On Saturday, March 29, 2025, voters across Louisiana will be asked to weigh in on four proposed constitutional amendments. After reviewing the language, intent, and long-term impact of each proposal, Big Easy Magazine is encouraging voters to vote NO on all four amendments.
This isn’t a decision rooted in politics—it’s a judgment based on principles. Each amendment introduces risks that could undermine the public interest, weaken oversight, or shift power away from the communities most affected by the decisions being made.
Amendment 1: Special Courts and Out-of-State Attorneys
This amendment allows the state legislature to create specialized courts and reaffirms the Louisiana Supreme Court’s ability to discipline out-of-state lawyers. But the truth is, the court already has that authority.
What concerns us is the hidden consequence: granting lawmakers the power to set up “special courts” that could be designed to favor certain political or business agendas. That risks undermining judicial neutrality.
Our position: NO. We believe the judiciary should remain fair and independent—not fractured by politically driven courts.
Amendment 2: Major Budget Changes That Cut Services
Amendment 2 proposes sweeping tax and budget reforms, including reducing income tax rates and placing strict limitations on government spending. It also eliminates existing constitutional protections for public education funding and nonprofit property tax exemptions.
While it promises permanent teacher pay raises and relief for seniors, the reality is more complicated. The amendment weakens the state’s ability to invest in long-term needs like schools, healthcare, and infrastructure.
Our position: NO. Public services shouldn’t be sacrificed for tax shifts that disproportionately benefit wealthier interests.
Amendment 3: Lowering the Bar for Prosecuting Minors as Adults
This amendment removes the list of serious crimes for which juveniles can be tried as adults from the state constitution and gives the legislature the power to redefine those crimes through simple legislation.
Right now, only the most serious offenses—like murder or rape—qualify. If this amendment passes, future legislatures could expand that list with little oversight or public input.
Our position: NO. Decisions about juvenile justice should be made carefully and with strong constitutional safeguards—not handed over entirely to political discretion.
Amendment 4: Filling Judicial Vacancies During Low-Turnout Elections
Amendment 4 would require that judicial vacancies be filled during the earliest available election, often resulting in low-turnout contests where only a small fraction of voters participate.
Judicial elections already receive less attention than other races. Accelerating the timeline only makes it harder for voters to be informed—and easier for insiders to shape outcomes.
Our position: NO. Voters deserve time and transparency when choosing judges who will shape the legal system for years to come.
Each of these amendments may seem minor on the surface, but taken together, they reflect a trend toward less accountability, less investment in public services, and more political influence over institutions that should be neutral.
We believe constitutional changes should be clear, necessary, and genuinely in the public’s best interest. None of the amendments on the March 29 ballot meet that standard.
Big Easy Magazine urges you to vote NO on all four constitutional amendments.
