Connect with us

Politics

Which states could have abortion on the ballot in 2024?

Published

on

Which states could have abortion on the ballot in 2024?
  • Since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022, most Republican-controlled states have implemented new abortion restrictions, and 14 ban it at every stage of pregnancy.
  • Voters in 7 states have sided with abortion rights supporters on ballot measures.
  • It is not yet clear how many states will vote in November on measures to preserve abortion access.

South Dakota advocates submitted petitions Wednesday in their effort to amend the state constitution to include the right to abortion, at least under some circumstances.

Signatures are also expected to be turned in Friday in Missouri for a ballot measure there.

The efforts in both states are part of a movement to put abortion rights questions to voters since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade and removed the nationwide right to abortion.

OUTSPOKEN PRO-ABORTION GOVERNOR GETS SPEAKING SLOT AT VATICAN SUMMIT

Since that 2022 decision, most Republican-controlled states have new abortion restrictions in effect, including 14 that ban it at every stage of pregnancy. Most Democrat-dominated states have laws or executive orders to protect access.

Additionally, voters in seven states — California, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, Montana, Ohio and Vermont — have sided with abortion rights supporters on ballot measures.

Advertisement

It’s not clear yet how many states will vote on measures to enshrine abortion access in November. In some, the question is whether amendment supporters can get enough valid signatures. In others, it’s up to the legislature. And there’s legal wrangling in the process in some states.

Some of the efforts have already failed to reach ballots. Wisconsin’s legislative session ended without a state Senate vote on a measure that the House approved to ask voters to ban abortion after 14 weeks. Iowa lawmakers did not approve a measure before their session ended this year to ask voters to find that there’s no constitutional right to abortion; Pennsylvania lawmakers previously pursued a similar amendment, but it’s not expected to be added to the ballot there this year. A Louisiana measure to enshrine abortion rights in the state constitution died in committee and one in Maine effectively died when it fell short of receiving the approval of two-thirds of the House.

Protesters shout as they join thousands marching around the Arizona Capitol after the Supreme Court decision to overturn the landmark Roe v. Wade abortion decision Friday, June 24, 2022, in Phoenix. (AP Photo/Ross D. Franklin)

WHAT’S SECURELY ON 2024 BALLOTS?

FLORIDA

Advertisement

The state Supreme Court ruled on April 1 that a ballot measure to legalize abortion until viability could go on the ballot despite a legal challenge from state Attorney General Ashley Moody, who argued that there are differing views on the meaning of “viability” and that some key terms in the proposed measure are not properly defined.

Advocates collected nearly a million signatures to put a state constitutional amendment to legalize abortion until viability on the ballot, surpassing the nearly 892,000 required.

Sixty percent of voters would have to agree for it to take effect.

Abortion is illegal in Florida after the first six weeks of pregnancy under a law that took effect May 1.

MARYLAND

Advertisement

Maryland voters this year will also be asked whether to enshrine the right for women to end their pregnancies in the state’s constitution in a ballot question put before them by lawmakers last year. The state already protects the right to abortion under state law and Democrats outnumber Republicans 2-1. Abortion is allowed in Maryland until viability.

NEW YORK

New York lawmakers agreed to ask voters to bar discrimination on the basis of pregnancy, pregnancy outcome and reproductive healthcare as part of a broader equal protection amendment. It would also bar discrimination on the basis of sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, national origin and disability. The language of the constitutional amendment does not mention abortion specifically. Abortion is allowed in New York law until viability.

WHERE ELSE COULD ABORTION BE ON THE BALLOT IN 2024?

ARIZONA

Advertisement

A signature drive is underway to add a constitutional right to abortion in Arizona. Under the measure, the state would not be able to ban abortion until the fetus is viable, with later abortions allowed to protect a woman’s physical or mental health. Supporters must gather nearly 384,000 valid signatures by July 4.

Abortion is currently legal for the first 15 weeks of pregnancy in Arizona. An Arizona Supreme Court ruling in April said enforcement could begin soon for a near-total ban that was already on the books. But on Thursday, the governor signed a bill repealing that law, which is still expected to be in effect for a time.

ARKANSAS

Proponents of an amendment to allow abortion in many cases have until July 5 to gather nearly 91,000 valid signatures to get it on the Nov. 5 ballot. The measure would bar laws banning abortion in the first 20 weeks of gestation and allow abortion later in pregnancy in cases of rape, incest, threats to the woman’s health or life, or if the fetus would be unlikely to survive birth. Because it allows limits as soon as 20 weeks, the proposal does not have the support of Planned Parenthood Great Plains, which includes Arkansas. The state has a ban on abortion at all stages of pregnancy with narrow exceptions.

