If our distracted Attorney General Jason Ravnsborg needs help whipping up a response to the Governor-funded court challenges against Amendment A, law student Brian Murphy is willing to help. The Pierre native and retired Marine now studies law at the for-profit Charleston School of Law in South Carolina. Murphy read the election contest filed by Pennington County Sheriff Kevin Thom and Highway Patrol Colonel Rick Miller to overturn every vote on Amendment A. Within two days, Murphy drafted the following four-page letter and a 21-page research document suitable for reframing as a legal filing by the Attorney General or any party willing to intervene to stop the state’s continued disregard for the will of the people who, under God, are trying to rule.
Murphy tackles the single-subject and amendment-vs.-revision arguments raised by the plaintiffs with argument similar to mine. Murphy bolsters the amendment-vs.-revision argument by citing the trusty Black’s Law Dictionary:
Black’s Law Dictionary defines Amendment as “amendment (17c) 1. A formal and usu. minor revision or addition proposed or made to a statute, constitution, pleading, order, or other instrument; specif., a change made by addition, deletion, or correction; esp., an alteration in wording. (emphasis added). Black’s Law Dictionary defines revision as "revision n. (17c) 1. A reexamination or careful review for correction or improvement. 2. Parliamentary law. A general and thorough rewriting of a governing document, in which the entire document is open to Amendment <bylaws revision>.” (emphasis added). Black’s Law Dictionary defines article as “2. A separate and distinct part (as a clause or stipulation) of a writing, esp. in a contract, statute, or constitution <Article III> (emphasis added) [Brian Murphy, research document on SD Amendment A, 2020.11.22, pp. 6–7].
With these emphasized definitions in mind, Murphy notes that the South Dakota Constitution does not prohibit an amendment adding language or entire articles to address topics currently ignored by the Constitution. Murpy further cites Governor Frank Farrar’s 1969 request for a constitutional revision commission to support the argument that Amendment A is not a general and thorough rewriting of the Constitution but only an amendment.
To tackle the single-subject argument, Murphy digs up two cases that preceded the explicit single-subject rule but which challenged amendments in 1897 and 1974 for encompassing more than one subject. Those precedents offer general arguments about what constitutes a single subject, but the court would have to re-weigh those arguments in the context of the new language we wrote into our Constitution when we enacted via Amendment Z in 2018.
But hey: neither Murphy nor I are lawyers (though is far closer!). We should all look forward to seeing how well Attorney General Ravnsborg and maybe some real lawyers for Amendment A’s sponsors craft their arguments against the Thom/Miller/(Noem) lawsuits.
Murphy’s implicit sarcasm while he maintains precise politeness and apparent respect for the sycophantic Thom and Miller is exquisite.
My thoughts exactly Bob, but you put it more eloquently than I would have.
Respect and politeness is waning in this state and nation due to the Republican gutter-style politics that keep worsening over time! Not far back in time was the GOP (Republican) “Swift-boat” attacks on a Vietnam hero-Kerry, when he ran for president. At the same time as that, the Veteran’s Service Administrator-a quadraplegic veteran of the Vietnam War ran for Senator and suffered the same GOP name-smearing Kerry suffered. Then along comes Trump and his total disregard of ethics, compassion or politeness and the Republicans fell in lockstep with him just like Hitler’s jackboots. They remain so today, as less than 10 or 12 have spoke against their Fuehrer-type leader. A couple, like Georgia’s Sec of State and the fired cyber security chief had the backbone to
speak out against this White-House defiler.
Here, in SD we have a wanna-be Trump governor enabling two law enforcement chiefs attempting to thwart the People’s Will. Respect and politeness they aren’t seeking, not with Trump’s campaign manager dregs climbing onto our state government payroll every month to “advise” our lady guv.
Scott Atlas, Trump’s “herd-immunity” specialist is available now Kristi, to head up your South Dakota Health Dept!
Anybody wants to have an excellent overview of the odorous vacuum of Thom’s and Miller’s argument, read anything by Mike Gray.
http://drugcrazy.com/
I saw gullianass from the first time I heard of this. His style now it’s in SD
I of course meant the law suit not this eloquently written article or letter written by mr Murphy
One duty as a citizen of the United States and the state of South Dakota is to make sure there is Government accountability.
When our elected officials and our governor in particular who swore to uphold the constitution try to override
the will of the people, they are willfully corrupting a free and legal election.
That is Facism. Plain and simple.
Our Dope Queen Governor and her
court jesters are not only delusional
they are dangerous.
Be careful everyone.
There are Human Beings out there.