The Missouri Supreme Court is set to hear arguments on Tuesday regarding a proposed abortion-rights amendment that could potentially go before voters this year. The amendment aims to enshrine abortion rights in the state constitution, as well as affirming the right for individuals to make reproductive health care decisions. If approved, the measure is expected to overturn the state's near-total abortion ban implemented in 2022.
The proposal was initially scheduled for the November ballot. However, Republican Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft removed it from the ballot on Monday, following a county circuit judge's ruling in favor of abortion opponents and Republican lawmakers seeking to have the amendment removed.
The move by Ashcroft, who opposes abortion, is largely symbolic as the Supreme Court is anticipated to have the final say on the matter. The court faces a deadline of 5 p.m. Tuesday to make any changes to the November ballot, leaving only a few hours for a ruling after the morning hearing.
This amendment is part of a broader national trend to involve voters in abortion-related decisions following the overturning of Roe v. Wade in 2022. Missouri was among the states that swiftly implemented severe abortion restrictions post the Supreme Court's decision.
Several other states, including Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Maryland, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, and South Dakota, are also considering constitutional amendments to protect abortion rights. Most of these proposals would ensure the right to abortion until fetal viability and later for the health of the pregnant woman, mirroring the intent of the Missouri amendment.
The legal battle surrounding Missouri's proposed amendment centers on a state law requiring campaigns to disclose to voters the laws that the amendments seek to overturn during the signature-gathering process. Plaintiffs argue that the abortion-rights campaign failed to inform signers about the provisions of Missouri law it aims to repeal, including the existing abortion ban.
Advocates for the abortion-rights campaign emphasize that the case is about protecting the people's right to engage in direct democracy. They argue that the circuit court's decision could impede citizens' ability to vote on changing the Constitution regarding abortion rights.
States that have previously had abortion-related questions on their ballots post the Roe v. Wade decision have generally seen voters siding with abortion-rights supporters.
