this post was submitted on 23 Apr 2025
367 points (99.7% liked)

News

36457 readers
3351 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Yost, a Republican, had rejected the amendment’s language eight times, prompting a lawsuit from three Ohio voters represented by Capital University professor Mark Brown. U.S. District Court Judge James Graham ruled against Yost, finding his rejections overly technical. The Supreme Court’s denial upholds that decision, though Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Brett Kavanaugh dissented, indicating they would have reviewed the case.

The decision clears the way for the amendment to proceed to the Ohio Ballot Board, which will review its language to determine if it should appear as one or multiple ballot issues. Proponents must then collect 413,487 valid signatures to place the measure on the statewide ballot.

The ruling could limit the attorney general’s authority to reject proposed constitutional amendment language, potentially easing the path for future ballot initiatives in Ohio. The Ohio Ballot Board previously approved a modified version of the measure in December 2024, but proponents aim to move forward with their original language.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Arondeus@lemmy.ca 8 points 10 months ago (6 children)

Wtf does "as path paves forward" mean?

[–] Deconceptualist@lemm.ee 8 points 10 months ago

It means the same as "The decision clears the way" at the start of the 2nd paragraph.

This process was blocked multiple times by the state attorney general. The lawsuit outcome says he was wrong and that the proposed amendment can now continue in the legislative process (possibly in parts, with each part requiring voter signatures).

[–] Nollij@sopuli.xyz 4 points 10 months ago

Are you asking grammatically or procedurally?

Others have answered the former. As for the latter, supporters will now collect signatures from Ohio voters. If they collect enough (IIRC, 5% of the number of people that voted in the last governor's election), then it will be on the general ballot in an upcoming statewide election. If it passes, it will be adopted into law.

I haven't looked at this one specifically, but they are usually an amendment to the state constitution. That makes it harder for legislators or judges to override the will of the people.

[–] ByteJunk@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I guess it's just embellishing the expression "paving a path forward", meaning in a more literal way that it would be easier to follow it, and more abstractly, that progress is now expected to be swifter than before.

[–] Arondeus@lemmy.ca 1 points 10 months ago

Oh. Yeah that makes sense. I forgot about that saying. Reads awkwardly though when they re-arrange it like that...

[–] dan1101@lemm.ee 1 points 10 months ago

It means there is a clear way to move forward.

[–] DoucheBagMcSwag@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Means this could go to the SCOTUS and we could get a 7-2 (Alito and Thomas of course) to get this overturned.

Wishful thinking

[–] LilB0kChoy@lemm.ee 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Nope, it’s a state issue. This can’t go to the US Supreme Court because it’s not federal.

[–] DoucheBagMcSwag@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)
[–] LilB0kChoy@lemm.ee 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

If you’re in favor of ending qualified immunity though, then it’s a good thing. This means the state AG has lost and they can get it on the ballot to allow Ohioans to vote on the issue directly.

[–] DoucheBagMcSwag@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 10 months ago

Yeah absolutely.

[–] catloaf@lemm.ee 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Yeah grammatically it's incorrect. Paths are paved, they themselves do not pave.