Kentucky Constitutional Amendment 1, Marsy's Law Crime Victims Rights Amendment (2020)

Kentucky Constitutional Amendment 1
Election date November 3, 2020
Topic Law enforcement
Status a Approved
Type Constitutional amendment	Origin State legislature
List of Kentucky measuresConstitutional Amendment 1Constitutional Amendment 2Submit

Kentucky Constitutional Amendment 1, the Marsy's Law Crime Victims Rights Amendment was on the ballot in Kentucky as a legislatively referred constitutional amendment on November 3, 2020. It was approved.

A "yes" vote supported adding specific rights of crime victims, together known as Marsy's Law, to the Kentucky Constitution.

A "no" vote opposed adding specific rights of crime victims, together known as Marsy's Law, to the Kentucky Constitution.

Election results

Kentucky Constitutional Amendment 1
Result		Votes	Percentage
Yes		1,156,883	63.36%
No		668,866	36.64%

Results are officially certified.

Source

Overview

What did Constitutional Amendment 1 add to the Kentucky Constitution?

See also: Text of the measure

Constitutional Amendment 1 was a type of Marsy's Law. The measure provided crime victims with specific constitutional rights, including the right to be treated with fairness and due consideration for the victim’s safety, dignity, and privacy; to be notified about proceedings; to be heard at proceedings involving release, plea, or sentencing of the accused; to proceedings free from unreasonable delays; to be present at trials; to consult with the state's attorneys; to reasonable protection from the accused and those acting on behalf of the accused; to be notified about release or escape of the accused; to have the victim's and victim's family's safety considered when setting bail or determining release; and to receive restitution from the individual who committed the criminal offense.

Why did Marsy's Law appear on Kentucky ballots again?

See also: Kentucky Marsy's Law Crime Victims Rights Amendment (2018)

Kentucky voters approved a Marsy's Law amendment in 2018 with 63 percent of the vote, but it was overturned in KACDL v. Grimes and Board of Elections. The Kentucky Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers filed litigation against the state on August 13, 2018. The association said the ballot question, which the state legislature wrote, fails to "inform the electorate of the substance of the amendment" and that the constitutional amendment should be blocked. On June 12, 2019, the Kentucky Supreme Court, in a unanimous decision, rendered the amendment void. The ruling stated, "We hold that Section 256 of the Kentucky Constitution requires the General Assembly to submit the full text of a proposed constitutional amendment to the electorate for a vote. Likewise, Section 257 requires the secretary of state to publish the full text of the proposed amendment at least ninety days before the vote. Because the form of the amendment that was published and submitted to the electorate for a vote in this case was not the full text, and was instead a question, the proposed amendment is void."

In response to the court's ruling, the Kentucky State Legislature required that the ballot question and the full text of the 2020 amendment be printed on November ballots.

What other states have passed Marsy's Law?

See also: Marsy's Law in the states

As of October 2020, 14 states had passed a ballot measure for Marsy's Law. The first was in California in 2008. Between 2008 and 2020, voters had approved Marsy's Law in Illinois (2014), Montana (2016), North Dakota (2016), South Dakota (2016), Ohio (2017), Florida (2018), Georgia (2018), Kentucky (2018), Nevada (2018), North Carolina (2018), Oklahoma (2018), Pennsylvania (2019), and Wisconsin (2020). Ballotpedia identified $113.2 million in total contributions to the support campaigns for the 14 Marsy's Law ballot measures that were on ballots between 2008 and 2020. Henry Nicholas, the co-founder of Broadcom Corp., and the organization Marsy's Law for All provided 97 percent—about 99.3 million—of the total contributions. Marsy's Law is named after Henry Nicholas' sister, who was murdered in 1983.

Text of the measure

Ballot question

The following ballot question appeared with the complete text of the amendment:

“

Are you in favor of creating a new section of the Constitution of Kentucky relating to crime victims, as proposed in Section 2 below?

”

Constitutional changes

See also: Kentucky Constitution

Constitutional Amendment 1 added a new section to the Kentucky Constitution:

Note: Hover over the text and scroll to see the full text.

To secure for victims of criminal acts or public offenses justice and due process and to ensure crime victims a meaningful role throughout the criminal and juvenile justice systems, a victim, as defined by law which takes effect upon the enactment of this section and which may be expanded by the General Assembly, shall have the following rights, which shall be respected and protected by law in a manner no less vigorous than the protections afforded to the accused in the criminal and juvenile justice systems: victims shall have the reasonable right, upon request, to timely notice of all proceedings and to be heard in any proceeding involving a release, plea, sentencing, or in the consideration of any pardon, commutation of sentence, granting of a reprieve, or other matter involving the right of a victim other than grand jury proceedings; the right to be present at the trial and all other proceedings, other than grand jury proceedings, on the same basis as the accused; the right to proceedings free from unreasonable delay; the right to consult with the attorney for the Commonwealth or the attorney's designee; the right to reasonable protection from the accused and those acting on behalf of the accused throughout the criminal and juvenile justice process; the right to timely notice, upon request, of release or escape of the accused; the right to have the safety of the victim and the victim’s family considered in setting bail, determining whether to release the defendant, and setting conditions of release after arrest and conviction; the right to full restitution to be paid by the convicted or adjudicated party in a manner to be determined by the court, except that in the case of a juvenile offender the court shall determine the amount and manner of paying the restitution taking into consideration the best interests of the juvenile offender and the victim; the right to fairness and due consideration of the crime victim's safety, dignity, and privacy; and the right to be informed of these enumerated rights, and shall have standing to assert these rights. The victim, the victim's attorney or other lawful representative, or the attorney for the Commonwealth upon request of the victim may seek enforcement of the rights enumerated in this section and any other right afforded to the victim by law in any trial or appellate court with jurisdiction over the case. The court shall act promptly on such a request and afford a remedy for the violation of any right. Nothing in this section shall afford the victim party status, or be construed as altering the presumption of innocence in the criminal justice system. The accused shall not have standing to assert the rights of a victim. Nothing in this section shall be construed to alter the powers, duties, and responsibilities of the prosecuting attorney. Nothing in this section or any law enacted under this section creates a cause of action for compensation, attorney's fees, or damages against the Commonwealth, a county, city, municipal corporation, or other political subdivision of the Commonwealth, an officer, employee, or agent of the Commonwealth, a county, city, municipal corporation, or any political subdivision of the Commonwealth, or an officer or employee of the court. Nothing in this section or any law enacted under this section shall be construed as creating:

(1) A basis for vacating a conviction; or

(2) A ground for any relief requested by the defendant.

Readability score

See also: Ballot measure readability scores, 2020

Using the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL and Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) formulas, Ballotpedia scored the readability of the ballot title and summary for this measure. Readability scores are designed to indicate the reading difficulty of text. The Flesch-Kincaid formulas account for the number of words, syllables, and sentences in a text; they do not account for the difficulty of the ideas in the text. The state legislature wrote the ballot language for this measure. The FKGL for the ballot title is grade level 13, and the FRE is 44. The word count for the ballot title is 23, and the estimated reading time is 6 seconds.

Support

Marsy's Law for Kentucky led the campaign in support of the amendment.

Supporters

Officials

• State Sen. David Givens (R)

Unions

• Kentucky Association Chiefs of Police

Organizations

• Advocacy Action Network
• Children’s Advocacy Centers of Kentucky
• Kentucky League of Cities
• Kentucky Sheriffs’ Association
• Kentucky State Police Professional Association
• University of Louisville PEACC Center

