Oregon Dead before the vote? Hopefully no IP 17 & 18 this fall

[Saladfarmer]

IF this goes through, can these ridiculous ballot measures even make it on the ballot?
Since this is a court in Colorado and they are a few steps ahead of high and left Oregon, this could be a good bellwether
for IP 17 and 18 not even making to the ballot this fall.
Change my mind.

Read More

 

[saxon]

the 9th already flip floped on it, first they shot it down then they reinstated it, so we shall see even though they themselves stated " 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 7-4 that the ban on large-capacity magazines is "a reasonable fit for the government interest of reducing gun violence" and that it "only minimally interferes with the core right of self-defense.""

 

[saxon]

buren also stops licensing for handguns ect but again they will pass the LAW then it will have to be fought

 

[Yarome]

"only minimally interferes with the core right of self-defense.""

IOW.... blantantly admitting, "only infringing a little bit".

"Shall NOT be infringed" must have escaped their attention during their years of law school... and must not have been on the bar exam.

It's yet to be seen if the higher courts will now follow the law of the land or willingly ignore it, but at least out of CO it's a potential ray of hope for us as well.

 

[Yarome]

buren also stops licensing for handguns ect but again they will pass the LAW then it will have to be fought

Likely, which leads you to wonder what checks are broken in place that should be preventing frivoulous and unconstitutional measures from ever reaching the ballots in the first place.

 

[saxon]

Likely, which leads you to wonder what checks are broken in place that should be preventing frivoulous and unconstitutional measures from ever reaching the ballots in the first place.

absolute true, probably the fact that most representatives don't know the constitution and bill of rights or don't care.

 

[Ura-Ki]

Channel 2 is now running a "your vote, your voice" segment, with interviews! The LEVO group is in a panic now that SCOTUS has issued the latest ruling on Bruen! We already know the State is going to allow it to go forward despite the rulings, so it should see a challenge like in Colorado basically letting g them "Win" the vote, but the court striking it down!
While we all know Oregon's Supreme Court normally takes a hard left anti 2nd stance, it's likely they will be forced to follow the Bruen Ruling and strike it down, and further, block U.P. 18 from the legislature after Nov. Fingers crossed, but we also have the 9th who have been handed their arses by SCOTUS, so there's that as well!

 

[Ura-Ki]

And of course, they went to Keven Sterette, the worst of the worst people to counter the LEVO idiot!!! God help us, Kevin did us no favors! That dude wasted half his time talmi g about Bullsh!t instead of thoughtful and well reasoned facts! Obviously, it's a leftist MSM news show, so they had to have a counter to the LEVO nutjob, but Damn, Kevin strikes again!

 

[VinnieBoomBah]

the State is going to allow it to go forward despite the rulings,

Serious question: Does the state have a choice? Not sure the state has the authority to cancel a public initiative (or referendum or whatever) at this point in the game unless it violates the established rules of public initiatives.

 

[Ura-Ki]

Serious question: Does the state have a choice? Not sure the state has the authority to cancel a public initiative (or referendum or whatever) at this point in the game unless it violates the established rules of public initiatives.

That's THE question! I'm not entirely sure, but I believe the States Attorney General can/should step in and put a stop to it, I believe it's within the power of her office to do so, but we all know she is as leftist anti 2nd as they come, so no chance of that happening!
I believe we will suffer this on the ballot this November, and can only hope it gets shut down by the court, or immediately blocked like Colorado did!

 

[3MTA3]

Serious question: Does the state have a choice? Not sure the state has the authority to cancel a public initiative (or referendum or whatever) at this point in the game unless it violates the established rules of public initiatives.

I think the only way it can be stopped is if the AG decides it to be unconstitutional, but in our case it seems the AG finds the Constitution to be unconstitutional

 

[VinnieBoomBah]

That's THE question! I'm not entirely sure, but I believe the States Attorney General can/should step in and put a stop to it, I believe it's within the power of her office to do so, but we all know she is as leftist anti 2nd as they come, so no chance of that happening!
I believe we will suffer this on the ballot this November, and can only hope it gets shut down by the court, or immediately blocked like Colorado did!

