Abortion-rights ballot measures seek to mow down limits in red and blue states alike

DENVER — Pro-choice advocates are once again wielding ballot measures to challenge strong pro-life laws in states such as Florida and Missouri, but the movement is also trying to pick off relatively modest restrictions in states where abortion is readily accessible.

In Colorado, abortions are allowed through all 40 weeks of pregnancy with two caveats: Taxpayer funding for abortion is prohibited, and parental notification for minors is required.

Amendment 79 would explicitly allow public funding and bar any law “impeding” abortion access, meaning parental notification probably wouldn’t survive court scrutiny, said Scott Shamblin, executive director of Colorado Right to Life.

“It’s essentially going to make Colorado a permanent abortion hot spot,” said Mr. Shamblin, who heads the Vote No on 79 campaign.

Colorado is one of 10 states where voters will decide Nov. 5 on proposed constitutional amendments billed as efforts to save reproductive rights from restrictive bans. In most of these states, abortion is already legal in the first trimester and beyond.

In Maryland, abortion is legal through all 40 weeks of pregnancy. In Nevada, New York and Montana, procedures are allowed through fetal viability, or about 24 weeks of gestation. Arizona permits abortions until 15 weeks of gestation and afterward under certain exceptions.

In Nebraska, voters have a choice between competing measures: Amendment 434, which would hold the line on the state’s 12-week gestational limit, and Amendment 439, which would allow abortion until fetal viability and afterward to protect the life and health of the mother.

Picking ballot fights in abortion-friendly states such as Colorado, Maryland and New York could be seen as overkill, but pro-choice advocates argue that the amendments act as insurance against future legislatures that may not be as amenable to reproductive rights.

“Maryland currently lacks constitutional protections that guarantee everyone’s right to reproductive freedom and abortion access,” said the Yes on Question 1 campaign. “With reproductive rights under attack, we must amend our state constitution to ensure politicians can never undermine our rights in the future.”

Jessica Grennan, director of the Colorado Yes on 79 campaign, said the amendment is needed to ensure that “abortion care remains safe from the swipe of a politician’s pen.”

Pro-life advocates say the attack on reasonable limitations proves their point: that the goal isn’t to protect health care access but to enshrine into law unfettered abortion throughout pregnancy.

“The abortion lobby wants nothing less than limitless abortion on demand, paid for by taxpayers,” said Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America. “Pro-abortion ballot measures show they are never satisfied with any limits, no matter how reasonable.”

Most of the proposed amendments draw the line at fetal viability or when a baby can survive outside the womb. After viability, procedures would be legal under a host of exceptions, including to protect the life or health of the mother, which includes mental health.

Pro-life groups argue that the viability restriction is no restriction at all.

“Though some of the measures include the word ‘viability,’ the broad exceptions in the measures ultimately allow elective abortion in all nine months,” said SBA spokeswoman Emily Erin Davis. “Girls who aren’t old enough to get their ears pierced on their own will be able to obtain an abortion without a parent ever knowing.”

Codifying Roe

The pro-life movement hopes to reverse its fortunes on Election Day after going 0 for 7 in state ballot battles. The Supreme Court’s 2022 decision in Dobbs v. Jackson overturned Roe v. Wade and sent abortion legislation back to the states.

It won’t be easy. The Colorado Yes on 79 campaign has a 40-1 fundraising advantage, and other pro-choice campaigns also are awash in cash. Pro-lifers are on the defensive in 10 of the 11 contests, except Nebraska’s Amendment 434.

The stakes are highest in Florida and Missouri, where sweeping abortion rights amendments are endangering pro-life laws implemented after the overturning of Roe.

In Florida, Amendment 4 would allow abortion until fetal viability and then protect the woman’s health “as determined by the patient’s health care provider,” someone who doesn’t have to be a doctor and could be an abortion provider.

The amendment would eliminate the state’s heartbeat law, which bars most abortions after six weeks of gestation with several exceptions, including to protect the woman’s health.

Missouri’s Amendment 3 would eradicate one of the nation’s strictest abortion laws, which bans abortions except to protect the woman’s life or physical health, by adding the “right to reproductive freedom” to the state constitution.

Passing the Florida measure will be more formidable, given that the state requires a 60% vote for constitutional amendments. In Missouri, the threshold is 50%.

South Dakota’s Amendment G establishes a trimester framework similar to that of Roe v. Wade.

The proposal would prohibit restrictions on abortions in the first trimester, allow the state to enact some limits in the second trimester, and bar abortion in the third trimester with exceptions for the life and health of the mother.

Despite the hurdles in Colorado, Mr. Shamblin said he is “cautiously optimistic” about defeating Amendment 79, which requires a 55% vote to pass.

“According to our polling, this fails if the voters know the truth, the truth being that it creates a right to late-term, nine-month abortions, that it prohibits parental notification, and that it forces tax dollars to pay for abortions,” he said. “When people know those three things, this amendment fails, so it’s up to us to get the word out.”