COLORADO

Advertisement

Advocates for a ballot measure to add constitutional protections for abortion, including requiring Medicaid and private health insurers to cover it, have turned in signatures to have it placed on the ballot. The secretary of state’s office has until May 17 to determine whether there are enough valid signatures. More than 124,000 are required.

Amending the state constitution requires support of 55% of voters.

Those backing a dueling measure — a law to ban abortion — did not turn in signatures, and the measure will not go before voters.

Abortion is legal at all stages of pregnancy in Colorado.

MISSOURI

Advertisement

Missouri advocates for abortion access are expected to turn in signatures on Friday, two days ahead of their deadline to submit more than 171,000 to ask voters to approve a constitutional amendment to guarantee abortion until viability.

A group of moderate Republicans have abandoned for this year efforts for an alternate amendment that would have allowed abortion up to 12 weeks and after that with only limited exceptions.

Abortion is currently banned in Missouri at all stages of pregnancy with limited exceptions.

MONTANA

Abortion rights proponents in Montana have proposed a constitutional amendment that would bar the government from denying the right to abortion before viability or when it’s necessary to protect the life or health of the pregnant person. After a legal battle over the ballot language, the Montana Supreme Court on April 1 wrote its version of the language that would appear on the ballot if supporters gather more than 60,000 signatures by June 21. Abortion is legal until viability in Montana under a 1999 Montana Supreme Court opinion.

Advertisement

NEBRASKA

Advocates are trying to collect about 125,000 signatures needed by July 5 to put a constitutional amendment before voters to protect abortion rights until fetal viability. A competing petition effort would add a constitutional amendment that mirrors a law adopted last year that bans abortion after 12 weeks, with some exceptions.

NEVADA

Signatures are being gathered to place an abortion access amendment on Nevada’s ballot in November. Under the amendment, abortion access for the first 24 weeks of pregnancy or later to protect the health of the pregnant person, which is already assured under a 1990 law, would be enshrined in the constitution. It requires more than 102,000 valid signatures by June 26 to place the measure on the ballot. Voters would need to approve it in both 2024 and 2026 to change the constitution.

The measure is one of several attempts by Nevada abortion rights groups to get a ballot question before voters in 2024 or 2026.

Advertisement

SOUTH DAKOTA

South Dakota advocates said they submitted more than 55,000 signatures — 20,000 more than required — to get a measure on the ballot that would loosen restrictions but does not go as far as many abortion rights advocates would like. It would ban any restrictions on abortion in the first trimester of pregnancy. It would allow the state in the second trimester to “regulate the pregnant woman’s abortion decision and its effectuation only in ways that are reasonably related to the physical health of the pregnant woman.” An abortion ban would be allowed in the third trimester, as long as it included exceptions for the life and health of the woman. Planned Parenthood is not supporting the measure.

Abortion in the state is now banned at all stages of pregnancy with narrow exceptions.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Politics

ICE says it will needs massive funding hike, tens of thousands more beds to implement Laken Riley Act

Published

on

ICE says it will needs massive funding hike, tens of thousands more beds to implement Laken Riley Act

Join Fox News for access to this content

Plus special access to select articles and other premium content with your account – free of charge.

By entering your email and pushing continue, you are agreeing to Fox News’ Terms of Use and Privacy Policy, which includes our Notice of Financial Incentive.

Please enter a valid email address.

Having trouble? Click here.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is telling lawmakers that the Laken Riley Act, an anti-illegal immigration bill expected to hit President-elect Trump’s desk in the coming weeks, will cost an additional $3 billion due to the agency needing an additional 60,000 detention beds.

ICE responded to questions by Rep. Mike Collins, R-Ga., on the impact of the Laken Riley Act. The bill passed the House this month and looks likely to pass the Senate. It requires DHS to detain illegal immigrants who have been arrested for theft-related crimes. 

Advertisement

It also allows for states to sue DHS for alleged failures in enforcing immigration law. The bill is named after Laken Riley, a Georgia student who was murdered by an illegal immigrant from Venezuela last year. It has picked up the support of Republicans as well as a number of Democrats.

BIDEN DHS EXEMPTED THOUSANDS OF IMMIGRANTS FROM TERROR-RELATED ENTRY RESTRICTIONS IN FY 2024

ICE agents are pictured arresting a man. ICE agents arrested an Indian citizen following his convictions for child sex abuse.  (ICE ERO El Paso/X)

In the letter, obtained by Fox, ICE says it has identified tens of thousands of illegal immigrants who would meet the criteria for arrest both on its detained docket and non-detained docket. It said that its Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) has estimated that the number of illegal immigrants on its national docket who meet the criteria would be over 60,000. The letter was first reported by Politico.

