The 2024 elections include a raft of ballot measures across every state. Voters will be asked to mark their preference on controversial topics such as abortion, school choice, the legalization of drugs, and much more. This Washington Examiner series, Direct Democracy, will take a forensic look at several of these items. Part One is on the abortion measures in 10 states.

Voters in 10 states this election season will directly vote on abortion in state-level referendums that could cause a seismic shift in the abortion landscape across the country. 

Five of those states (Arizona, Florida, Missouri, Nebraska, and South Dakota) are part of the contingent of nearly half of the states that have implemented abortion restrictions following the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade in June 2022.

ABORTION WON’T BE A WINNING ISSUE FOR DEMOCRATS IN 2024

If approved, those abortion rights amendments would overturn existing state laws placing gestational age limits on the procedure and other state regulations on abortion.

Abortion rights advocates in five other states (Colorado, Maryland, Montana, Nevada, and New York), which all currently have legislative protections on abortion, are seeking to enshrine the right to abortion in their state constitutions to protect against future changes to state law.

Since the decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, in 2022 and 2023, abortion rights amendments have passed in every state that had them on the ballot. This year, the GOP has made significant efforts to rebrand its position on abortion, with most abortion-related language being stripped from the national Republican Party platform. 

Most federal-level Republican candidates have embraced former President Donald Trump’s rhetoric that abortion is now a state-based issue with little to no relevance on the national stage. 

Although Democrats have leaned into the same abortion campaign strategy that delivered victories the past two years, Republicans and independents argue that state-level abortion amendments will have much of an effect on federal-level races, saying that voters can support right-wing candidates and vote for abortion rights in a single-issue question.

Here is a run-down of the important details for each state’s amendment campaign.

Arizona

The abortion rights amendment on Arizona ballots, Proposition 139, would establish in the state constitution a “fundamental right to abortion” and prohibit the state from interfering with abortion access before fetal viability — or the point at which a fetus can survive outside of the mother’s womb. 

As of last month, abortion is restricted in Arizona after 15 weeks gestation, with no exceptions for survivors of rape or incest after that point.

A series of complicated judicial and legislative developments since Dobbs have thrust abortion politics to the forefront in the state.

The Arizona state legislature passed a 15-week abortion ban shortly after the Dobbs decision was leaked from the Supreme Court but before the decision was announced in June 2022. 

Meanwhile, an 1864 statute, crafted when Arizona was a territory, prohibited abortion at all stages of pregnancy except in cases of medical emergency for the mother. 

In April of this year, the state Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the 1864 law because it was the only statute on the books that was passed when Roe was not the law of the land.

Within three weeks of the state Supreme Court decision, Arizona’s House and the Senate passed bills to repeal the 1864 law, meaning that the law imposing a 15-week limit became operative.

With this contentious backdrop, the abortion rights fight in Arizona has attracted a significant amount of campaign contributions.

According to state campaign finance documents, Arizona for Abortion Access, which supports Proposition 139, has collected a total of $32.7 million as of Sept. 30 and spent $20.6 million during the campaign. 

By comparison, It Goes Too Far PAC, which is against the amendment, has garnered only $1.3 million in contributions and spent slightly over $540,000.

A September New York Times and Siena College poll found that 58% of voters supported Proposition 139. That includes about 30% of Republicans, 84% of Democrats, and 63% of independents. The measure just requires a simple majority in order to pass.

Colorado

Colorado is one of the six states that have no gestational age restrictions on abortion, and the Centennial State has permitted abortion since 1967, six years before Roe.

Colorado’s abortion rights amendment would prevent the state from any action that would “deny, impede, or discriminate against” the right to abortion, including health insurance coverage for abortion. In effect, this would mean that state Medicaid dollars would go toward the provision of abortion services.

The amendment would repeal an existing clause in the state constitution, passed by ballot initiative in 1984, that bans public funding for abortion except in cases where the mother’s life is in danger.

Colorado requires a 55% supermajority vote to enshrine the ballot amendment into the state constitution. There is not much polling data on the measure, but national polling numbers on taxpayer-funded abortion have consistently been negative, even after the overturning of Roe.

Florida

The Florida abortion rights measure, Amendment 4, would undo the state’s six-week abortion ban by preventing the state legislature from imposing any restrictions on abortion before fetal viability at approximately 24 weeks gestation. 

The state’s Heartbeat Protection Act, which prohibits abortion after six weeks of pregnancy when fetal cardiac activity can be detected on ultrasound, withstood constitutional challenges and took effect this year. 

Florida’s abortion rights amendment has drawn significant controversy in recent weeks as the administration of Gov. Ron DeSantis (R-FL) has ardently pushed back against the effort.

During the campaign, the DeSantis administration has made numerous public health announcements that state law does not prevent treating pregnancy-related emergencies or prohibit abortion to save a mother’s life or health.

DeSantis himself has appeared at campaign events with critics of the amendment.

Earlier this month, a federal judge ordered DeSantis’s Department of Health to stop threatening to punish television stations for airing pro-Amendment 4 ads that say the amendment is necessary to protect women’s health in the context of medical emergencies, such as miscarriage or ectopic pregnancy.

Floridians Protecting Freedom, which is campaigning for the amendment, has spent more than $6.6 million on related activities this year, with most of this spending concentrated in the Miami-Fort Lauderdale, Tampa-St. Petersburg, and Orlando-Daytona Beach areas.

The Republican Party of Florida, which is opposed to the amendment, has spent approximately $6.5 million across the state in the anti-Amendment 4 campaign. Florida Voters Against Extremism, also opposed to Amendment 4, has also spent approximately $114,000. 

According to an early October New York Times and Siena College poll, only 46% of Floridians planned to support the ballot measure, falling well below the 60% majority of voters necessary to amend the state constitution.

Maryland

Maryland is another one of the six states that have no gestational age restrictions on abortion. 

The ballot initiative amendment offered this year would constitutionally ensure the right to reproductive freedom, which it defines as “the ability to make and effectuate decisions to prevent, continue, or end one’s own pregnancy.”

The amendment is supported by Gov. Wes Moore (D-MD), who has made expanding abortion access a key pillar of his administration. Moore has also spoken about reproductive rights during campaign events for Vice President Kamala Harris this election season.

Nearly 70% of Maryland voters say that they will support the abortion rights amendment, according to a University of Maryland poll conducted earlier this month.

Missouri

The abortion rights amendment on the ballot this year in Missouri would establish a fundamental right to reproductive freedom, defined in the state constitution as “all matters relating to reproductive health care,” including abortion and contraception. 

If ratified, the amendment would allow the legislature to regulate abortion after fetal viability, which the amendment clarifies would be determined by the “good faith judgment” of the healthcare provider. 

The amendment faced significant legal hurdles this fall, with a state circuit court judge in early September finding that the signatories of the petition to place the abortion rights measure on the ballot were not sufficiently informed of each of the state laws that would be undone by adopting the amendment. 

Two days later, however, the Missouri Supreme Court overruled the lower court and kept the amendment on the ballot. 

Missouri is one of the nine states that do not have rape or incest exceptions to near-total abortion bans. Abortion is only legal in Missouri if it is necessary to preserve the life or physical health of the mother.

An August poll from St. Louis University found that 52% of voters would vote “yes” on enshrining the abortion rights amendment into the state constitution, meaning that the amendment could pass since all that is required is a simple majority vote. 

Only 34% of respondents in the poll planned to vote “no,” and 14% were undecided. 

Montana

The Right to an Abortion Initiative, also known as Montana CI-128, would enshrine in the state constitution the “right to make and carry out decisions about one’s own pregnancy, including the right to abortion.”

In 1999, the Montana Supreme Court issued a ruling that said the state’s constitutional right to privacy protects the right to abortion before fetal viability, but the state’s Republican legislature passed a law in 2023 saying that the constitution does not protect abortion rights. 

Little polling information is available for Montana’s abortion rights amendment, but only a simple majority is needed to pass the amendment.

Supporters of the initiative ended up obtaining more than 81,000 signatures to get the amendment on the ballot. The campaign only needed a little over 60,000 signatures to be placed on the ballot.

Nebraska

Nebraska is the only state with two competing amendments relating to abortion on the ballot.

Initiative 439, supported by Planned Parenthood and the American Civil Liberties Union, would enshrine in the state constitution a fundamental right to abortion until fetal viability, which is determined on a case-by-case basis but is generally considered to be 24 weeks gestation.

By contrast, Initiative 434 would allow abortion only until 12 weeks of pregnancy. The amendment specifically says that the “unborn children” would be protected under the law during the second and third trimesters.

Currently, abortion is only legal in Nebraska until 12 weeks of pregnancy, except in cases of rape, incest, or when to save the life of the mother. 

One campaign tactic of abortion rights advocates, in Nebraska and other states, has been to argue that gestational age restrictions on abortion hinder access to emergency medical care for women facing pregnancy complications, including miscarriages.

Gov. Jim Pillen (R-NE), who has been a strong ally of anti-abortion activists, held a press conference last week stressing that, under the 12-week statute, doctors are not restrained from providing women critical care in pregnancy-related emergencies.