Arguments

• Dr. Emily Bonistall Postel, the director of outreach for Marsy’s Law for Kentucky: "We believe you’ll find that Marsy’s Law is a straightforward, commonsense tool to correct a troubling imbalance in our justice system: While individuals who are accused and convicted of crimes currently possess constitutional rights, Kentucky crime victims who have had their lives forever changed are not afforded similar protections. Marsy’s Law provides victims the constitutional right to be notified, to be heard, and to be present in the process that seeks to hold their offender accountable to society for the wrong committed against the victim."
• Eileen Recktenwald, the executive director for the Kentucky Association of Sexual Assault Programs; Dorislee Gilbert, the executive director for the Mary Byron Project (MBP); and Caroline Ruschell, the executive director for the Children’s Advocacy Centers: "Like all states and the federal government, Kentucky provides constitutional rights to individuals who are accused of crimes. But the Commonwealth is one of only 15 states that does not provide victims of crime with any constitutional protections in the criminal justice process. ... Let’s ensure that victims’ voices are also heard in courtrooms across the Commonwealth — and that they finally receive constitutional protections allowing them to participate in the justice system as it deals with those who forever changed their lives."
• Melissa Buchanan, founder of Hope After Homicide: "It is also disingenuous for Sen. Schickel to claim that our fight for victim rights is led by 'special interests from outside our state.' I am certainly not an “outsider,” and Hope After Homicide is not a 'special interest group' — and neither are countless other Kentucky victims and advocates who tirelessly strive to stand up for those without a voice. Marsy’s Law for Kentucky enjoys broad, bipartisan support and will have no impact upon any presumption of innocence or the rights of the accused. It will simply correct the current imbalance of justice that exists by ensuring the inclusion, participation, and respect of victims in the criminal justice system."
• Kentucky State Senator Whitney Westerfield (R): Explaining why he sponsored the bill, Sen. Westerfield said, "It really resonated strongly with me the value of putting these rights in the constitution. Their life, their lives are affected by that crime. Whether or not the system has yet adjudicated someone guilty of it yet, doesn't change the fact that someone has still been hurt and been wronged."

Opposition

Vote NO on Marsy's Law KY led the campaign in opposition to Constitutional Amendment 1.

Opponents

Officials

• State Senator John Schickel (R)
• State Representative Chad McCoy (R)

Organizations

• ACLU of Kentucky
• Kentucky Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (KACDL)

Arguments

• Kentucky State Senator John Schickel (R-11); Shane Young, a commonwealth’s attorney for Kentucky’s 9th Circuit Court; Heather Gatnarek, a staff attorney at the ACLU of Kentucky; Scott Hofstra, the spokesperson for the United Kentucky Tea Party; and Jan Skavdahl, a leader of the Northern Kentucky Tea Party: "Kentucky law already grants victims many of the rights outlined in Marsy’s Law, including the rights to timely notice of all court proceedings, to be heard in release, plea, or sentencing proceedings, to be present at trial and all other proceedings, and the ability to consult with Commonwealth or County Attorneys. Prosecutors’ offices have victims’ advocates. If victims feel uninformed or unsupported by these advocates, the advocates should be provided with additional resources. If the laws we have in place aren’t serving victims, let’s amend our laws, not our Constitution."
• State Sen. John Schickel (R-Union): "Marsy's Law would unnecessarily and carelessly amend the constitution when the amendment's goals could be achieved more appropriately through statutory reforms. ... This constitutional amendment will compromise the prosecutor’s ability to get to the truth. Something that is never good for crime victims. Furthermore, it fundamentally undermines the presumption of innocence, a bedrock of the American and Kentucky criminal justice systems."
• Kentucky State Representative Chad McCoy (R): "My fear is that once you grant a constitutional right, you must be prepared to grant a constitutional remedy. What will we do, for example, if a person has served their time and is ready to be released but we can’t find the victim to give notice? Both people have a constitutional right in play, one to be released, and one to be notified – in my opinion this problem far outweighs any benefit from changing the constitution. Similarly, if a victim says they don’t understand these new rights, are we going to grant them a lawyer to make sure their rights are not infringed? These type of questions, knowing that a victim already has the law on their side, make me vote against this amendment."
• Kentucky Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (KACDL): "The amendment provides that a person can hire his/her own lawyer or look to the prosecutor to protect and represent their interests and those of the community. Under the law as it is today, a wealthy complaining witness has the ability to hire their own counsel to participate in the case if they perceive the prosecutor is not adequately protecting their interests. Under the proposed amendment, what if the complaining witness is poor and cannot afford to hire a lawyer, yet wants to take advantage of this option? This amendment offers no way to enable them to do so. The results of this amendment will amplify what we have today - those with money wield their influence and pay a lawyer to further their interests, while those who don’t have to fend for themselves and hope they have a good prosecutor on the case."
• Bill Deatherage, a Christian County attorney and current board member of the Kentucky Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers: "Our system of justice will be undermined The Constitution protects citizens from the imposing power of the state to take away liberty, freedom from stigma, and sometimes even life. That is the reason that our citizens are given the presumption of innocence unless proven guilty. This amendment declares that a complaining witness who brings a criminal charge against another citizen is entitled to a heightened status under our Constitution. If adopted, the amendment will weaken constitutional protections for the accused and create the potential for a race to the courthouse."
• Jim Waters, president and CEO of the Bluegrass Institute for Public Policy Solutions: "The proposed amendment also potentially erodes important tenets of American jurisprudence. For example, the Constitution would change to remove suspects’ innocent-until-proven-guilty assumption by giving victims the right to dodge discovery requests and withhold exculpatory evidence which unintentionally thwarts justice by allowing guilty defendants to get their cases overturned on appeal. Marsy’s Law has been implemented in only six states, some of which already have experienced serious disruption in their justice systems. South Dakota voters misled into passing a version of Marsy’s Law in 2016 went back and overwhelmingly amended the Constitution again in the 2018 election after realizing their earlier action greatly hindered criminal prosecutions. Do we really want that kind of a mess in the commonwealth?"