“Since the Laken Riley Act requires ERO to immediately detain those noncitizens, ERO would then require, at minimum, 64,000 additional detention beds; however this does not account for other immigration enforcement mandates that may place a need for increased detention capacity.”

Advertisement

SENATE DEMS TO JOIN REPUBLICANS TO ADVANCE ANTI-ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION BILL NAMED AFTER LAKEN RILEY

ICE estimates that increasing that capacity would require a funding increase of approximately $3.2 billion. Additionally, it estimates that it will need 10 new Mobile Crisis Assistance Teams (MCAT) and a HQ law enforcement officer across eight field offices, requiring an additional nearly $15 million along with associated equipment.

Notably, ERO says it currently possesses the authority to fulfill the requirements of the Act and would require no additional authorities.

The agency warned that it may have to release tens of thousands of illegal immigrants if it does not get the additional bedspace.

ICE agent

An ICE agent monitors hundreds of asylum seekers being processed upon entering the Jacob K. Javits Federal Building on June 6, 2023, in New York City. (David Dee Delgado/Getty Images)

CLICK HERE FOR MORE IMMIGRATION COVERAGE

Advertisement

“…[I]f supplemental funding is not received and ICE remains at its current bed capacity, the agency would not have the detention capacity to accommodate the immediate arrest and detention of noncitizens convicted or charged with property crimes,” it says. “ERO anticipates that tens of thousands of noncitizens would need to be released by the end of the fiscal year, resulting in the potential release of public safety threats.”

As challenges to implementation, it cites the challenges of having ICE officers, and also the challenges of sanctuary cities: “A complicating factor is a lack of cooperation from ICE’s state and local law enforcement partners.”

This is not the first alarm that ICE has sounded about its funding levels, noting in its FY 24 report that it is already underfunded with its existing responsibilities.

“Throughout the year, the agency was called on to do more without commensurate funding, working within the confines of strained resources and competing priorities while steadfastly supporting the Department of Homeland Security and its component agencies in their efforts to secure the border,” the agency said.

Advertisement

President-elect Trump has promised to launch a mass deportation operation, in which ICE would be the operative agency. In Congress, Republicans are preparing to make significant funding changes via the budget reconciliation process. Border security and interior enforcement would likely be top priorities for Republicans, given the issues’ prominence in the 2024 election.

Continue Reading

Politics

Rep. Nancy Pelosi will not attend Trump's inauguration

Published

on

Rep. Nancy Pelosi will not attend Trump's inauguration

Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) will not attend President-elect Donald Trump’s inauguration, a spokesman confirmed Thursday.

The spokesperson did not provide a reason for Pelosi’s decision to skip the ceremonial event, which is slated for the U.S. Capitol on Monday. The decision was reported earlier by ABC News.

Pelosi, 84, who has retained political prominence and influence in the Democratic Party — and her seat in the House — despite giving up her longtime leadership role after Republicans won control of the House in 2022, has long had a contentious relationship with Trump.

She also broke her hip and was hospitalized while traveling with a bipartisan congressional delegation in Luxembourg last month — though she has returned to the halls of Congress since, including for the Jan. 6 confirmation of Trump’s electoral victory.

Trump did not attend the inauguration of President Biden after losing to Biden in the 2020 election. He also denied that he lost despite all evidence to the contrary — a lie he maintains to this day. He was the first president to skip the inauguration of his successor since Andrew Johnson did so in 1869.

Advertisement

Pelosi has called Trump “crazy” and unfit for office. Trump has called Pelosi “evil” and an “enemy” of the country. The pair have sparred for years. Pelosi raised eyebrows when she ripped up a copy of Trump’s State of the Union speech behind him in 2020. Trump infuriated the former speaker by mocking a violent attack on her husband at the couple’s San Francisco home.

Former First Lady Michelle Obama has also announced that she will not attend the inauguration, though former President Obama will, according to the Associated Press. The former first lady also has been an outspoken critic of Trump.

Continue Reading

Politics

Lee Zeldin, Trump’s E.P.A. Nominee, Is Short on Environmental Experience

Published

on

Lee Zeldin, Trump’s E.P.A. Nominee, Is Short on Environmental Experience

Of all the government agencies that President-elect Donald J. Trump has threatened to shrink or eliminate, perhaps none has been a greater target than the Environmental Protection Agency.