Polling data in Nebraska indicate that a plurality of voters would support both amendments. An NPR poll from the beginning of October found that 46% of Nebraskans would support banning abortion after the first trimester, and another 44% would support prohibiting abortion after fetal viability. 

To pass, either amendment would need a simple majority.

Nevada

Voting “yes” on Nevada’s Question 6 would establish in the state constitution a right to abortion until fetal viability, which is defined in the amendment as the “professional judgment of the patient’s treating health care practitioner” that the fetus has a “significant likelihood” of survival outside of the mother’s womb. 

The amendment would also allow for an abortion later in pregnancy to protect the life and health of the mother, which would fall under the professional medical judgment of the treating healthcare provider.

Ballot-initiated constitutional amendments in Nevada must be approved during two consecutive elections, meaning that voters will have to vote again on the amendment in 2026 for it to be ratified.

A Fox News poll from August found that a total of 75% of Nevada voters would support the abortion rights amendment, including 57% of conservatives. Only a simple majority is required to pass the initiative.

In Nevada, abortion has been legal up until 24 weeks of pregnancy, what is typically considered the point of viability, since 1990 when voters in a referendum supported the measure by nearly 64%.

Following the overturning of Roe, Gov. Joe Lombardo (R-NV) signed an executive order reaffirming his state’s “unwavering commitment” to protecting abortion access. Lombardo also signed a bill in 2023 protecting out-of-state patients traveling to Nevada to receive an abortion.

State campaign finance records indicate that the abortion rights group Nevadans for Reproductive Freedom has spent a total of $6.4 million this year and has received nearly $9.5 million in campaign contributions.

As of the third week in October, the Nevada Secretary of State’s office did not have financial filings for the campaign against the amendment initiative, Coalition for Parents and Children. 

New York

On the ballot in New York is a broader equal rights amendment, Proposition 1, that would amend the state constitution to prevent a person’s rights from being denied on the basis of their “ethnicity, national origin, age, and disability” or “sex, including sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, pregnancy, pregnancy outcomes, and reproductive healthcare and autonomy.”

The Equal Rights Amendment was already passed last year by the New York legislature in two consecutive sessions, but it also must be ratified by a simple majority vote in November to become part of the Empire State’s constitution.

Although the Democratic supporters of the Equal Rights Amendment argue that the measure is necessary to protect abortion access in the state, the campaign against Proposition 1 asserts that it is not needed to protect abortion access. 

“New York legalized abortion in 1970 and is not under any threat of repeal,” the official statement from the New York Republican Party on the measure says.

The New York State Reproductive Health Act, passed in 2019, makes abortion legal up to 24 weeks gestation, which is often considered the approximate time in pregnancy that a fetus can survive outside of the mother’s womb. It also allows for abortion at any time of pregnancy to protect a woman’s life or health.

New York Republicans also point out that the word “abortion” is not mentioned in the text of the amendment. Instead, the measure uses “pregnancy outcomes” and “reproductive autonomy,” which have less jurisprudential history for interpretation. 

“Abortion is already legal in New York, with some of the most far-reaching protections in the country,” says the Coalition to Protect Kids-NY, the largest advocacy group against the amendment. “There is no need to add it to the constitution.”

The Coalition to Protect Kids-NY criticizes the amendment as using “dramatically vague” language that, in effect, would remove parental consent for decisions related to sexual orientation, gender identity, and reproductive health for minors.

In the final days of the election season, the group New Yorkers for Equal Rights is spending as much as $2.4 million on advertisements in support of the amendment. As of September, the group only spent about 25% of its budget on direct voter outreach.

South Dakota

South Dakota’s Constitutional Amendment G would establish a constitutional right to an abortion and provide a legal framework for regulating abortion after the first trimester (or the first 12 weeks).

During the second trimester, weeks 13 to 27, the state could regulate abortion “only in ways that are reasonably related to the physical health of the pregnant woman.” 

From 28 weeks onward, or during the third trimester, the state could entirely prohibit abortion “except when abortion is necessary, in the medical judgment of the woman’s physician, to preserve the life and health of the pregnant woman.”

South Dakota had a trigger law established before Dobbs was decided, which allowed the state’s abortion ban to take effect immediately upon the overturning of Roe. 

State law presently prohibits abortion during any stage of pregnancy except when necessary to save the life of the mother. South Dakota is one of the nine states that have no exceptions for survivors of rape or incest.

Local news outlet South Dakota News Watch says that public opinion on enshrining abortion rights into the state constitution is too close to call.

Polling from the University of South Dakota this month indicates that 50% of South Dakota registered voters support Amendment G while 47% oppose and 3% are undecided. The margin of error for the poll, however, was 4.5 percentage points.