|
take an appeal no matter when the offense
was committed, even though it was com-
mitted after July 1, 1968.
If the case is tried in the magistrates'
court and not in the new district court, the
State can take its appeal in the superior
court or the district court, as it will be
called. These conditions occur if the of-
fense and the trial took place before Jan-
uary 1, 1970.
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding) : Are
there any further questions on section 3? If
not, we will go to section 4, suffrage and
elections. Any questions regarding section 4?
The Chair hearing none, we will go to
section 5.
Delegate Marion.
DELEGATE MARION: Delegate Hard-
wicke, is there any danger in prohibiting
the effectiveness of section 2.06 until the
deferred date of July 1, 1969, when the
legislation designed to accompany this sec-
tion in section 3.15 expires on that date?
As I understand it, that section authorizes
the General Assembly to provide disquali-
fication.
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding) : There
are so many people walking around and
talking in here it is almost like Grand Cen-
tral Station. Really, we would like to have
a little more order and not so many people
walking around.
Delegate Marion.
DELEGATE MARION: These telegrams
seem to be more important than the busi-
ness at hand.
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding) : Go
ahead, Delegate Marion.
DELEGATE MARION: My question in
short is, is there any need at all in section
5 in the schedule of transitional provisions,
and would it not encumber the legislature
from acting prior to that time, to provide
for such disqualifications to take effect
after the legislative provisions, section 3,
page 15, expired by its own terms?
DELEGATE HARDWICKE: It seems to
me, Delegate Marion, that the two fit to-
gether correctly.
Section 2.06 deals with disqualifications,
and it provides that the General Assembly
can establish by law the disqualifications.
Since the General Assembly is not going to
be in session on July 1, 1968, we gave them
an additional year in which to set up dis-
qualifications.
|
Then, over in the schedule we continued
the present constitutional disqualification
provisions for the period of time sufficient
to permit them to act. It seems to me that
that is the way is should be done. What
danger do you see?
DELEGATE MARION: You do not per-
mit them to establish the disqualification
prior to July 1, 1969, by the language of
section 5. You say that that language of
the constitution shall not become effective
and, therefore, it seems to me that you are
saying that they do not have the power to
establish those disqualifications until this
section becomes effective in July of 1969.
By that date, section 3 on page 15 in the
legislative schedule will have expired.
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding) : Would
not the General Assembly not have plenary
power to act if there were on constitu-
tional provision?
For what purpose does Delegate Chabot
rise?
DELEGATE CHABOT: I suggest that
the General Assembly would have abso-
lutely no power to act because as this is
written, present constitutional power —
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding) : Dele-
gate Marion has the floor, Delegate Chabot.
DELEGATE MARION: I think Delegate
Chabot was starting to say the same thing
I was saying, that unless there is effective
constitutional authorization for the legisla-
ture to provide that someone who is other-
wise qualified to vote may be disqualified
for certain reasons, I do not think they
have the plenary power to provide those
disqualifications in the teeth of the consti-
tution. I am not sure that section 3 on page
15 would be constitutional as legislation
during the time in which we say that sec-
tion 2.06 should not be effective.
My suggestion simply is that section 5
here is unnecessary and that we provide in
effect for a one-year period of time for the
legislature to act by continuing a disquali-
fication section in the schedule of legisla-
tion which expires a year after the consti-
tution takes effect. That will give that year
for the legislature to act. It is dangerous
to put this deferred effect in section 2.06
in the schedule of transitional provisions.
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding) : Dele-
gate Hardwicke.
DELEGATE HARDWICKE : I think you
are right, Delegate Marion. I think you are
|
