A Missouri judge has rewritten the ballot summary language of proposed pro-abortion constitutional amendments, removing specific phrases that Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft had written.
A state law protecting all preborn children from abortion (except in cases to save the life of the mother, though abortion is never medically necessary) took effect in Missouri on June 24, 2022, when the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade. A proposed constitutional amendment aims to remove those protections.
One of the proposed amendments states, “The government shall not deny or infringe upon a person’s fundamental right to reproductive freedom, which entails the right to make and carry out decisions about all matters relating to reproductive health care, including but not limited to prenatal care, childbirth, postpartum care, birth control, abortion care, miscarriage care, and respectful birthing conditions.”
It also states that the “right to reproductive freedom shall not be denied, inferred with, delayed, or otherwise restricted,” allowing abortion to become legal in the state throughout all nine months of pregnancy.
The summary of the amendments that voters would see on the ballot said that they would “allow for dangerous, unregulated, and unrestricted abortions, from conception to live birth, without requiring a medical license or potentially being subject to medical malpractice.” It also made it clear that the amendments would allow for abortion after viability and would not require minors to have parental consent for an abortion.
Last week, Cole County Judge Jon Beetem removed much of that language that he deemed “problematic.” That includes the phrase “dangerous, unregulated, and unrestricted abortions” along with 12 other phrases. Beetem then rewrote the six ballot questions without those phrases, which were written to explain to voters just how extreme the amendment is on abortion.
Ashcroft is appealing Beetem’s ruling, explaining, “We will not stand idly by while the courts hide the effects of this amendment and mislead the people as to what they may very well be voting on next year. While the court may pretend this does not allow ‘dangerous, unregulated, unrestricted’ abortions, it is clear that under this initiative petition, individuals like Kermit Gosnell, who was sentenced to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole for killing a mother and 3 children, would be free from prosecution. Additionally, this court’s language misleads the people into believing that initiative petitions 2024-085 and 087 would amend the constitution to ‘declare government funding of abortion is not required’ which is categorically false.”
The appeals hearing is scheduled for October 30 when a three-judge panel will hear oral arguments.
