Marsy’s Law Ballot Question is ENJOINED – BUT You Still Need to Vote “NO”

Posted on by Joshua Prince, Esq.

Moments ago, the docket in League of Women Voters of Pennsylvania, et al. v Kathy Boockvar, the Acting Secretary of the Commonwealth, was updated with the following

AND NOW, this 30th day of October, 2019, Petitioners’ Application for Relief in the Form of a Preliminary Injunction Under Pa.R.A.P. 1532 is GRANTED. The Acting Secretary of the Commonwealth, and her agents, servants and officers, are enjoined from tabulating and certifying the votes in the November 2019 General Election relating to the ballot question asking voters whether the Pennsylvania Constitution should be amended to include a new section providing for victims ‘ rights until final disposition of the Petition for Review, including appeals. Petitioners’ Application for Relief for a Nominal Preliminary Injunction Bond Under Pa.R.C.P. No. 1531(b) is GRANTED. Petitioners shall deposit with the Prothonotary of the Commonwealth Court a bond of $500.00 within five (5) days of the date of this Order. In the interest of judicial economy and expeditious resolution of the matter, upon the filing of any appeal resulting in an automatic supersedeas pursuant to Pa.R.A.P. 1736(b ), the automatic supersedeas is lifted without further application to this Court. The criteria to lift an automatic supersedeas have been met as outlined in the foregoing opinion. Dep ‘t of Envtl. Res. v. Jubelirer, 614 A.2d 199 (Pa. 1989).

As neither the Order nor decision are yet available on the Commonwealth Court’s website, we’ll update this as they become available. For now, the Marsy’s Law ballot question is enjoined from “tabulation and certification” on Tuesday; HOWEVER, the question WILL still be on the ballot on Tuesday and it is possible that the Commonwealth or Supreme Court could, in the future, allow the tabulation and certification of the votes cast. Thus, it is imperative that you vote NO on Tuesday for Marsy’s Law.

If you want further information on what the injunction means, check out the Pennsylvania Capital-Star’s article here.

UPDATE: I was able to procure a copy of the decision. You can download it here.

Published by Joshua Prince, Esq.

With our 2nd Amendment rights being attacked at both the Federal and State level, and the ATF (Burea of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives) trying to close down FFLs (Federal Firearms Licensees) for minor infractions while making FFLs the scapegoat when the ATF's records are inaccurate, I want to take this opportunity to introduce myself. I am one of only a handful of attorneys across the US that practices in the niche area of law known as firearms law. I decided to concentrate my legal practice on firearms law not only because I am a shooter and firearms enthusiast, but also to ensure that our inalienable Right to Keep and Bear Arms is never encroached upon. I handle cases at the Federal and State level for both FFLs and individuals. At the federal and state levels for individuals, I actively defend the 2nd Amendment of the US Constitution and Section 21 of the PA Constitution, as well as, help individuals with: - License to Carry Firearms Denials; - Challenges to Erroneous PICS Denials; - Relief from Firearms Disabilities; - Estate Planning Advice; - Gun/NFA Trusts; and - 42 USC 1983 Actions for Deprivation of Civil Rights At both the state and federal levels, I represent FFLs and SOTs throughout Pennsylvania and the US regarding: - ATF Compliance Inspections; - Warning Letters and Hearings; - FFL Revocations; - Corporate Structure Advice - Indoor/Outdoor Range Implementation; and - Forfeiture Proceedings In following my love for firearms and firearms law, I have taught several Continuing Legal Education (CLE) seminars on Firearms in Estates and Trusts and Firearms Law 101 for several Bar Associations, including Berks, Cumberland, and Dauphin Counties. I also planned and taught several Firearms in Estates CLE classes for the Pennsylvania Bar Institute (PBI). While at Widener Law School, I was a member of the Widener Law Journal. I wrote an article on the Inaccuracy of the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record (NFRTR). I also had an article published on Fee Disputes in Workers Compensation cases in the Widener Law Journal, Volume 18, No. 2. You can often find me posting on several internet forums, including Subguns, Uzitalk, AR15, and PAFOA. I also hold PA Firearms Law classes for local ranges to inform the public on the firearm laws of the Commonwealth. Following in my father's footsteps, I am also a Board member for the Pottstown Police Athletic League (PAL).

4 thoughts on “Marsy’s Law Ballot Question is ENJOINED – BUT You Still Need to Vote “NO””

  1. Come on Joshua, give me a break. I’m not a lawyer. What the heck does “enjoined” and “supersedeas” mean? Isn’t this blog for lay people? What if you were my patient and I walked into your hospital room and told you that your differential had a “marked left shift” and your “base excess” was now at 5? Would you be concerned or relived? The answer is that you wouldn’t know what to think because you don’t know what the hell I was talking about. Please add a one or two sentences at the end of posts like this summing it up in plain English for those of us without “esquire” after our names.
    Thanks.

    Like

    Reply

  2. A wealthy affluential family pushing “laws” that hurt those without money and those without equal representation.

    A movement of clean white smiling faces.

    And somewhere out there a defendant will be completely railroaded by the system because it can’t be wrong to give accusers such prosecurial immunity can it?

    If so, why is this “good cause” doing so behind the scenes while no one is looking? Could it be that they’ve been manipulating the narrative? That this isn’t really about victim rights. It’s about the destruction of a fair system. It’s about the illusion of “victim injustice”. It’s about feeding the public with violent imagery and asking them if they are offended.

    It’s about giving prosecutors and cops what they always wanted. A way around the presumption of innocence. It starts with 1 law, and then 100 more follow. And then…

    Guilty until rendered guilty.

    Like

    Reply
  3. Pingback: Commonwealth Court Declares 2019 “Marsy’s Law” Proposed Amendment Unconstitutional, Invalidates Votes Cast – Prince Law Offices Blog

Leave a comment