the system will continue fighting to protect its own.
Thanks! This was helpful. But since they changed it multiple times, do they pick the proposal version they want? Or do they have to use the latest one?
I'm sorry, I didn't read the whole article first before posting it.
I've found a better article that explains what happened and will update the link.
YES! Hold the thugs accountable
Wtf does "as path paves forward" mean?
It means the same as "The decision clears the way" at the start of the 2nd paragraph.
This process was blocked multiple times by the state attorney general. The lawsuit outcome says he was wrong and that the proposed amendment can now continue in the legislative process (possibly in parts, with each part requiring voter signatures).
Are you asking grammatically or procedurally?
Others have answered the former. As for the latter, supporters will now collect signatures from Ohio voters. If they collect enough (IIRC, 5% of the number of people that voted in the last governor's election), then it will be on the general ballot in an upcoming statewide election. If it passes, it will be adopted into law.
I haven't looked at this one specifically, but they are usually an amendment to the state constitution. That makes it harder for legislators or judges to override the will of the people.
I guess it's just embellishing the expression "paving a path forward", meaning in a more literal way that it would be easier to follow it, and more abstractly, that progress is now expected to be swifter than before.
Oh. Yeah that makes sense. I forgot about that saying. Reads awkwardly though when they re-arrange it like that...
Means this could go to the SCOTUS and we could get a 7-2 (Alito and Thomas of course) to get this overturned.
Wishful thinking
Nope, it’s a state issue. This can’t go to the US Supreme Court because it’s not federal.
Damn
If you’re in favor of ending qualified immunity though, then it’s a good thing. This means the state AG has lost and they can get it on the ballot to allow Ohioans to vote on the issue directly.
Yeah absolutely.
It means there is a clear way to move forward.
Yeah grammatically it's incorrect. Paths are paved, they themselves do not pave.
I know a bunch of people in Ohio, is there a link to share the ballot initiative with them yet? I'm sure they'd love to sign