Latest news with #SB74
Yahoo
17-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Louisiana AG wants juvenile ‘change of venue' bill, Caddo DA and judges do not
SHREVEPORT, La. (KTAL/KMSS) – Caddo Parish District Attorney James E. Stewart, Sr., is asking lawmakers to reconsider a bill that would allow district attorneys' offices around the state to send juvenile proceedings to district court judges for trials and hearings. Senate Bill 74, sponsored by Senator Alan Seabaugh and heavily supported by the Louisiana Attorney General's Office, would allow for a venue change if prosecutors believe that the juvenile courts cannot properly prosecute certain youth offenses. DA Stewart said in his opinion that the state is trying to legislate a chronic issue in New Orleans through an unnecessary statewide measure. In March, voters rejected a similar ballot initiative that called for expanding offenses for which a juvenile could be charged as an adult. During a Senate Criminal Justice Committee hearing, Seabaugh was adamant that SB 74 is not the same legislation as the failed amendment. He said this bill is strictly about venue. DA Stewart objects to proposed Senate bill related to juvenile court hearings, procecutions 'This bill supposedly is going to change what we call 'venue'. And it would allow certain juvenile cases to be heard in district court using the children's code rule, but by district court, judges, it's it's a solution to to a problem that's not there,' Stewart said. Proponents of the bill say it provides more discretion over where a juvenile trial can occur, but the district attorney already has some discretion over 15-year-old offenders. 'We can transfer that jurisdiction from juvenile court to adult court so they are treated like adults,' Stewart explained. The list includes, rape, homicide, car jacking, armed robbery violent all violent felonies. Within SB74, there are additional offenses, including burglary and battery, that would be included and on the table for transfer to district court. Seabaugh's assertion that the bill is strictly about venue may be true, but the game changes when youth offenders enter the court system. Changing the venue of juvenile hearings would change how the district court operates when the Louisiana Children's Code is in place. Juvenile court cases are not public like adult criminal trials. No spectators or media are allowed, and only necessary parties are allowed in the courtroom. Youth prosecutions are also expedited, requiring law enforcement, crime labs, court dockets, and other involved stakeholders to move quickly, without violating the code. Watch: Confronting the Plague of Juvenile Crime 'As of right now, the district court judges don't have to use the Children's Code. They use the criminal code or procedure, which is for adults. They would have to figure out the nuances of the children's code for the few times that you switch from one situation to the other,' Stewart said. The most significant difference between criminal district courts and juvenile courts is that the juvenile justice process is meant to be restorative, while criminal court is intended to be punitive. Another is the privacy of juvenile processes, which are primarily intended to protect young people who made poor decisions but can still turn their lives around through the interventions that the juvenile system provides. 'What people really don't understand is that support services, juvenile services. The Office of Juvenile Justice, truancy, Volunteers for Youth Justice, and the drug court. The mental courts are all set up in juvenile court. And how you're going to use them in two different places,' Stewart said. 'There are just a lot of little, small things that make juvenile court work, that we would have problems with if you attempted to move venue. Deputy AG Larry Freiman said the bill is needed because the increase in violent offenses committed by juveniles is exhausting a system that was created to handle fights, family trouble, truancy, and other non-violent crimes. The rise of youth engaged in shootouts, carjacking, robberies, and homicides is growing in a way that the current system is ill-equipped to handle. 'If the DA feels that their juvenile judges are doing a great job, then they don't have to move it. But if they think a case warrants it, they can,' Freiman said during the hearing. 'You know, our CDC (criminal district court) is full of dockets. We're trying to move as many cases as fast as possible. And changing gears, it's not well thought of. Fortunately, in Caddo, we have a separate juvenile court that could deal with all juvenile matters, and they do a good job of dealing with it. So it's really not necessary to transfer those cases for venue purposes and create a whole hybrid system here when you have, too much work already to be done.' On Monday, SB74 was brought before the Senate Finance Committee, which explored the bill's cost, which Senator Seabaugh said was negligible at best. He testified that the bill would have no state general fund impact. He did note that local areas may see a slight increase while some may see a decrease, 'But neither is determinable. The fiscal note would be zero or indeterminable.' Baton Rouge Public Defenders' Office testified during the hearing, explaining to lawmakers that the bill would strain her office's personnel and finances. Her testimony sparked a discussion that ultimately led to the bill's deferment. Caddo Parish Juvenile Court Judges testified that Caddo District Court is already 'begging for judges' and that the bill would require a separate section and probation staff. One retired Caddo juvenile judge explained that criminal district court judges know nothing about the children's code and that getting them up to speed on the differences will involve training costs. He also foreboded 'the harm to come' while that real-time training is happening. Ultimately, Seabaugh voluntarily deferred the bill while the fiscal note is amended, which he said he doesn't anticipate will change much despite the testimony otherwise. DA Stewart said he is still willing to work with lawmakers and other stakeholders on real solutions and interventions to prevent young people from committing crimes, rather than knee-jerk reactions that lead to legislation that will stress an already stressed system. 'I know some people are interested in it, but then you get sidetracked with bills like this, where you're dealing with other issues. I mean, really, the problem is the juvenile court or truancy. So you need some kind of support for choices. Then you have delinquents, they come out of the Department of Juvenile Justice, and they don't have the support systems to get them back in school to teach them or treat or make them be successful, young people, before they ever get into the adult system,' Stewart said. The bill will be returned to the Senate Finance Committee on Monday, May 19. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
17-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Library workers deserve protection, not prosecution