During the first Trump administration, the nation’s top regulator of air and water pollution and industrial chemicals saw its budget slashed, leading to an exodus of employees and weakened enforcement of environmental rules.

This time, Mr. Trump could go further.

President Biden rebuilt the E.P.A. and used it to enact two powerful climate regulations aimed at cutting greenhouse gas emissions from tailpipes and power plants. But Mr. Trump has already promised to “kill” the agency’s climate regulations, and people close to the Trump transition have recommended ousting E.P.A. career staff, eliminating its scientific advisers, and closing an office that helps minority communities that disproportionately struggle with polluted air and water. There is even discussion of moving E.P.A. headquarters and its 7,000 workers out of Washington, possibly to Texas or Florida, as a way to shed employees.

The man who would carry out the dismantling is a former congressman from New York, Lee Zeldin, who is set to appear Thursday morning before the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works.

Advertisement

The nomination of Mr. Zeldin baffled many, since he has little background in environmental regulation.

But Mr. Zeldin, 44, who ran unsuccessfully for governor of New York in 2022, is a Trump supporter who voted against certifying the results of the 2020 election. Friends say he has a long and loyal connection with the president-elect.

“They have a unique bond,” said Chris Berardini, a Republican lobbyist . “Republicans in New York tend to be always close. It’s a very lonely fraternity.”

The two men have something else in common, Mr. Berardini said. Last summer, Mr. Trump survived an assassination attempt at a campaign event. In 2022, Mr. Zeldin was attacked by a man with a pointed weapon at a campaign event. “Those are the subtle threads that weave into a personal relationship,” Mr. Berardini said.

While Mr. Zeldin is not experienced in environmental regulation, he and his allies point to his years representing his Long Island district, which included miles of coastline and had a bipartisan tradition of environmental conservation.

Advertisement

At the same time, Mr. Zeldin appears to have embraced Mr. Trump’s seemingly contradictory position: he says he wants clean air and water while he plans to erase regulations that ensure both, along with limits on the emissions of greenhouse gases from fossil fuels that are linked to stronger droughts, wildfires, floods.

Upon accepting the nomination to head the E.P.A., Mr. Zeldin wrote on X, “We will restore US energy dominance, revitalize our auto industry to bring back American jobs, and make the US the global leader of AI. We will do so by protecting clean air and water.”

Senator Shelley Moore Capito, Republican of West Virginia, who chairs the environment committee, said Wednesday on Fox Business News of Mr. Zeldin that “By being the representative from New York, he’s seen all different types of clean air, clean water issues, and the best way to solve those problems.”

But Ms. Capito, whose home state is a major producer of coal and natural gas, also appears confident that Mr. Zeldin will execute Mr. Trump’s plans.

In a Facebook post last month, Ms. Capito wrote, “Congressman Zeldin understands the need to roll back regulatory overreach, unleash American energy, and allow Americans to build again — all while protecting public health and the environment. His skill set is well suited to implement the agenda of President Trump. ”

Advertisement

Mr. Zeldin has not said much about whether he accepts the established science of climate change but he was a member of the bipartisan Climate Solutions Caucus in Congress. However, he voted against the Inflation Reduction Act, the nation’s first major climate law, which pumped at least $370 billion into clean energy programs.

When Gov. Kathy Hochul of New York criticized Mr. Zeldin, he responded on social media, saying, “I just voted NO because the bill sucks.”

During Mr. Zeldin’s tenure in the House, he voted against clean water legislation at least a dozen times and clean air legislation at least half a dozen times, according to a scorecard by the League of Conservation Voters, an environmental group.

However, he has boasted about securing federal funds to improve the health of Long Island Sound, and he voted for a bill that would require the E.P.A. to set limits on PFAS, damaging chemicals that are persistent in the environment and the human body. The E.P.A. under the Biden administration has set strict limits on chemicals in drinking water. In 2020, he voted against legislation to slash E.P.A.’s budget.

Senator Edward J. Markey of Massachusetts, a senior Democrat on the environment committee, said he met with Mr. Zeldin Tuesday and had “a good, candid conversation.”

Advertisement

Still Mr. Markey questioned his qualifications to run the E.P.A., and expressed skepticism about his commitment to guard the air and water from polluting industries.

“I’m not convinced his top priority is protecting communities and our environment,” Mr. Markey said.

On climate change, Mr. Markey said Mr. Zeldin “said he believed that human activity contributes to climate change.” But he said, “My questions go to what the E.P.A. priorities would be under his leadership.”

Lisa Friedman contributed reporting.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending