KENTUCKY -- In 1983, Marsy Nicholas was killed by her boyfriend.
Billionaire Henry Nicholas, Marsy's brother, spent millions of dollars of his own fortune campaigning for a new law named after his sister in every state -- Marsy's Law.
It could give crime victims in Kentucky more rights -- things like updated information on their case and the right to be included in every court proceeding.
The wording on the ballot can be confusing -- the words "Marsy's Law" won't be included. Here's what you'll see:
"Shall the Constitution of Kentucky be amended so as to provide certain rights to victims against whom a crime has allegedly been perpetrated and allow victims to assert such rights?"
Here's the translation -- A yes vote means you want Kentucky's Constitution to give crime victims more rights. A no vote means you don't want Marsy's Law included in the Kentucky State Constitution.
But why would anyone be against helping crime victims?
Two words -- "unintended consequences."
South Dakota approved a similar amendment in 2016.
They had to change it back in 2018 because it cost the state too much money. Some even said it was making it harder to investigate crimes. Supporters of Marsy's Law say they just want victims to have the same rights as the accused.
So, you're the voter. Whether it's added in Kentucky is up to you -- and your vote -- on Nov. 6.
We have heard from several families of crime victims who desperately want to see Marsy's Law passed.
They feel going through the criminal justice system as a victim of crime is sometimes just as horrible as the crime itself. But, there are people who are against it. The ACLU says they are committed to protecting the right of due process. According to Kate Miller, Advocacy Director for ACLU Kentucky, "Some of the language, within Marcy's Law is going to undermine those very fundamental rights which are so critical for people to have access to."
►Make it easy to keep up-to-date with more stories like this. Download the WHAS11 News app now.
Editor's Note: A previous version of this article had incorrect wording on what will be written on the ballot. This copy had been edited with the correct information.