Campaign finance

The campaign finance information on this page reflects the most recent scheduled reports that Ballotpedia has processed, which covered through December 7, 2020.

See also: Campaign finance requirements for Kentucky ballot measures

One political issue committee—Marsy's Law For Kentucky—registered in support of Constitutional Amendment 1. The committee reported receiving $2.3 million in contributions.

	Cash Contributions	In-Kind Contributions	Total Contributions	Cash Expenditures	Total Expenditures
Support	$2,346,602.11	$2,250.00	$2,348,852.11	$2,281,296.94	$2,283,546.94
Oppose	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00
Total	$2,346,602.11	$2,250.00	$2,348,852.11	$2,281,296.94	$2,283,546.94

Support

The following table includes contribution and expenditure totals for the committee in support of Constitutional Amendment 1:

Committees in support of Constitutional Amendment 1
Committee	Cash Contributions	In-Kind Contributions	Total Contributions	Cash Expenditures	Total Expenditures
Marsy's Law for Kentucky	$2,346,602.11	$2,250.00	$2,348,852.11	$2,281,296.94	$2,283,546.94
Total	$2,346,602.11	$2,250.00	$2,348,852.11	$2,281,296.94	$2,283,546.94

Top donors

The following chart lists the top donor to the campaign in support of Constitutional Amendment 1:

Donor	Cash Contributions	In-Kind Contributions	Total Contributions
Marsy's Law For All Foundation	$2,346,602.11	$2,250.00	$2,348,852.11

Opposition

Ballotpedia did not identify any committees registered in opposition to the amendment.

Methodology

To read Ballotpedia's methodology for covering ballot measure campaign finance information, click here.

Media editorials

See also: 2020 ballot measure media endorsements

Ballotpedia identified the following media editorial boards as taking positions on the ballot measure. If you are aware of a media editorial board position that is not listed below, please email the editorial link to editor@ballotpedia.org.

Support

• State Journal Editorial Board: "We side with Marsy’s Law supporters and believe crime victims’ rights should be protected by the constitution in the same manner that criminal defendants’ rights are."

Opposition

• Herald Leader Editorial Board: "The last time Marsy’s Law was on the ballot, it was rejected by the state Supreme Court for being insufficiently detailed and descriptive. That means Kentucky got a redo, and we should not lose this chance to send this bad idea packing. Marsy’s Law is a confusing hodgepodge of ideas that upholds many victims rights already in law but could also make court proceedings much more complicated. ... Vote no on both constitutional amendments found on the back of your ballots."

Background

Kentucky Marsy's Law Crime Victims Rights Amendment (2018)

Kentucky voters approved a Marsy's Law amendment in 2018 with 63 percent of the vote, but it was overturned in KACDL v. Grimes and Board of Elections. The Kentucky Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers filed litigation against the state on August 13, 2018. The association said the ballot question, which the state legislature wrote, fails to "inform the electorate of the substance of the amendment" and that the constitutional amendment should be blocked.

