DA Zappala to intervene in lawsuit challenging Marsy’s Law amendment | TribLIVE.com

DA Zappala to intervene in lawsuit challenging Marsy’s Law amendment

Jamie Martines

Allegheny County District Attorney Stephen A. Zappala Jr. filed a petition Friday in Commonwealth Court to intervene in a lawsuit filed this week by opponents of a proposed crime victims’ rights amendment to the state constitution.

The lawsuit was filed Thursday in Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court by the American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania on behalf of the League of Women Voters of Pennsylvania and Philadelphia resident Lorraine Haw.

It argues that the proposed amendment is unconstitutional because it combines several changes to the state constitution into a single amendment, according to a statement from the ACLU.

Zappala argues that the proposed amendment would directly impact the work of the district attorney’s office and therefore he should be allowed to participate in the ACLU lawsuit, according to court documents.

“This proposed constitutional amendment is intended to provide your petitioner and other prosecutors across the Commonwealth with another tool to aid them in this endeavor,” Zappala argued in court documents filed Friday. “Accordingly, your petitioner will be directly impacted by the outcome of this action, and therefore, ought to have an opportunity to be heard by the Court.”

Changes covered by the amendment, known as Marsy’s Law, would include the availability of bail, who can be called as witnesses, the pardons process and the right to be free from double jeopardy.

It also would bolster laws that give crime victims the right to be notified of and present for court proceedings, seek restitution, offer victim impact statements in court and to be notified of parole proceedings and inmate release dates.

The ACLU of Pennsylvania declined to comment Friday afternoon on Zappala’s petition to intervene.

Pennsylvania voters would vote to approve or reject the amendment when they head to the polls in November.

In a separate statement, Zappala criticized the ACLU and the League of Women voters for challenging the amendment.

“The fact that the ACLU, along with the League of Women Voters, has decided to politicize the rights of crime victims across the commonwealth is profoundly disappointing,” Zappala said in a statement. “The fact that they waited until three weeks before election day to do this when they have known about Marsy’s Law for the past two years is quite telling as to their true intentions.”

Speaking with the Tribune-Review after the lawsuit was filed Thursday, Pennsylvania ACLU Deputy Legal Director Mary Catherine Roper told the Tribune-Review that the group could not file a lawsuit until members saw how the ballot measure would be worded.

Roper said she also plans to seek a preliminary injunction to prevent the state from counting votes on the amendment.

Jamie Martines is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Jamie at 724-850-2867, [email protected] or via Twitter .

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.