Maryland

Is ‘abortion’ actually on the November ballot in Maryland? – WTOP News

Published

1 year ago

October 24, 2024

Is ‘abortion’ actually on the November ballot in Maryland? – WTOP News

Question 1 on the ballot in Maryland aims to protect abortion in the state, but opponents say the word’s absence could cause trouble.

This article was republished with permission from WTOP’s news partners at Maryland Matters. Sign up for Maryland Matters’ free email subscription today.

Maryland voters will have the chance to weigh in this fall on Question 1, a ballot measure that would amend the state constitution to enshrine “reproductive freedom,” a change supporters say will protect access to abortion, among other procedures.

But anti-abortion advocates say there’s a problem: The word “abortion” does not show up in the proposed amendment language.

That’s true. The word “abortion” will not appear on ballots this election cycle, even though the constitutional amendment is billed by advocates to protect one’s right to an abortion.

Opponents call that a legal loophole “you can drive a Mack Truck … through,” and have put forth any number of far-reaching possible scenarios the amendment could allow.

Supporters say opponents are just “making stuff up” to confuse voters on an issue that has overwhelming support — a recent poll said 69% of those surveyed plan to vote for Question 1, compared to 21% who will vote no. Even though the word abortion is not on ballot, they said, there’s no way the amendment can be interpreted otherwise.

Secretary of State Susan Lee certified the official ballot language in June. It states, in part, that “the proposed amendment confirms an individual’s fundamental right to reproductive freedom, including but not limited to the ability to make and effectuate decisions to prevent, continue or end the individual’s pregnancy.”

On July 16, Secretary of State Susan Lee certified ballot language for the Right to Reproductive Freedom referendum: “The proposed amendment confirms an individual’s fundamental right to reproductive freedom, including but not limited to the ability to make and effectuate decisions to prevent, continue or end the individual’s pregnancy, and provides the State may not, directly or indirectly, deny, burden or abridge the right unless justified by a compelling state interest achieved by the least restrictive means.”
Voters will choose between “For the Constitutional Amendment,” “Against the Constitutional Amendment,” or leave the question blank.
Advertisement

Erin Bradley, chair of Freedom in Reproduction-Maryland (FIRM), said supporters would have preferred the term “abortion” be used in the ballot language, but it’s not a large issue for them.

“National polling experts have shared with me that when the word ‘abortion’ is in the language, it performs better,” she said. “So, we would have liked to have said, ‘You can prevent a pregnancy through birth control, you can end a pregnancy through abortion,’ but it doesn’t.”

Bradley said the ballot measure, if successful, would still protect the right to an abortion even though it “doesn’t say it outright.”

“The ballot language speaks to the person having the right to make and effectuate their own decisions about preventing a pregnancy — so that covers birth control. About maintaining their pregnancy unfettered — so staying pregnant as they would like and starting a life as they would like. Or to end a pregnancy — which covers abortion,” Bradley said.

Anti-abortion advocates counter that the ballot measure is not limited to just abortions but “paves the way for all kinds of” other medical procedures, according to Jeffrey Trimbath, president of the Maryland Family Institute.

Mail-in voting has already started and almost 70% of Marylanders in a recent poll said they are broadly in support of “adding an individual’s right to reproductive freedom to the Maryland state constitution.” That leaves Trimbath and other opponents with a steep climb to convince a majority of Marylanders to vote against Question 1.

They have latched onto the fact that “abortion” doesn’t appear in the amendment language “because, fundamentally, it’s not about abortion.”

“It’s about undermining parental rights,” he said.

Trimbath and other anti-abortion organizations, like Maryland Right to Life and Health Not Harm MD, say the ballot measure does not explicitly exclude minors, and would overstep a parent’s ability to “influence the health care decision of their kids, and that includes abortion,” he said.

He also argues that the bill language would include gender-affirming care by “being able to take away reproductive function.”

“And that certainly is in the transgender space, where you have hormones and surgeries that do these things,” Trimbath said. “The fact that the word ‘abortion’ doesn’t appear tells us it’s not primarily about that subject, it’s about undermining parental rights.”

He said that as written, the ballot initiative isn’t clear on “what it includes or doesn’t include.”

