A Missouri judge rewrote the ballot summaries for six proposed initiative petitions to institute abortion rights into the state constitution to remove language such as "unborn child," "end the life," and "the right to life" — a setback to the anti-abortion rights side.
In a ruling issued on Monday, Judge Jon Beetem wrote that 13 of the phrases used in the summaries written by Missouri Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft were "argumentative" and obscured the intention of the amendment to protect abortion rights and other rights related to reproduction.
DESANTIS UNDER PRESSURE TO GET OFF THE ROPES IN SECOND REPUBLICAN DEBATE
A near-total abortion restriction in Missouri took effect immediately after the announcement of the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization Supreme Court decision in June 2022 that overturned federal abortion rights.
Anna Fitz-James, representing the political action committee Missourians for Constitutional Freedom, filed 11 versions of an abortion amendment proposal to enshrine abortion into the state constitution in March.
Beetem said Ashcroft, who is running in the gubernatorial election on a strong anti-abortion platform, ignored the other elements of reproductive healthcare in the ballot summaries, such as contraception and fertility care.
Beetem wrote, "The Court further finds that while the proposals will have the greatest immediate impact on abortion, the absence of any reference to reproductive health care beyond abortion is insufficient in that it would cause a voter to believe that abortion is the only health care comprising the initiatives."
Beetem's revised ballot summaries begin with an identical first sentence in each, which asks Missouri voters if they want to "establish a right to make decisions about reproductive health care, including abortion and contraceptives, with any government interference of that right presumed invalid."
In the order, Judge Beetem wrote, “The Court finds that certain phrases included in the Secretary’s summary statement are problematic in that they are either argumentative or do not fairly describe the purposes or probably effect of the initiative.” https://t.co/4Oj5hKezxB pic.twitter.com/SYuU5DsHsO
— ACLU of Missouri (@aclu_mo) September 25, 2023
In a separate ruling issued on Monday, Beetem dismissed the lawsuit filed by two state lawmakers in August against the proposal's financial impact statement, which noted the abortion amendment would impose significant costs to the state that were not sufficiently described in the ballot summaries. Beetem upheld the fiscal note summary written by state Auditor Scott Fitzpatrick.
The ACLU, which represented Fitz-James in the case, praised the decision as a victory against anti-abortion special interest groups.
This is how the process should work. When a politician oversteps by inserting biased language into the ballot process, courts should rein in that attempt to interfere. Missourians deserve clear, accurate language about abortion rights. https://t.co/VqEvXoPX0y
— Planned Parenthood Great Plains Votes (@PPGPVotes) September 25, 2023
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
"The court saw Ashcroft's proposed summary statements for what they were — the language of a biased politician seeking the support of special interest groups," said Anthony Rothert, director of integrated advocacy at the ACLU of Missouri.
"This is how the process should work," Planned Parenthood Great Plains Votes said on X, formerly known as Twitter, noting that "courts should rein in" overstepping by politicians.