Louisiana will head to the polls March 29 to vote on four proposed amendments, in addition to any local races and propositions. Here’s what to know about the election.

Voting Information

Polls will open Election Day at 7 a.m. and close at 8 p.m. Early voting will run March 15-22 with the exception of March 16, and polls will open slightly later at 8:30 a.m. Information on polling locations, sample ballots and more can be found on the secretary of state’s website.

Amendment No.1

Amendment No.1 would give the Louisiana Supreme Court authority to discipline out-of-state lawyers for legal work done in Louisiana. It would also allow the legislature to create specialized courts of limited or specialized jurisdiction.

The Public Affairs Research Council of Louisiana, argues that the current constitution is too restrictive and lawmakers should be able to create more specialized courts where they see a need. Allowing the creation of such courts could also aid rural areas that might lack the resources to set up specialty courts.

A possible argument against the amendment is that Louisiana has more judges per capita than any other state, and giving the legislature the ability to easily create specialized courts will worsen the problem and drive up costs. Additionally, opponents argue this amendment is unnecessary because lawmakers already have the ability to create specialized courts on the district level.

Amendment No. 2

This wide-ranging amendment would seek to overhaul Louisiana’s revenue and tax systems by significantly modifying Article VII of the state constitution.

The changes, as per the ballot text, would include a lower maximum income tax rate, an increase to income tax deductions for citizens over 65, provide a government growth limit, modify certain constitutional funds, provide tax exemptions retaining the homestead exemption and exemptions for religious organizations and provide a permanent teacher salary increase, among other changes.

Gov. Jeff Landry voiced his support for the amendment on social media, highlighting it as a way to lower income taxes.

Nonprofit organization Power Coalition for Equity and Justice is notably against the amendment, saying it would not guarantee any additional funds for teacher pay raises, remove the constitutional protection for the property tax exemptions used by nonprofits, create spending limits on essential services.
Additionally, the amendment would limit local control over sales taxes, delete a fund supporting infant mortality programs, change gendered pronouns in the constitution, potentially increase taxes on take-out food and would remove constitutional authorization for farmers’ and fishermens’ programs.

Amendment No. 3

Amendment No. 3 would give the Louisiana Legislature the power to decide which felonies committed by people under the age of 17 can be tried for as an adult. The state constitution currently restricts trying minors as adults except in the case of certain 16 crimes such as murder, rape and kidnapping.

According to PAR Louisiana, proponents of the amendment believe that the specific crimes listed have not been adjusted in decades and crimes committed by juveniles have changed and worsened in severity. The amendment would allow lawmakers to respond to these crime trends to keep communities safer.

The nonprofit organization Council for a Better Louisiana opposes Amendment No. 3, arguing the constitutional limits were created because there was an understanding that youth have a better chance at rehabilitation. CABL believes that charging a child as an adult is a serious matter and not something that should be taken lightly and that citizens should decide who is tried as an adult, not just the legislature.

Amendment No.4

Amendment No. 4 would require the use of the earliest election date to fill judicial vacancies.

PAR Louisiana says the argument for the amendment is that the technical fix is needed because it is better to change the constitution than to change the law, which would allow for a special election to occur outside of election times. This could cost the state more money than necessary.
On the other hand, opponents argue that a constitutional amendment is unnecessary because the circumstances requiring special election are rare enough. Instead, they suggest there should be a law adjustment giving the governor more flexibility to call special elections.