On October 15, 2018, Judge Thomas Wingate of the Franklin County Circuit Court blocked Secretary of State Alison Grimes from certifying the results of the constitutional amendment, which received 62.18 percent of the vote. Judge Wingate said the ballot question did not fairly and fully inform the electorate. Snyder, the campaign's lawyer, said the constitution required an explanation of the amendment's substance in the ballot question. The defendants appealed the case to the Kentucky Supreme Court, which heard arguments on February 8, 2018.

On June 12, 2019, the Kentucky Supreme Court, in a unanimous decision, rendered the amendment void. The ruling stated, "We hold that Section 256 of the Kentucky Constitution requires the General Assembly to submit the full text of a proposed constitutional amendment to the electorate for a vote. Likewise, Section 257 requires the secretary of state to publish the full text of the proposed amendment at least ninety days before the vote. Because the form of the amendment that was published and submitted to the electorate for a vote in this case was not the full text, and was instead a question, the proposed amendment is void."

Kentucky Senate Bill 80 (2020)

On April 14, 2020, the Kentucky State Legislature approved Senate Bill 80 (SB 80). The bill would change the statutory definition of a victim, require full restitution be paid to a victim, and repeal a provision regarding the failure to provide a right, notice or privilege to a victim. The bill would take effect upon approval of the Marsy's Law amendment in November.

Marsy's Law

See also: Marsy's Law crime victim rights

Marsy's Law is a type of crime victims' rights legislation. Henry Nicholas, the co-founder of Broadcom Corp., started campaigning for Marsy's Law to increase the rights and privileges of victims in state constitutions. Marsy's Law is named after Nicholas' sister, Marsy Nicholas, who was murdered in 1983.

Henry Nicholas was the sponsor of the first Marsy's Law, which was on the ballot in California as Proposition 9 in 2008. He formed the national organization, Marsy's Law for All, in 2009.

Ballotpedia identified $113.2 million in total contributions to the support campaigns for the 14 Marsy's Law ballot measures. Henry Nicholas and the organization Marsy's Law for All provided 91 percent—about 103.2 million—of the total contributions.

The following map shows the status of Marsy's Law ballot measures across the states:

California Proposition 9

Californians voted on Proposition 9 in 2008, which was the first ballot measure known as Marsy's Law. Proposition 9 required that victims and their families be notified during all aspects of the justice process, including bail, sentencing, and parole; and that authorities take a victim's safety into concern when assigning bail or conducting a parole review. Along with Henry Nicholas, Proposition 9 received support from Crime Victims United of California and the California Correctional Peace Officers Association. Proposition 9 faced opposition from the California Teachers Association, the SEIU California State Council, the California Democratic Party, and the California Federation of Teachers. Proposition 9 passed with about 54 percent of the vote and became a model for several subsequent Marsy's Law ballot measures across the United States.

Marsy's Law ballot measures

The first state to vote on Marsy's Law after California was Illinois in 2014. The constitutional amendment received 72.3 percent of the vote in Illinois.

Marsy's Law for All organized campaigns for ballot initiatives in three states in 2016—Montana, North Dakota, and South Dakota. Voters in each state approved the ballot initiative. Montana's Marsy's Law was ruled unconstitutional in 2017 because the ballot initiative, according to the court, violated the state's separate-vote requirement for constitutional amendments. In June 2018, the South Dakota Legislature asked voters to amend Marsy's Law via Amendment Y. Amendment Y, which was approved, was defined to narrow the definition of crime victim and require victims to opt-in to Marsy's Law's protections, rather than making those protections automatic.

In 2017, Marsy's Law was on the ballot in Ohio as Issue 1 and received 82.6 percent of the vote.

The number of Marsy's Law amendments in state constitutions doubled in 2018 from six to 12. The states that voted on Marsy's Law in 2018 were Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Nevada, North Carolina, and Oklahoma. Kentucky's Marsy's Law was ruled invalid in June 2019 because the language for the ballot measure, according to the court, did not meet constitutional requirements.

