Two additional states with near-total abortion bans are poised to place citizen-initiated measures on the ballot this year that would allow voters to overturn abortion bans by establishing the right to abortion in their state constitutions. .
On Friday, a coalition of abortion rights groups in Missouri submitted 380,159 signatures to put the amendment on the ballot, nearly double the 172,000 signatures required by law. corresponds to The announcement from Missouri organizers follows a signature drive in South Dakota on Wednesday, where they also said they had submitted more signatures than needed to amend the ballot.
The groups are riding on the momentum of other states where abortion rights advocates won 7-of-7 votes in the two years since the U.S. Supreme Court struck down Roe v. Wade, which established a constitutional right to abortion. I hope that. Almost 50 years.
Groups in about 10 other states have either secured ballot spots for abortion rights measures or are collecting signatures to do so. That includes the battleground states of Arizona and Nevada, where Democrats hope newly energized voters around abortion rights will help re-elect President Biden.
South Dakota and Missouri are definitely Republican states. But the ban is one of the strictest in the nation, making abortion illegal except to save a pregnant woman's life.
Post-Roe polls show a majority of voters in Missouri want abortion to be legal in all or most cases, giving abortion rights groups a strong chance of success. But both measures face major hurdles.
Republicans who control the Missouri General Assembly are pushing for another ballot question that would go before voters in August, making it difficult for future ballot amendments to succeed.
The measure raises the bar for victory, requiring not just a majority of voters statewide, but a majority of voters in five of the state's eight congressional districts. Abortion rights supporters worry that this requirement will allow local minorities, who tend to oppose abortion rights, to vote down the amendment.
The Missouri General Assembly is expected to vote on the bill before the end of this month's session. State officials also must decide whether the abortion rights bill will appear on the August primary ballot, when turnout tends to be low, or in the November general election.
For more than a year, the state's Republican leadership has been trying to block the bill from going before voters. Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft sought to change the language of the voting law in a way that stoked fears that it would lead to dangerous and unregulated abortions. Supporters of the bill successfully filed a lawsuit to block him.
Missouri's amendment is similar to amendments passed in Ohio and Michigan. It would establish “the right to make and implement decisions on all matters related to reproductive health care,” including abortion. Congress could restrict abortions beyond the point at which the fetus can survive outside the womb without “special medical treatment,” based on the “good faith judgment” of the treating medical professional.
In South Dakota, Republican lawmakers passed a law in March that allows signers to withdraw their support, which could make it difficult to get signatures certified. Supporters of the amendment collected approximately 55,000 signatures. That's 20,000 more votes than needed, but anti-abortion groups are working to get enough votes against the bill to take it off the ballot.
Reform efforts in South Dakota have been primarily driven by one group: Dakotas for Health. Planned Parenthood and other abortion rights allies have declined to support the effort. The group said the ballot amendment leaves open the possibility that Congress could continue to regulate abortion so strictly that it would allow, in the words of the American Civil Liberties Union, “abortion in name only.” It is claimed that
South Dakota's amendment would prohibit the state from regulating “a pregnant woman's decision to terminate an abortion and its effectuation” during the first trimester, but during the second trimester, it would prohibit the state from regulating “the abortion decision and its effect on the physical health of the pregnant woman.” It would allow restrictions on surgical abortions only if they are “reasonably related”. Pregnant woman. ” Later in pregnancy, states can regulate and even ban abortion, as long as the ban includes an exception for “the life or health of the pregnant woman.”
South Dakota is one of the few states where polls show less than a majority of voters (47% in a recent poll) think abortion should be legal in all or most cases. It is one. (Other states that participated in the same study were North Dakota, Arkansas, Idaho, and Utah.)
