On November 5, 2019, over 1.7 million Pennsylvanians voted for Marsy’s Law.

The most common way to initiate a change in the constitution is through a single-subject Amendment that is proposed by concurrent resolution of both houses. However, it is not a bill. It is a proposal required to be passed by two consecutive two-year sessions of the General Assembly and advertised in two newspapers of general circulation in each county before it can be placed on an election ballot after the second session’s passage. That passage is required to be accomplished only by majority vote of each house.

Statutory rights are insufficient because victims do not have standing if statutory rights are not enforced -- and they can be changed by simple majorities. Victims deserve to have constitutional protections, just as those who are accused and convicted.

Victims’ rights will not trump defendants’ constitutional rights. Victims’ constitutional rights create balance with defendants’ constitutional rights. The courts have the ability to balance rights if a conflict arises between a victim’s right and a defendant’s right.

Will forcing prosecutors to speak to the victims before finalizing a plea deal, giving victims notice of court hearings and providing victims with the right to provide input at hearings cause long costly delays in the prosecution?

More than 30 states have constitutional victims’ rights and their criminal courts have not been derailed. Speaking to a victim before finalizing a deal or a bail hearing is currently in statute in Pennsylvania and therefore is common practice.

The parole board should have all pertinent information when deciding if an inmate should be paroled, and this includes information from the victim. Victims should have a right to know if their perpetrator will be released (possible safety concerns) and have an opportunity to explain to the parole board why an inmate should or should not be released.

Since Marsy’s Law rights are currently in statute, there will be minimal cost in implementation. The implementation process will be a collaborative effort between victim advocate groups, law enforcement, prosecutors and judges.

The right, which the victim must “request,” is to “reasonable” notice of the proceeding when it is scheduled, not to dictate when it will be scheduled or to delay its scheduling in any way.