If the Legislature ignores it or votes it down, the constitution says, “The Secretary of State shall submit the question of approval or disapproval of such statute or amendment to a statute to a vote of the voters at the next succeeding general election.”Īttorney Bradley Schrager, who was representing those trying to withdraw the petition, said there are several other provisions regarding the ballot initiative process that are not in the constitution, such as the requirement for them to cover only a single subject or to have a clear description of the proposal’s effect.
Under the constitution, once a petition to change a statute is qualified, it is sent to the Legislature for review. Justice James Hardesty noted that there is nothing in the state constitution about withdrawing petitions and said that the language within it “seems to run directly contrary” to the measure passed by the 2021 Legislature that provided the process for a petition that had qualified to be withdrawn. Wayne Klomp, an attorney representing Cegavske, argued that the laws directing the initiative petition process are “self-executing,” and the 2021 law interferes with that process. The comments came during oral arguments Wednesday in a case about whether the Clark County teachers union can pull back two petitions that would ask voters to approve or reject a higher tax tier for the state’s largest, wealthiest casinos and to increase part of the state sales tax by 1.5 percent, raising roughly $2.8 billion for education over two years. (Elizabeth Page Brumley/Las Vegas Review-Journal)Īn attorney for Nevada Secretary of State Barbara Cegavske told the state Supreme Court Wednesday that a recently enacted law that allows for a pair of tax-hiking initiatives to be withdrawn after they were qualified is unconstitutional.Īnd at least one of the justices on the high court seemed to agree.
Nevada Secretary of State Barbara Cegavske, seen in 2019.
0 kommentar(er)
