MELANIE'S LAW AND THE CONSTITUTIONAL CONSERVATIVE

"A Republic If You Can Keep It." - Benjamin Franklin 1787

James Madison - Principal Author of The Bill of Rights

In July 2022 Melanie Hull was driving her 8-year old son to school when a driver ran a red light and hit Melanie’s car. The impact must have been horrifying. As a result of the impact Melanie Hull suffered a broken jaw, three brain bleeds, 12 rib fractures, a severed spleen and her spine was separated from her pelvis. Her son received injuries to his legs and was treated for PTSD.

Amber Washington the driver of the vehicle that hit Melanie Hull, was later tested for drugs and alcohol and was found to have both methamphetamine and THC in her blood. Washington who also suffered unspecified injuries was arrested, held on a $50,000 bond and charged with “Operating a Motor Vehicle While Under the Influence of a Controlled Substance”, two counts of first-degree Assault and first-degree Wanton Endangerment. Washington was also exposed to civil litigation.

Sometimes, as humans we are just not satisfied with the penalty that the law provides for a crime. And sometimes we have an extraordinary drive to “fix” those laws to seek a more “fitting” redress. And sometimes that redress is outside what our founders imagined when they crafted our Constitution and its Bill of Rights.

State Senator David Yates, Republican Majority Whip and Melanie Hull’s cousin sought to “fix” existing Kentucky DUI laws to provide for restitution for survivers of accidents in which the driver of one vehicle was chemically impaired and caused death or permanent injury to others. Yates introduced Senate Bill 268:

“AN ACT relating to financial support of a child or dependent after driving under the influence.” this Bill which was signed with little opposition in the Commonwealth legislature was into law by Governor Andy Beshear provides “restitution in the form of child support to be ordered in violations of KRS 189A.010 if the violation caused the death of a parent or guardian of a minor child or resulted in a finding by the court that a parent or guardian of a minor child is disabled or totally and permanently disabled; provide that the Act may be cited as Melanie's Law.”

There was opposition to this Bill, to Melanies Law. That opposition came from a handful of Constitutional Conservatives in the House. Among them was Representative Marianne Proctor others including Steve Rawlings, Savanah Maddox, and nine other Constitutional Conservatives. These members argued that Melanie’s Law is unconstitutional because it imposes a penalty without a hearing in which the person found guilty the DUI under Kentucky law can be assessed an additional, variable penalty in there form of child support for the surviving children without having an opportunity to present mitigating evidence. In short, Melanies Law denies the person being charged of their 5th and 14th Amendment rights to Due Process.

Our Constitution is sometimes not satisfying to victims or their families when it comes to the rights of criminals as is the case here. Senator Yates and others believed that Kentucky’s DUI laws did not appropriately compensate Melanie Hull’s family for her loss to them and he wanted ensure that the same thing would never happen again. This is a classic argument that we have had throughout our history. How do we obtain restitution when the Constitution appears to obstruct our desired outcome? Ignoring it is not a remedy.

I cannot imagine the daily suffering that plagues the family of Melanie Hull, including Senator Yates. It is well beyond my comprehension. But I know this; denying a person their Constitutional right to due process in order to obtain punitive, monetary damages is not the solution. It cannot restore Melanie to how she was before Amber Washington changed her life for ever and it will never take away the pain and suffering that Melanie’s family will experience for the rest of their lives.

I also know that presenting the due process argument during debate does not “PUT DRUNK DRIVERS FIRST” or put Marianne Proctor and the others on the side of drivers over victims as two recent mailers assert. Proctor and the others are simply arguing that in all matters our Constitution has primacy and it cannot be ignored because of outrage or emotional distress.

These mailers were produced and paid for by a PAC called Kentucky Conservative Alliance. It is hard to know who these people are. PACS are like that. I have a suspicion but only that. But I will with all certainty say this: any organization that calls itself “conservative” has an obligation to act as OUR Constitution would have us act. The denial of due process is not that way and smearing people who are unafraid to remind us of that is shameful, no matter how great the pain or the belief that existing law is not enough .

In 1787 shortly after our Constitution was ratified Benjamin Franklin was asked by Elizabeth Willing Powel: "Well, Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?

Franklin replied: “A republic if you can keep it.”

Ignoring our constitution is the quickest way to lose this Republic. Those who are Constitutional Conservatives are essential to ensuring that we keep the Republic. They remind us that the Bill of Rights is what keeps a monarchy at bay.

We have a Republic — IF we can keep it.

Union, Kentucky

16 May 2024