FILE – Missouri residents and pro-choice advocates react to a speaker during Missourians for Constitutional Freedom kick-off petition drive, Feb. 6, 2024, in Kansas City, Mo. (AP Photo/Ed Zurga, File)
The Missouri Supreme Court will decide whether a ruling by a judge — who is also a cousin to late conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh — striking down a ballot measure to enshrine abortion rights in the state will stand.
After Missouri Circuit Judge Christopher Limbaugh ruled late Friday that the ballot initiative known as Amendment 3 violated state law, the case bypassed Missouri’s court of appeals and headed straight to the state’s’ highest bench. Oral arguments are scheduled for 8:30 a.m. Tuesday — the same day ballots are supposed to be printed for absentee voters.
Missouri has a near-total ban on abortion that was put into place immediately after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022. A proposed ballot initiative known as “The Right to Reproductive Freedom Initiative” proposed revising Missouri’s constitution to protect abortion rights by including the following language:
The Government shall not deny or infringe upon a person’s fundamental right to reproductive freedom, which is the right to make and carry out decisions about all matters relating to reproductive health care, including but not limited to prenatal care, childbirth, postpartum care, birth control, abortion care, miscarriage care, and respectful birthing conditions.
The right to reproductive freedom shall not be denied, interfered with, delayed, or otherwise restricted unless the Government demonstrates that such action is justified by a compelling governmental interest achieved by the least restrictive means. Any denial, interference, delay, or restriction of the right to reproductive freedom shall be presumed invalid. For purposes of this Section, a governmental interest is compelling only if it is for the limited purpose and has the limited effect of improving or maintaining the health of a person seeking care, is consistent with widely accepted clinical standards of practice and evidence-based medicine, and does not infringe on that person’s autonomous decision-making.
More from Law&Crime: Justice Alito sets SCOTUS up for an abortion pill ruling that could be even more radical than overturning Roe v. Wade
Advocacy group Missourians for Constitutional Freedom produced more than 380,000 signatures from Missouri voters across the state in order to earn the measure a place on the ballot.
Since the Supreme Court’s ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, several states have begun the process of carrying out ballot measures that similarly protect abortion rights. The efforts have proven largely successful, even in conservative-leaning states such as Kansas and Kentucky.
Ten states, including Arizona, Florida, Nevada, Montana, and South Dakota, expect to present ballot initiatives on abortion to voters in the upcoming November election. Although polling suggests that voters support the ballot measures across the country, anti-abortion activists and lawmakers in Missouri and elsewhere have campaigned hard to try to keep the measures from getting on the ballot, proposing legislation that would make it harder to collect signatures or pass the measures, and encouraging voters who signed the petition to remove their names.
A group of anti-abortion activists sued the Missouri Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft, who certified the citizen-led ballot initiative for the Nov. 5 ballot, asking that the measure be kept from voters this fall.
The plaintiffs, represented by the Thomas More Society, include Republican state legislators Sen. Mary Elizabeth Coleman and Rep. Hannah Kelly, anti-abortion activists Kathy Forck and Marguerite Forrest. They argued that the amendment’s language could have unintended affects that go far beyond abortion, such as interference with state bans against gender-affirming health care and human cloning.
Limbaugh, a judge of the Cole County Circuit Court, ruled in favor of the plaintiffs Friday. In a 10-page ruling, Limbaugh said that the petition submitted by Anna Fitz-James constituted a “blatant violation of the sufficiency requirements” for placing the measure on the ballot. Limbaugh said that voters had not been sufficiently informed about the ramifications of the proposal.
Limbaugh said that if presented to voters as planned, the amendment could “result in a repeal of Missouri statutes or that it’s too confusing to determine which statutes would be repealed.”
Limbaugh, who was appointed by Republican Gov. Mike Parson after serving as his general counsel, said that his ruling would be stayed until Tuesday when the ballots are scheduled for printing.
Mary Catherine Martin, Thomas More Society Senior Counsel, praised Limbaugh’s decision in a statement
Amendment 3 is designed to commit Missourians to allowing and funding an enormous range of decisions, even by children, far beyond just abortion. The court’s favorable decision relies on only the most glaring decision among a range of consequences hidden by the drafters of Amendment 3. We are confident the reviewing court will also hold that Missouri voters have a right to know what they are voting on, and to vote on one matter at a time. Thomas More Society’s mission is to defend life, family, and freedom — wherever they are threatened. Missouri’s Amendment 3 threatens all three. We will not allow Missourians to be deceived into signing away dozens of current laws that protect the unborn, pregnant women, parents, and children.
Missourians for Constitutional Freedom issued a statement Friday calling Limbaugh’s ruling “a profound injustice to the initiative petition process,” that “undermines the rights of nearly 380,000 Missourians.”
Campaign manager Rachel Sweet promised, “Our fight to ensure that voters — not politicians — have the final say is far from over.”
The appeal was fast-tracked to Missouri’s top court and scheduled immediately for oral arguments.
Have a tip we should know? [email protected]