The Pennsylvania General Assembly referred Marsy's Law to the ballot for the election on November 5, 2019. The Wisconsin State Legislature referred Marsy's Law to the ballot for the election on April 7, 2020.

The following table describes the outcome of votes on Marsy's Law ballot measures:

State	Measure	Year	Percent “Yes”	Percent “No”	Status
California	Proposition 9	2008	53.84%	46.16%	Approved
Illinois	Amendment	2014	78.45%	21.55%	Approved
Montana	Initiative 116	2016	66.09%	33.91%	Approved (Overturned)
North Dakota	Measure 3	2016	62.03%	37.97%	Approved
South Dakota	Amendment S	2016	59.61%	40.39%	Approved (Amended)
Ohio	Issue 1	2017	82.59%	17.41%	Approved
Florida	Amendment 6	2018	61.61%	38.39%	Approved
Georgia	Amendment 4	2018	80.93%	19.07%	Approved
Kentucky	Amendment	2018	62.81%	37.19%	Approved (Overturned)
Nevada	Question 1	2018	61.19%	38.81%	Approved
North Carolina	Amendment	2018	62.13%	37.87%	Approved
Oklahoma	State Question 794	2018	78.01%	21.99%	Approved
Average			66.44%	33.56%

Path to the ballot

See also: Amending the Kentucky Constitution

To put a legislatively referred constitutional amendment before voters, a 60 percent supermajority vote is required in both the Kentucky State Senate and the Kentucky House of Representatives.

This amendment was introduced as Senate Bill 15 (SB 15) on January 9, 2020. On February 25, 2020, the state Senate passed SB 15 in a vote of 31-6, with one abstaining. Of the 28 Republicans in the senate, 25 voted in favor of SB 15, and four voted against it. Six Democrats voted for it, two voted against it, and one abstained.

On April 14, 2020, the state House passed SB 15 in a vote of 74-15, with 11 not voting. Of the 62 Republicans, 52 voted in favor of the amendment, 10 voted against it, and four did not vote. Of the 38 Democrats, 22 voted in favor of it, nine voted against it, and seven did not vote.

Vote in the Kentucky State Senate February 25, 2020
Requirement: Three-fifths (60 percent) vote of all members in each chamber
Number of yes votes required: 23  a
	Yes	No	Not voting
Total	31	6	1
Total percent	81.58%	15.79%	2.63%
Democrat	6	2	1
Republican	25	4	0

Vote in the Kentucky House of Representatives April 14, 2020
Requirement: Three-fifths (60 percent) vote of all members in each chamber
Number of yes votes required: 60  a
	Yes	No	Not voting
Total	74	15	11
Total percent	74.00%	15.00%	11.00%
Democrat	22	9	7
Republican	52	6	4

Lawsuit

  

Lawsuit overview
Issue: Whether the constitutional amendment violates the constitutional requirement that ballot measures relate to a single subject matter and whether the state legislature followed the proper procedures to place the amendment on the ballot
Court: Franklin County Circuit Court
Plaintiff(s): Kentucky Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers	Defendant(s): Kentucky Secretary of State Michael Adams (R)
Plaintiff argument: The state violated the requirement that constitutional amendments relate to a single subject matter and did not follow the correct procedures to place the amendment on the ballot.	Defendant argument: The amendment does not violate the single subject matter rule because all provisions of the amendment relate to crime victims' rights, and the state legislature followed the proper procedures to place the amendment on the ballot and did so with bipartisan support.

  Source: Messenger-Inquirer

The Kentucky chapter of the Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers filed a lawsuit against Kentucky Secretary of State Michael Adams (R) arguing that the Marsy's Law amendment violated the state constitution's requirement that amendments "relate to a single subject or to related subject matters and may amend or modify as many articles and as many sections of the Constitution as may be necessary and appropriate in order to accomplish the objectives of the amendment." The lawsuit says the Marsy's Law amendment contains four independent amendments, which include: giving certain rights to crime victims; "altering the structure of government" by authorizing lawmakers to protect victims’ rights; extending civil immunity to certain government agencies; and "limiting the rights of persons accused of crime."

