Missouri’s Republican Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft speaks, Nov. 7, 2017, in Valley Park, Mo. On Monday, Sept. 25, 2023, a Missouri judge tossed Republican-written ballot language that described several abortion-rights amendments as allowing “dangerous and unregulated abortions until live birth.” The office of Ashcroft, who is running for governor in 2024, wrote summaries for the abortion-rights amendments. In Missouri, summaries are provided to voters on ballots to help quickly explain sometimes lengthy and complicated proposals. (AP Photo/Jeff Roberson, File)
In a recent development, a Missouri judge, Jon Beetem of Cole County Circuit, has taken a significant step in reshaping the language used to describe proposed constitutional amendments related to abortion in the state. The judge’s decision came in response to Republican-crafted ballot summary language, which opponents argued was biased and misleading.
The original ballot summary language described the proposed amendments as allowing “dangerous and unregulated abortions until live birth.” However, Judge Beetem determined that this language was problematic and issued a revised description. The new summary now states that the amendments would establish the “right to make decisions about reproductive health care, including abortion and contraception,” and also reverse the state’s near-total ban on abortions.
In Missouri, ballot summaries are designed to provide voters with concise explanations of complex proposals, aiding them in making informed decisions during elections. The initial summaries, written by Republican Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft’s office, faced criticism for their perceived bias and distortion of the proposed amendments’ intent.
Abortion rights advocates promptly challenged the original summaries, contending that they were misleading. Judge Beetem’s ruling concurred with their assessment, leading to the rewriting of the descriptions.
The proposed constitutional amendments aim to secure or reinstate access to abortion, especially following the fall of Roe v. Wade in the previous year. If supporters gather enough voter signatures, these amendments will appear on the Missouri ballot in 2024.
Ashcroft’s original description had framed the issue by asking voters whether they wanted to “allow for dangerous, unregulated, and unrestricted abortions, from conception to live birth, without requiring a medical license or potentially being subject to medical malpractice.” This portrayal prompted the legal challenge, leading to the judge’s decision to revise the language.
The revised summaries provide a more balanced and accurate representation of the proposed amendments, focusing on reproductive health care decision-making and reversing the state’s abortion restrictions. Abortion rights advocates welcomed the change, viewing it as a step toward fairly describing the right to make reproductive health care decisions without undue government interference.
This legal battle is part of a broader national landscape where abortion-related issues are being hotly contested. Several states, including Ohio, Arizona, Maryland, New York, and South Dakota, are considering putting abortion-related ballot measures before voters in the coming years. The outcomes of these initiatives will have significant implications for reproductive rights in the United States.
Despite the challenges and intense debates surrounding these issues, it is clear that the battle over abortion rights is far from settled, and the courts continue to play a crucial role in shaping the discourse and policy on this matter.
COMMENTS