Guest commentator says Senate Bill 74's practical effect would be to criminalize library workers for simply doing their job. Getty Images Georgians have access to a public library in every county in the state, adding up to more than 400 public library branches. In 2024, Georgia's library cardholders borrowed more than 11.7 million items from their local public libraries, an increase of 407,500 items borrowed compared to the year before. This is made possible by library workers who ensure materials are accessible, maintain various collections, assist patrons, and handle the behind-the-scenes work to keep the checkout systems running smoothly. Despite this, these crucial professionals now face unwarranted threat of criminal prosecution because of what's happening at the Georgia Legislature. Senate Bill 74 would strip library workers at all public libraries (i.e., county, university, K-12, and community libraries) of protection from criminal prosecution if they 'knowingly' distribute material that is deemed 'harmful to minors.' This phrase is defined in Georgia Code § 16-12-102 based loosely on the U.S. Supreme Court's 'obscenity' definition. The legislation's practical effect would be to criminalize library workers for simply doing their job. For example, for library workers to avoid prosecution under SB 74, they would have to be familiar with the complete content of the hundreds of thousands of titles contained in their library collections and make a good faith effort to keep media containing any portion that could be deemed 'harmful' out of the hands of any person under 18. It is not feasible for library workers to maintain such encyclopedic knowledge of their collections, nor for them to determine what is 'harmful' for each minor library patron they encounter. As any parent can tell you, what is 'harmful' for a kindergartener may be entirely suitable for a high school junior, yet SB 74 takes no account of these age distinctions. Moreover, with the availability of library reading rooms and the advent of self-checkout machines, library workers are not going to be privy to the materials that each person under the age of 18 is browsing or checking out. In the words of one career librarian in the state, 'Making an assurance that minors would never have any contact with objectionable material would be nearly impossible without keeping anyone under the age of 18 away from all library resources.' This would have a chilling effect on what materials libraries carry in their collections and result in unanticipated restrictions on young people using libraries. Georgia's library workers already give a great deal of thought to age-appropriate content. There are existing selection processes that require that materials added to library collections meet certain criteria for quality, relevance, and value. Whether a book is scientific, literary, historical, or religious, it goes through a vetting process by professional library workers, who consider factors like author credibility, readership interest, and educational merit. Even if a book is considered controversial, its presence in a library suggests it has been determined by library professionals to merit inclusion in the collection for public access, discussion, or preservation. Criminalizing library workers for enabling patrons to check out books disregards the professional judgement exercised by trained library workers in assembling their collections and thwarts the fundamental role libraries play in people's access to information. The legislation echoes the past. Georgia has a long history of attempting to use state power to restrict access to information under the pretense of protecting the public. In December 1829, Georgia passed anti-literacy laws, criminalizing teachers for educating enslaved Black people. Later, segregated libraries limited access to information for Black and White readers. The legislation is a modern-day restriction of access to knowledge based on a government-imposed definition of 'harmful' materials influenced by the government's disfavor of certain topics or viewpoints. Other states that have passed bills similar to SB 74 have faced and lost costly legal battles. In Arkansas, for instance, in July 2023 a federal judge temporarily blocked provisions that could imprison library workers for providing 'harmful' materials to minors. Then, in December 2024, a federal judge ruled those provisions unconstitutional, permanently blocking the implementation of certain provisions. If SB 74 passes, Georgia taxpayers could end up footing the bill for inevitable legal challenges — court battles the state is likely to lose. Managing which materials young people access from their public libraries is best and most appropriately handled by parents and their kids making their own family- and age-specific decisions, not the government. With more than 11 million checkouts in 2024—a surge compared to 2023—Georgians have made it clear: Public libraries are a needed resource for diverse and valuable information. By making it possible to criminally prosecute library workers, SB 74 threatens to chill access by reducing both the variety of materials on the shelves and the ability of young people to access it. Library workers need your support. Call or email your local legislator and demand they oppose SB 74. Donate, volunteer, or simply visit your local library—because library workers deserve protection, not prosecution. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
28-01-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Gov. Dunleavy reintroduces bill to penalize unpermitted public protests as felonies
Alaska Gov. Mike Dunleavy speaks during a news conference on Friday, March 15, 2024. (Photo by James Brooks/Alaska Beacon) One year after a similar proposal failed to pass the state legislature, Alaska Gov. Mike Dunleavy has reintroduced legislation that could result in felony charges against homeless Alaskans and the organizers of unpermitted protests. Senate Bill 74 and its companion, House Bill 71, were filed Monday in the state Capitol. Each says that someone who 'obstructs or blocks a public place' by dropping a substance or using 'any other means' may be liable for a class C felony, the lowest-level felony in state law. Both bills are substantially similar to proposals that Dunleavy introduced last year. Those concepts were criticized by civil legislative hearings, Attorney General Treg Taylor said that homeless Alaskans who block trails and sidewalks could also be subject to prosecution. Neither of last year's bills advanced to a vote in either the state House or the state Senate. In a letter sent to the state Senate alongside SB 74, Dunleavy said, 'Alaskans have a constitutional liberty interest in freely moving about the state. This bill will protect the right to freedom of movement against infringement by increasing and expanding existing criminal prohibitions on obstructing public places and rights-of-way and by establishing new civil liability for obstruction of public places.' SB 74 and HB 71 have been referred to the transportation committees in the Senate and House, respectively. No hearings have been scheduled. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