The lawsuit also argued that the Kentucky State Legislature did not follow the correct procedures to place the amendment on the ballot because the approved legislation was never presented to the governor. The lawsuit says that the amendment is also unconstitutional because it does not define "crime victim," but rather relies on Senate Bill 80 to define it.

On July 21, 2020, Kentucky Attorney General Daniel Cameron (R) filed a motion to intervene on behalf of the state. In a press release announcing the motion to intervene, Attorney General Daniel Cameron said, "The Kentucky Constitution permits the General Assembly to place proposed constitutional amendments on the ballot for consideration by the people. Because government derives its power from the people, I will strongly defend the right of Kentuckians to vote on proposed constitutional amendments, including Marsy’s Law."

How to cast a vote

See also: Voting in Kentucky

Click "Show" to learn more about voter registration, identification requirements, and poll times in Kentucky.

How to cast a vote in Kentucky

The information below covers regular voting policies in the state. Information may have not applied to the election on November 3, 2020, because of temporary changes in response to coronavirus. Click here to read about changes made for the 2020 elections. Poll times In Kentucky, all polls are open from 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Central and Eastern Time. All those in line by 6:00 p.m. will be permitted to vote. Registration requirements Check your voter registration status here. According to the Kentucky State Board of Elections, in order to register to vote, a person must: “ Be a U.S. citizen and a Kentucky resident for at least 28 days before the election. Non-U.S. citizens, including U.S. nationals do not qualify; Be at least 18 years old by the next General Election; Kentucky law allows qualified individuals to register at 17 years of age and be able to participate in a Primary Election if the individual will be 18 years old by the General Election; Not be a convicted felon (or, if convicted of a felony, my right to vote has been restored following an expungement, Executive Pardon, or Executive Order; Not have been judged mentally incompetent in a court of law and have voting rights removed; Not claim the right to vote outside Kentucky. ” The deadline to submit a voter registration application is 29 days before an election, unless that day is a state or federal holiday. If mailed, applications must be postmarked by that deadline. Voter registration applications may be completed online, mailed to the county clerk's office, or submitted in person at the county clerk's office. Automatic registration Kentucky does not practice automatic voter registration. Online registration See also: Online voter registration Kentucky has implemented an online voter registration system. Residents can register to vote by visiting this website. Same-day registration Kentucky does not allow same-day voter registration. Residency requirements Kentucky law requires 28 days of residency in the state before a person may vote. Verification of citizenship See also: Laws permitting noncitizens to vote in the United States Kentucky does not require proof of citizenship for voter registration. An individual must attest that they are a U.S. citizen when registering to vote. According to the state's voter registration application, "per KRS 119.025, any person who causes himself to be registered when he is not legally entitled to register, shall be subject to penalties including fines and/or a term of imprisonment not less than one (1) year nor more than (5) years." All 49 states with voter registration systems require applicants to declare that they are U.S. citizens in order to register to vote in state and federal elections, under penalty of perjury or other punishment. Seven states — Alabama, Arizona, Georgia, Kansas, Louisiana, New Hampshire, and Wyoming — have laws requiring verification of citizenship at the time of voter registration, whether in effect or not. In three states — California, Maryland, and Vermont — at least one local jurisdiction allows noncitizens to vote in some local elections. Noncitizens registering to vote in those elections must complete a voter registration application provided by the local jurisdiction and are not eligible to register as state or federal voters. Verifying your registration The Voter Information Center site, run by the Kentucky State Board of Elections, allows residents to check their voter registration status online. Voter ID requirements

See also

2020 measures

• 2020 ballot measures
• Law enforcement on the ballot

Kentucky

• Kentucky ballot measures
• Kentucky ballot measure laws

News and analysis

• Ballot measure lawsuits
• Ballot measure readability
• Ballot measure polls

• Marsy's Law crime victim rights
• Marsy's Law for All

External links

• Full Text
• Kentucky 2020 Sample Ballot

Support

• Marsy's Law for Kentucky campaign website
• Marsy's Law for Kentucky Facebook page
• Marsy's Law for Kentucky Twitter page

Opposition

• Vote NO on Marsy's Law KY Facebook page
• Vote NO on Marsy's Law KY Twitter page