Pennsylvania voters to resolve racial fairness modification – KIRO 7 Information Seattle

HARRISBURG, PA. – (AP) – Protests raged across the country against George Floyd’s assassination by the Minneapolis police last June when a Democratic legislature spoke in the Pennsylvania Senate to advocate better protection against racial discrimination.

Next week, almost a year after Floyd’s death, voters will decide whether or not to explicitly mention these protections in the state constitution. It is believed that it will be the first time since last summer’s protests that voters will vote on a racial justice issue in a nationwide ballot.

The ramifications are uncertain if voters approve it. However, civil rights groups say they could potentially lead to policy changes in the areas of housing, police, education and other areas.

State Senator Vince Hughes said trials and court decisions would ultimately determine the practical impact of the proposal he sponsored, but he sees the change as a step in the right direction. Philadelphia lawmakers said they would enact it if federal anti-discrimination jurisprudence is ever overturned by Conservative federal judges appointed by former President Donald Trump or the U.S. Supreme Court with a Republican majority.

“Any additional protection we can offer regarding race and ethnicity, I believe, needs to be in the area of ​​deployment,” said Hughes, a member of the Pennsylvania Legislative Black Caucus. “And if we can add that extra protection to the state constitution, the lawyers I speak to have said it’s a good thing.”

The proposed constitutional amendment, passed last summer and again earlier this year with the support of both parties in both chambers, was included in a vote that included two more unrelated amendments in Tuesday’s main election. Both were Republican measures to curb a governor’s executive powers in emergencies like the coronavirus pandemic and to give lawmakers much greater authority.

In a curious twist, Hughes and almost every other Democrat in the General Assembly voted against his change in racial justice. The legislature only had to cast a single vote for all three amendments, and the Democrats strongly opposed the GOP measures because they see them as a way to undercut the current Democratic governor.

If approved by voters, Hughes’ amendment would add a section to the state constitution stating that equality under the law cannot be denied or curtailed on the basis of a person’s race or ethnicity. By including ethnicity, the change also applies to Latinos.

It would become the fourth equality provision in the constitution. At various points in the document it is already stated that “all men are born equally free and independent”. It includes a 1971 amendment that ensures gender equality and ensures that the state or local governments cannot prevent anyone from exercising their civil rights.

An analysis by the Attorney General’s Office for voters found that the measure would increase protection against discrimination, including protection that unintentionally affects people of color. Racial programs that increase gender equality will continue to be allowed, according to the agency. The change would apply to state, regional and local government agencies.

Support for the conservative Commonwealth Foundation, which sent out mailings linking all three amendments to improve “equality for all”, drew criticism from the Legislative Black Caucus. The foundation has not been an ally on many issues that matter to black voters and has co-opted the racial equality measure to pursue its own agenda, said caucus chair Donna Bullock, D-Philadelphia.

“It is insulting to use issues that we connect with to get this message across and to appeal to my community. It’s not sincere, ”said Bullock.

Commonwealth Foundation spokesman Michael Torres said his organization had partnered with members of the Black Caucus on criminal justice, school choice and other issues. She sees changing racial equality as a way to protect people from harmful and discriminatory government action.

The practical implications of changing racial equality in one sentence may not be clear for years, perhaps until the state Supreme Court weighs it up. However, Senate Majority Leader Kim Ward is among those who believe this will not have a material impact because it does nothing more than reflect existing anti-discrimination standards under the US Constitution’s equal treatment clause.

“I think we already live under the law not to discriminate based on race or ethnicity,” said Ward, a Republican from Westmoreland County.

Bruce Ledewitz, a professor at Duquesne Law School who has extensively studied and written about the state constitution, agrees that protecting the federal government from racial discrimination means that the proposed Pennsylvania amendment is likely to have little practical impact.

Jon Greenbaum, chief attorney for the Washington-based Civil Rights Advocacy Committee, however, said Hughes’ amendment could open the door to lawsuits in state courts for so-called “differential effects,” where government policies have inadvertently harmed racial groups. Disparate impact lawsuits are limited to limited circumstances such as voting rights, workplace discrimination, and violations of the Fair Housing Act in federal courts.

The Pennsylvania ACLU said the change could have lasting effects on a wide range of policies if it allows state courts to rule against government agencies for inaction denying equality. An example could be removing disparities in education funding and programs.

“In short, the proposed change can serve as a means to combat systemic racism in the states and locales of Pennsylvania in ways that are not currently addressed,” the ACLU said in a bilateral analysis of the change. The group supports the measure.

Racial gender equality programs would not be at risk, the organization said, as the wording of the amendment is very different from that in other states that have passed laws to challenge positive action.

With the ultimate effect unknown, the election question has raised suspicion among some rural Pennsylvanians, said Rep. Jesse Topper, a Republican from Bedford County, east of Pittsburgh.

“There are some who are generally skeptical because the word ‘equality’ has been somewhat co-opted by left-wing groups over the years to mean whatever they want,” Topper said.

He said he had to reassure constituents that there was nothing shameful behind the proposal.

One reason for the uncertainty is that lawmakers did not hold hearings on the three amendments that will appear on the vote on Tuesday, said Tim Briggs Rep. Of Montgomery County, the senior Democrat on the Judiciary Committee. If they exist and have unintended consequences, another nationwide vote would be required.

“A constitutional amendment is a difficult kind of legislation because if you don’t think too much about the consequences, it’s hard to correct,” Briggs said.

Turnout is expected to be low on Tuesday, despite controversial primaries for Democratic mayors and prosecutors that could increase voter turnout in Pittsburgh and Philadelphia. Pennsylvania voters passed 19 constitutional amendments dating back to 1993.

Bullock, the chairwoman of the Black Caucus, said it would be a ominous sign if the racial justice change fails while voters approve of the two GOP proposals to reduce the governor’s emergency powers.

“It’s going to be a hit for morale,” said Bullock. “It will tell me personally that we have a lot more to do in this state to fight racism and bias, and that it goes deeper than we thought.”