Voters passed Marsy’s Law. Now the Kentucky Supreme Court will decide if that counts.

Kentuckians voted for Marsy’s Law this month. Now the Kentucky Supreme Court will decide if that vote counts.

On Thursday, the state’s highest court agreed to hear a lawsuit challenging Marsy’s Law, which proposes to add a “crime victim’s bill of rights” to Kentucky’s Constitution. Oral arguments are set for Feb. 8, 2019.

A Franklin Circuit Court judge ruled Oct. 15 that the short ballot question crafted by legislators last winter was misleading because it failed to accurately state what the amendment would do. As a result of that ruling, the Nov. 6 votes on Marsy’s Law were counted but — for now, at least — have not been certified by state elections officials.

The lead plaintiff in the lawsuit is David Ward, president of the Kentucky Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, and the lead defendant is the legislative sponsor of Marsy’s Law, state Sen. Whitney Westerfield, R-Hopkinsville. Both sides asked the Supreme Court to take the case directly from circuit court, bypassing the Court of Appeals.

Kentucky’s version of Marsy’s Law would establish a dozen constitutional rights for crime victims, many similar to rights that have existed in state law since 1986. They include the right to be heard at court proceedings; for proceedings to be free from unreasonable delay; to be notified when a defendant is released or escapes custody; to have reasonable protection from the accused and those acting on behalf of the accused; to have consideration for their safety, dignity and privacy; and to consult with prosecutors.

Although victims would not have “standing” in court — that is, criminal cases would still have just two opposing parties, the state’s prosecutors and the defendants — judges would have to protect victims’ constitutional rights as vigorously as they did the rights of the accused. When victims and their attorneys came to the courthouse, court officials would be required to listen to them.

Critics say Marsy’s Law promises to sow confusion in the courts by giving one or more designated crime victims a formal say at every important hearing, even before a defendant is convicted and it hasn’t necessarily been established that a crime has occurred. Existing law already gives crime victims the right to explain to the courts before sentencing how they were harmed and to request notification when an inmate is released from custody, among other legal protections, they say.

Marsy’s Law was approved by about 63 percent of the voters.