Looks like the Sec Of State can't do it

https://sos.oregon.gov/elections/documents/stateir.pdf

From page 10


Comments Any person may comment on whether the prospective initiative petition complies with all procedural requirements in the Oregon Constitution. After the deadline to file comments has passed and before the certified ballot title deadline, the Secretary of State:
 reviews the text of the prospective initiative petition;  considers any procedural constitutional requirement comments;
 may receive advice from the Attorney General; and
 determines whether the prospective initiative petition complies with the requirements in the Oregon Constitution.
The Secretary of State does not review the prospective petition for substantive constitutional or legal sufficiency.

 

[Ura-Ki]

Looks like the Sec Of State can't do it

https://sos.oregon.gov/elections/documents/stateir.pdf

From page 10


Comments Any person may comment on whether the prospective initiative petition complies with all procedural requirements in the Oregon Constitution. After the deadline to file comments has passed and before the certified ballot title deadline, the Secretary of State:
 reviews the text of the prospective initiative petition;  considers any procedural constitutional requirement comments;
 may receive advice from the Attorney General; and
 determines whether the prospective initiative petition complies with the requirements in the Oregon Constitution.
The Secretary of State does not review the prospective petition for substantive constitutional or legal sufficiency.

But,..............What about Ellen Rosenbloom, OryGuns Attorney General, I believe this falls well within her authority!

 

[Ura-Ki]

Your Voice, Your Vote: Gun-control measure will be on Oregon's fall ballot

Oregonians will vote on a new initiative in November that would tighten gun laws in the state.

katu.com

I will say, Keven did OK in the bigger picture, just not the best choice for our side, especially given his past performances!

 

[VinnieBoomBah]

But,..............What about Ellen Rosenbloom, OryGuns Attorney General, I believe this falls well within her authority!

Going through that PDF using "Attorney General" as a search function I found 22 times the role of the Attorney General is described. All of them relate to the ballot title and the ballot title only. So obligatory IANAL, but I would go with "No, the Attorney General can not do that"

Not saying that SOMEONE shouldn't, just so far no idea who could

 

[saxon]

one could make an argument that they are not dealing with one constitutional change but at least 3

[h3][/h3][h3][/h3]

Legislative Referrals

In addition to citizens placing a bill passed by the Legislature on the ballot using the referendum process, the Legislature may directly refer a measure to voters to adopt or reject.

Both houses of the Legislature must vote to refer the measure, and the referral cannot be vetoed by the governor.

Any change to the Oregon Constitution passed by the Legislature requires referral to voters.

 

[3MTA3]

one could make an argument that they are not dealing with one constitutional change but at least 3

[h3][/h3][h3][/h3]

Legislative Referrals

In addition to citizens placing a bill passed by the Legislature on the ballot using the referendum process, the Legislature may directly refer a measure to voters to adopt or reject.

Both houses of the Legislature must vote to refer the measure, and the referral cannot be vetoed by the governor.

Any change to the Oregon Constitution passed by the Legislature requires referral to voters.

Referendum only applies to laws passed by the Legislature. Any bill or Initiative voted on by the citizens does not apply, so it's irrelevant where IP 17 is concerned.

Just as a side not, since the People were successful using the Referendum process to overturn the original Motor Voter law that would have given voting rights to non citizens, the Oregon Legislature now frequently uses Emergency Legislation rules to prevent us from overturning them later. Due to a "loophole", emergency legislation goes into effect sooner than regular legislation and Referendum must be initiated before the law can take place.

 

[Ura-Ki]

Referendum only applies to laws passed by the Legislature. Any bill or Initiative voted on by the citizens does not apply, so it's irrelevant where IP 17 is concerned.

Just as a side not, since the People were successful using the Referendum process to overturn the original Motor Voter law that would have given voting rights to non citizens, the Oregon Legislature now frequently uses Emergency Legislation rules to prevent us from overturning them later. Due to a "loophole", emergency legislation goes into effect sooner than regular legislation and Referendum must be initiated before the law can take place.

And as we already saw during the lockdowns, the courts have no problem violating the States constitution ether!

So, we suffer this nonsense until it can go before the 9th, and maybe, but maybe not get it tossed out!

Here's hoping for an injunction and a TRO!

 

[Ura-Ki]

 

[Xaevian]

Your Voice, Your Vote: Gun-control measure will be on Oregon's fall ballot

Oregonians will vote on a new initiative in November that would tighten gun laws in the state.

katu.com

I will say, Keven did OK in the bigger picture, just not the best choice for our side, especially given his past performances!

Knowing your feelings on the guy, that says a lot.