A Cole County judge heard arguments Wednesday over whether a proposed ban on abortion set to go to voters next year should be thrown out or revised over a provision targeting gender-affirming care for minors.
The ACLU of Missouri believes the proposal, which was drafted by state lawmakers, violates the state constitution because it includes multiple subjects. The group also contends the summary that would appear on the ballot is misleading.
If the courts decide to keep the measure on the ballot, plaintiffs are asking that the ballot summary be revised to explicitly state that the measure would ban abortion.
If approved by a simple majority of voters, the abortion ban amendment would repeal a citizen-led reproductive rights amendment that passed last November legalizing abortion in Missouri up until the point of fetal viability and enshrining other reproductive rights in the constitution, including in-vitro fertilization and contraceptives.
The new amendment would reinstate an abortion ban, allowing limited exceptions for medical emergencies, fatal fetal anomolies and for survivors of rape and incest in the first 12 weeks of pregnancy.
The current language written by the Missouri General Assembly makes no mention of the ban it would enact.
Instead, Missourians would be asked if they want to amend the Missouri constitution to:
Missouri statute states “petitions for laws shall contain not more than one subject which shall be expressed clearly in the title.”
Chuck Hatfield, an attorney with Stinson LLP representing the plaintiff on Wednesday argued that the inclusion of the gender-affirming health care ban was “ballot candy” meant to win over more voters but is a separate issue from reproductive health care.
Recent polling by St. Louis University/YouGov shows that while the majority of polled Missouri voters support access to abortion, the majority also oppose access to gender-affirming health care for minors.
“You can’t say to the people, ‘Here’s a proposal whether the Chiefs should stay in Kansas City and to ban crypto,’” Hatfield said.
Missouri Solicitor General Louis Capozzi, defending the proposed amendment, told Cole County Circuit Judge Daniel Green on Wednesday that gender-affirming procedures can cause the loss of fertility. Therefore, he believes reproductive health care “applies to all people who are thinking about whether to have children.”
Capozzi said the latest proposed amendment “ensures that Missouri children are able to make the choice whether to reproduce when they are adults,” adding that if someone is “unable to reproduce, they can’t access reproductive health care.”
Last year, anti-abortion leaders were unsuccessful in convincing the courts to throw the abortion rights amendment off the ballot by claiming it violated the single subject rule. At the time, an attorney for the Thomas Moore Society argued unsuccessfully that the subject of that amendment, “a person’s fundamental right to reproductive freedom,” encompassed “infinite subjects.”
