Constitutional Amendment to define the term "person" to include every human being from the beginning of the biological development of that human being. (2/3 - CA13 s1(A))
Impact
The proposed amendment has significant implications for Louisiana state law, as it would redefine personhood in legal contexts. This could affect various areas of law, including those relating to reproductive rights, healthcare, and individual liberties. By explicitly stating that personhood begins at biological development, it could lead to legal challenges and changes regarding abortion, contraception, and various forms of medical treatment. Proponents argue that it would strengthen the rights of the unborn, while opponents fear it may infringe upon the rights of women and undermine established legal precedents regarding reproductive autonomy.
Summary
Senate Bill 78 is a proposed constitutional amendment aimed at redefining the term 'person' within the Louisiana Constitution. Specifically, it seeks to establish that the term shall apply to every human being from the point of biological development. If passed, this amendment would add a new section to the declaration of rights in the Louisiana Constitution, thereby potentially impacting legal interpretations surrounding personhood and related rights and protections.
Sentiment
The sentiment surrounding SB 78 is highly polarized. Supporters of the bill view it as a necessary step towards protecting the rights of the unborn and seeing it as aligned with moral and ethical beliefs about personhood. Conversely, opponents see it as a direct threat to women's rights and reproductive freedom. The discussions have highlighted the broader societal divides on these issues, underscoring deep concern among some communities about the implications this amendment could have for personal freedoms.
Contention
Notable points of contention include the potential legal ramifications of redefining personhood. Critics argue that this amendment could lead to a cascade of legal challenges that jeopardize women's access to abortion and healthcare, thereby affecting their autonomy. Furthermore, there are concerns about the amendment's wording and the broader implications it could have on existing laws protecting abortion rights and reproductive health. The debate reflects a broader conflict over women's rights and the legal recognition of unborn children, with passionate arguments presented on both sides.
Constitutional amendment to prohibit a person appointed by the governor to fill a vacancy in a statewide office from being a candidate for that office in the election to fill the vacancy. (2/3-CA13s1(A)) (OR NO IMPACT GF EX See Note)
Constitutional Amendment to change term limits for certain elected officials and the percentage of the vote required to be eligible for successive terms of office. (2/3-CA13s1(A)) (1/31/12)
Constitutional Amendment to change state employees from a defined benefit retirement plan to a defined contribution plan. (2/3 - CA13s1(A)) (OR NO IMPACT APV)
Constitutional amendment to provide, beginning Fiscal Year 2016-2017, for certain dedications from the Transportation Trust Fund. (2/3-CA13s1(A)) (OR INCREASE GF EX See Note)