Voters in Nevada will decide on six statewide ballot questions in November, on topics ranging from energy to taxes. This week on Face the State, we heard from both sides of the debate over Nevada Ballot Question One: Marsy's Law.

Question One is a national campaign to pass a victim's bill of rights, also known as Marsy's Law. It has passed in several states already, with mixed reviews (Montana's Supreme Court tossed it out, and South Dakota's legislature attempted to get it repealed, before making changes to it. Other states have implemented it without major issues). It's now on the ballot in six more states this November, including Nevada.

Proponents of the measure say victims need specific protections while they're going through the legal process, starting with mandatory notifications when their defendant is released on bail.

"Victims need to be informed and be kept informed about every step in the criminal justice process," Marsy's Law for Nevada State Director Will Batista said, "so we want to make sure that victims have that available to them."

The law would also include rights like confidentiality for the victim, and the right to have personal property returned when it's no longer needed as evidence.

Marsy's law is a change to the Nevada Constitution, which means it requires several stages of approval in the legislature and by the voters. It has already passed the legislature in the last two sessions, so a vote of the people this November would make it law. It has major bipartisan support, including high profile endorsements from both sides of the aisle.

"Bipartisanship is often not seen," Batista said, "but you know, this is one issue that has brought everybody around. This is not a political issue; it's a people issue."

On the other side of the issue is the ACLU. The organization is opposing it in every state where it's up for consideration. Their policy experts say it's hard to predict what unintended consequences these laws could have to the system, and constitutional amendments take years to adjust if there are problems.

"That process could take six years," ACLU of Nevada Policy Director Holly Welborn said, "multiple legislative sessions, multiple election cycles, before you could actually fix and refine any problems in the law, so it'll either take that, or it'll take a court order."

Welborn said that's especially troubling since the wording of the law is vague. Provisions like the "confidentiality" clause could be applied to restrict the flow of information to the defense team, jeopardizing the fairness of the legal process. She said it also doesn't define who can be considered a "victim," leaving the door open to complications.

"I don't think, until we start seeing it play out in the courts, that lawmakers actually understand the impact that it has," Welborn said, "and I think they also fear retribution that would come if they didn't support it."

Both interviews will air in full on Face the State this weekend, on Saturday at 4:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., and on Sunday at 6:30 a.m. Episodes are also posted here after they air.