DUIs leading to parent's death would require child support from driver under Alabama bill
An Alabama Senate committee is considering legislation that would require individuals to support the child of another family if they are convicted of a driving under the influence offense that resulted in a parent's death.
The Senate Judiciary Committee delayed action last week on SB 167, sponsored by Sen. Arthur Orr, R-Decatur, would require such support to be paid until the child turns 19.
'The premise is to make sure we take care of the minor children that are left behind if the breadwinner is killed,' Orr said.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
He told the committee that the idea from the bill originated from Texas. Orr said he thought to himself, 'Well, if it will prevent DUIs (driving under the influence), to know how serious we are about it.'
The penalty would be in addition to other restitution that an individual who is convicted of the crime would owe.
A death resulting from a person operating a motor vehicle or vessel while intoxicated is considered criminally negligent homicide under Alabama law, a Class C felony punishable by up to 10 years in prison.
Language in the bill states that the court may consider the financial needs and resources of the surviving children as well as the parent or guardian, or the state of Alabama if no one else is available to care for the children.
Other factors the court could consider include the standard of living of the family, the physical and emotional needs of the children as well as educational considerations.
'The reasonable work-related child care expenses of the surviving parent or guardian,' the bill states.
Orr also proposed an amendment to the legislation stating that the penalty is separate from any civil penalties that a court may impose in the case because of wrongful death, which could add to the financial burden of those who are convicted.
Sen. Greg Albritton, R-Atmore, had concerns that the penalty could effectively require the person convicted of the parent's death to have a relationship with the family whose loved one was killed.
'I don't know if we want to go that route,' he said to the committee. 'I can see creative lawyers using that in that way.'
Albritton also said he was concerned about the broader impact the legislation has on the community.
'What about the guy who does this, and he has a family of his own?' Albritton said. 'We are not only punishing the individual, but we are also taking, and affecting more people, for the act of an individual. I think we need to be cautious of this.'
Sen. Vivian Davis Figures, D-Mobile, asked the committee to consider the situation when a parent loses a child because a person is driving under the influence of drugs and alcohol.
'If we are going to do something like this, I think we need to consider all cases when things happen by someone,' she said.
After hearing all the arguments, Orr withdrew his proposed amendment and requested that a vote be delayed.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Miami Herald
13 minutes ago
- Miami Herald
Why the surprise over Scots' reaction to Trump? Respect must be earned
Re: Mary Anna Mancuso's Aug. 1 op-ed, 'Scotland's protests should concern every American.' Why is she surprised by the Scots' reaction to President Trump's visit? What does she expect? Respectfully disagreeing with Trump gets one libeled on his online platform. Continuing to disagree gets one taken to court (and paying for that may require filing for bankruptcy). If one continues to strongly disagree, then threats of bodily harm against one and one's family begin. And when one is physically assaulted, Trump and his people laugh! The Scots are only giving Trump what he gave them: insults. His Scottish neighbors protested how he ran roughshod over the environment surrounding his golf courses, his attempts to stop energy-producing windmills from spoiling his view and his superior attitude toward them. They actually have to live with the results of his schemes. To get respect, one has to earn it. Threatening everyone who refuses to bow down to you won't earn you any respect. Corey Mass, Miami Beach Senate's carelessness In early 1972, I accepted an appointment by then-U.S. Sen. Edward J. Gurney of Florida to serve as an attorney to the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee. I traveled to Washington with aspirations of improving the federal judicial system. Then Watergate broke out. During the next two years, while assisting Gurney, who served on the Judiciary and Watergate Committees, I had a worm's eye view of the tumult, including revelations great and terrible. I witnessed young men of great promise and ability go to jail, but I also watched the testimony of Elliott Richardson and Bill Ruckleshouse, who resigned office rather than carry out an order they deemed wrong (if not legally, then morally). It made me realize that principles matter and that our government requires constant loyalty to the Constitution and the rule of law. Today, I see many parallels to the Watergate years, particularly when young lawyers disregard ethical considerations to further political ends, as by counseling defiance of court orders. Yet one distinction glares: during Watergate, the Senate joined the courts in investigating wrongdoing. I have every confidence today's courts will suffice under the doctrine of separation of powers, as federal judges are demonstrating daily, regardless who appointed them. I also have confidence that our military will withstand attempts to politicize it. However, it surely would help if the Senate were as concerned with the Constitution and the usurpation of their powers as they are with just getting reelected. R. Thomas Farrar, Miami Multiple articles have been published about the horrific boating accident last week on Biscayne Bay. Many of them referred to which boat had the 'right of way.' This terminology is misleading. On water, no boat has the 'right of way.' There is the 'give-way vessel,' which must take action to avoid a collision, or yield the right of way. There also is the stand-on vessel, which is supposed to maintain course. However, if it appears that the give-way vessel is not taking appropriate or adequate action to avoid a collision, the stand-on vessel then has the responsibility to maneuver to avoid a collision. While this might seem like semantics, it is important for all individuals operating a boat to know and understand. As has been mentioned in several articles, the determination of the give-way vessel and stand-on vessel varies based on many situations. Boating is a wonderful activity. Over the past few years, there have been many new recreational boat owners on our South Florida waters. Hopefully, they have been thoroughly educated in boating safety and operation and take care to avoid accidents. None of this will bring comfort to the victims and families of the recent tragedy, but education and knowledge will hopefully prevent future incidents. Seth Rosen, Pinecrest As a former high school social studies teacher, I would have to give Gov. Ron DeSantis a failing grade in American history and an A+ in making it up as he goes along. His 'civics excellence' program for Florida teachers is full of flat out lies, delusions, distortions and derangements, which fit very well within the core curriculum of his role model in the White House. Reconstructing the past to fit a delirious present is a slippery slope and depends on the assumption that Floridians are as ignorant as their chief executive. If that is the case, Florida has much larger problems than its residents can possibly comprehend. A search and destroy mission against the truth will have major unintended consequences. Undermining democracy requires the proper combination of fake news and fake history. Good luck with that recipe, Chef Ron. Craig Corsini, San Rafael, CA Last week's departure of ABC from WPLG Channel 10, after seven decades of affiliation, is quite alarming. I am old enough to remember when there was no ABC, but a Blue Network which was part of NBC, before breaking off into two networks. Apparently, Disney, which now owns ABC, offered less programming and higher fees, according to WPLG, hence their breakup. I also remember Disney when it was just happy producing films, then theme parks and now controlling Paramount and a broadcast network. Maybe Mickey is getting too big for his britches. Roger Shatanoff, Coral Gables In the Aug. 1 op-ed, 'Red states lead the charge to healthier living,' a Heritage Foundation analyst asserts that Florida's fluoride ban is an example of states' political and cultural realignments that will 'begin to change the health trajectory for their constituents.' True, but not in a good way. Why would anyone desire a political legacy that includes rotting kids' teeth? Bob Ross, Pinecrest As a high school senior who actively rides the Metrorail, I've been following the Miami Herald's recent stories on the impact of construction delays on local traffic. According to a July 7 report, the Future-Ready Modernization in Action plan to expand Miami International Airport will result in a 20 million passenger increase by 2040. Even though 2,240 additional parking spaces are planned to accommodate this growth, it's unclear that our roads can absorb the increase in rental cars, taxis and Ubers. Projects like the Signature Bridge will increase highway capacity; however, the completion date has been delayed by two years. Short-term solutions should be made available to daily commuters. We should use something like Miami-Dade's 'Better Bus Plan.' I took Metrorail to school using this six-week, fare-free promotion. It was clean, efficient and reduced my commute. Charles Holleman, Miami The detention center dubbed 'Alligator Alcatraz,' hosted by Gov. Ron DeSantis, President Trump and their own military with cult followers, mirrors what Argentina experienced during its period of dictatorship. That regime's detention center/prison held in isolation those it snatched from daily life, then deported them. Without human rights, legal process or outside communication, detainees were drugged, abused and tortured. Pregnant women were allowed to live until after giving birth. In some cases, their babies were given to military officers' families wanting a child. View some of the documentaries about Argentina's 'Dirty War' to understand our own political unrest. Our political climate is repeating this history. Are U.S. citizens so blinded with loyalty to this type of leadership, or lack thereof, not to realize the destruction to our Constitution? It's time to take back control of public education, fact-based news and publications and the judicial system. Reel in religious institutions that spew hate and white supremacy in preaching while enjoying a tax-free platform. Jail the real criminals. Kimberly Cole, Kendall
San Francisco Chronicle
13 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Texas dispute highlights nation's long history of partisan gerrymandering. Is it legal?
When Democratic lawmakers fled Texas to try to prevent the Republican-led Legislature from redrawing the state's congressional districts, it marked the latest episode in a long national history of gerrymandering. The word 'gerrymander" was coined in America more than 200 years ago as an unflattering means of describing political manipulation in legislative map-making. The word has stood the test of time, in part, because American politics has remained fiercely competitive. Who is responsible for gerrymandering? In many states, like Texas, the state legislature is responsible for drawing congressional districts, subject to the approval or veto of the governor. District maps must be redrawn every 10 years, after each census, to balance the population in districts. But in some states, nothing prevents legislatures from conducting redistricting more often. In an effort to limit gerrymandering, some states have entrusted redistricting to special commissions composed of citizens or bipartisan panels of politicians. Democratic officials in some states with commissions are now talking of trying to sidestep them to counter Republican redistricting in Texas. How does a gerrymander work? If a political party controls both the legislature and governor's office — or has such a large legislative majority that it can override vetoes — it can effectively draw districts to its advantage. One common method of gerrymandering is for a majority party to draw maps that pack voters who support the opposing party into a few districts, thus allowing the majority party to win a greater number of surrounding districts. Another common method is for the majority party to dilute the power of an opposing party's voters by spreading them among multiple districts. Why is it called gerrymandering? The term dates to 1812, when Massachusetts Gov. Elbridge Gerry signed a bill redrawing state Senate districts to benefit the Democratic-Republican Party. Some thought an oddly shaped district looked like a salamander. A newspaper illustration dubbed it 'The Gerry-mander' — a term that later came to describe any district drawn for political advantage. Gerry lost re-election as governor in 1812 but won election that same year as vice president with President James Madison. Is political gerrymandering illegal? Not under the U.S. Constitution. The Supreme Court, in a 2019 case originating from North Carolina, ruled that federal courts have no authority to decide whether partisan gerrymandering goes too far. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote: 'The Constitution supplies no objective measure for assessing whether a districting map treats a political party fairly.' The Supreme Court noted that partisan gerrymandering claims could continue to be decided in state courts under their own constitutions and laws. But some state courts, including North Carolina's highest court, have ruled that they also have no authority to decide partisan gerrymandering claims. Are there any limits on redistricting? Yes. Though it's difficult to challenge legislative districts on political grounds, the Supreme Court has upheld challenges on racial grounds. In a 2023 case from Alabama, the high court said the congressional districts drawn by the state's Republican-led Legislature likely violated the Voting Rights Act by diluting the voting strength of Black residents. The court let a similar claim proceed in Louisiana. Both states subsequently redrew their districts. What does data show about gerrymandering? Statisticians and political scientists have developed a variety of ways to try to quantify the partisan advantage that may be attributable to gerrymandering. Republicans, who control redistricting in more states than Democrats, used the 2010 census data to create a strong gerrymander. An Associated Press analysis of that decade's redistricting found that Republicans enjoyed a greater political advantage in more states than either party had in the past 50 years. But Democrats responded to match Republican gerrymandering after the 2020 census. The adoption of redistricting commissions also limited gerrymandering in some states. An AP analysis of the 2022 elections — the first under new maps — found that Republicans won just one more U.S. House seat than would have been expected based on the average share of the vote they received nationwide. That was one of the most politically balanced outcomes in years.
New York Post
42 minutes ago
- New York Post
Why Meghan Markle's ‘fragile' employees waited years to accuse her of bullying
Nobody wants the wrath of 'Duchess Difficult.' Former The Times royal correspondent Valentine Low explained why Meghan Markle's former staffers waited years before they accused her of bullying in Low's 2022 book 'Courtiers: The Hidden Power Behind the Crown' 'There was strong elements of nervousness and worry,' Low stated on Kinsley Schofield's 'Unfiltered' podcast last week. 'Some of them were still in a very fragile state.' 7 Meghan Markle. / The author added that Markle's employees 'were very worried about what Meghan would do to them' and 'viewed her capacity for revenge as infinite.' 'It was two and a half years later. They'd left the employ of the Royal Family and they still were in a psychologically delicate state as a result of what happened to them at that time,' Low also said. 7 Valentine Low. In addition, Low claimed that the staffers didn't want to be in the spotlight because of their allegations against Markle, 44. 'They are happy leading their new lives, doing whatever new job it is they do. They don't want the media on their doorstep,' he said. 'They don't want to have a target on them.' 7 Valentine Low's book that came out in 2022. St. Martins Press In his book, Low published anonymous staffers' claims about the alleged abuse they suffered working under the 'Suits' alum. The ex-employees claimed Markle — who they referred to as a 'narcissistic sociopath' — went on screaming tirades. On the podcast, Low noted that if Markle and Prince Harry 'were difficult to work for then, they're difficult to work for now.' 7 Prince Harry and Meghan Markle on their wedding day in May 2018. Getty Images He also recalled how the couple's legal team allegedly reacted to the book being published in 2022. 'We got a very, very long letter from their lawyers. And then sometime later we got another slightly less long letter from their lawyers, basically being very feisty, very strong,' Low said, adding, 'We published, and then we didn't hear a word from them.' 7 Meghan Markle speaks onstage at The Archewell Foundation Parents Summit: Mental Wellness event in NYC in Oct. 2023. Getty Images for Project Healthy Minds Low also stated: 'If the Times runs a story like that, and doesn't get sued, there probably something in it. And suddenly you realize all those tabloid stories earlier suggesting she might be the 'Duchess Difficult,' actually maybe they're true.' Markle's spokesperson told The Post that Low is blasting 'harmful gossip' and 'continues to desperately recycle false, offensive, and long-discredited allegations in an apparent bid to sell books and resuscitate relevance.' 7 Meghan Markle and Prince Harry left the royal family in 2020. / 'These claims—rooted in anonymous, unverifiable sources—form part of a broader and deeply troubling agenda that seeks to dehumanize a woman who has consistently stood up for fairness, dignity, and truth,' the rep continued. 'The Duchess has faced years of unfounded attacks masked as journalism in a never-ending smear campaign, beginning only once she was affiliated with the remains undeterred by the noise and firmly focused on her family and work,' the spokesperson added. 7 Meghan Markle with Prince Harry. Instagram/@meghan Markle was in the royal family from 2018 until 2020 when she and Harry, 40, quit their royal duties and moved to America. The mother of two faced other bullying accusations from some of her former staffers — who dubbed Markle a ''Mean Girls' teenager' — in a Vanity Fair report that came out in January. Last year, a report from the Hollywood Reporter claimed Markle instills fear in her staff, with one insider describing her as a 'dictator in high heels' who has reduced 'grown men to tears.' Markle's team has denied all bullying claims.
