- The Washington Times - Monday, November 27, 2023

Democrats take full control of Virginia’s General Assembly on Jan. 10, and they’re not wasting time setting out their new agenda.

House Joint Resolution 1 is a scheme that essentially rewrites the state constitution to say all Virginians have an inherent right to the enjoyment of life, liberty, property, happiness, and abortion on demand.

The measure, pre-filed last week by House Majority Leader-designate Charniele Herring and state Sen. Jennifer Boysko, expands what are notionally abortion rights far beyond the status they ever had in the commonwealth under Roe v. Wade.

The proposed amendment states: “This right to make and effectuate one’s own decisions about all matters related to one’s pregnancy shall not be denied, burdened, or infringed upon.”

It’s a radical proposal for a moderate state.

As written, it would prevent the state from implementing any law interfering with the barbarity of late-term abortion. It would likewise block restrictions on such abortions even beyond the point of viability. There would be no stopping the killing of babies in the womb found to have conditions such as Down syndrome.

Most polls show a majority of voters reject the idea of unrestrained abortion through the third trimester. Some limits, such as prohibitions on late-term and sex-selection abortions, could even be said to enjoy broad public support. Under the proposed amendment, none of that would matter.

The text of the amendment does have language suggesting that limited restrictions on abortion might be allowed if a “compelling state interest” is found, but the provision is ultimately meaningless. Even if a majority of the legislature and the governor agree such a situation exists, the courts can nullify those restrictions. It is, by design, exceedingly hard to overcome the clear intention of an amendment that labels abortion a fundamental right.

Sensible restrictions have been struck down before. Even President Ronald Reagan’s pick for the Supreme Court, then-Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, convinced her colleagues that the first late-term abortion ban enacted by Congress was unconstitutional. It’s not much of a leap to presume Virginia’s high court would feel free to do the same.

Virginia Democrats are emboldened after capturing a single-seat majority in the House earlier this month. Their campaign plan was based on an all-out assault on Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin’s proposed compromise that would have kept abortion legal through the first 15 weeks of pregnancy and made exceptions for conceptions resulting from rape and incest and in cases where the life of the mother was in danger.

The Democrats countered — successfully, as it turned out — that a GOP-controlled legislature wouldn’t stop there. Enough voters who were convinced this was true voted blue to avoid a “radical” proposal on the right.

Now we are stuck with a radical proposal from the left, as the Democrats never bothered to offer details during the campaign about how they would protect access to abortion in a post-Dobbs world. Now we know.

The amendment can take effect only if it passes the General Assembly by a majority vote in two consecutive legislative sessions, after which it would be placed on the ballot. It remains to be seen whether a majority of Virginia voters would endorse something so extreme.

Copyright © 2024 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

Please read our comment policy before commenting.

Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide