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.
Unless I read it wrong, Ohioans are planning to propose a state constitution amendment to end police qualified immunity. This rolling says, yeah you can do that. It still needs to get on the ballot and be voted on before anything changes.
Who is on the side of ending qualified immunity: pretty much anyone who isn't a cop or authoritarian. QI is basically legal armor for cops to do anything they want as long as it can be read as (waves hands) "following protocol".
Who is on the side of ending qualified immunity: pretty much anyone who isn't a cop or authoritarian.
As much as the votes on reproductive rights and cannabis gave me hope, the legislature’s responses on both left me cold, as some of these scumbags are not above ignoring the will of the electorate, and with the way the winds are blowing now, I’d not put it past them to move forward now to do just that.
I think there’s potential of the issue passing—as with the aforementioned reproductive rights and cannabis measures—but I fully expect a ballot issue on abolishing QI to meet a whole bunch of rigging and disenfranchisement fuckery, plus I fear that people may be intimidated or otherwise discouraged from voting altogether.
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