“‘Including but not limited to …’ My goodness, you can drive a Mack Truck, legally speaking, through that phrase,” Trimbath said. “So we think that this just paves the way for all kinds of things.

“We don’t know what it includes or doesn’t include,” he said. “And you can try to guess, but I would take the amendment at its word — at its expansive ordinance.”

Katie Curran O’Malley, retired Baltimore City District Court judge and current executive director of the Women’s Law Center of Maryland, agrees that the ballot language is broad, but says it is “not vague at all.”

“People get hung up on that sentence that says it confirms an individual’s fundamental right to reproductive freedom ‘including but not limited to,’” she said. “And then they just start making stuff up and saying that means there’s maybe gender-affirming care.

Retired Baltimore City District Court Judge Katie Curran O’Malley now runs the Women’s Law Center of Maryland. Photo courtesy Maryland Governor’s Office. (Screenshot of O’Malley campaign video)

“Not using the word ‘abortion’ is intended to reflect the broad sort of reproductive health services that people need to have protected, that are being attacked now,” O’Malley said. “I would argue that this language is not vague at all — it is broad though. It has to capture those large number of reproductive services that people want to have.”

She noted that while transgender individuals may still need access to abortion and other services, gender-affirming care is separate from reproductive health care.

“It says clearly in the amendment — decisions to prevent, continue or end an individual’s pregnancy … all of those reproductive health services which are completely different from gender-affirming care,” she said.

Bradley with FIRM said the ballot initiative does not cover gender-affirming care or override current state law about minors receiving medical care without parental consent.

“What this does not do: it does not change anything in existing law or statute about parental notification, who can and cannot give or provide an abortion, it doesn’t change any of the medical standards or any of the practices related to the provision of health care,” she said. “Only that no one can interfere with your right to have that health care.”

But Trimbath counters a change to the Maryland Constitution would trump state statute.

“Since it … will amend our state’s constitution, by definition, it will be the supreme law of the land. It will supersede every other state statute having to do for health care with minors,” he said.

Sharon Blugis, founder and legislative director of Reproductive Justice Maryland, says opponents are clutching at straws, and she is not surprised they are looping parental rights concerns and transgender issues in to their arguments against the amendment.

“This is their MO — it’s what they do. It’s the same stuff over and over and over and over. Doesn’t have to be true for them to do it,” she said. “There is not one iota or anything that would allow a child to have any kind of sex operation.”

“It’s outrageous, but it works. It won’t hit in this state as much as it will in Ohio, Missouri or Florida,” she said. “But it gets people all worked up if they’ve never actually read the bill … or the ballot language.”

Source link

Click to comment

Maryland

Maryland HOA holiday lights dispute highlights what homeowners can and can’t do

Published

10 minutes ago

December 13, 2025

Press Room

Maryland HOA holiday lights dispute highlights what homeowners can and can’t do

MONTGOMERY COUNTY, Md. (7News) — A Maryland family’s ongoing battle with their homeowners’ association over a Christmas light display has reignited a broader conversation about how much control HOAs can legally exercise over holiday decorations.

7News has been following the case, in which the family continues to face fines from their HOA over their holiday lights.

To better under how homeowner associations operate and what options residents may have, 7News spoke with Alfredo Vásquez, a Washington, D.C.-based homeowner defense attorney.

RELATED COVERAGE | HOA vs. Christmas decorations: Maryland family facing hundreds in fines for lights

Why HOAs often cite holiday decorations

According to Vásquez, disputes over holiday decorations are common, but they usually center on timing rather than style.

“It may vary by community or HOA,” Vásquez said. “The most common reason would be that residents put decorations up too early or take them down too late.”

He explained that most HOA governing documents regulate how long decorations can remain on display, outlining specific start and end dates of holiday decor.

Are there rules on lights, music, or colors?

While many homeowners wonder whether HOAs can ban flashing lights, colored bulbs, or loud holiday music, Vásquez said those restrictions are less common.

“I haven’t seen any restrictions that are specific in that way,” he said. “Most governing documents I’ve reviewed focus on whether lights or music interfere with a neighbor’s lot.”

In other words, enforcement is often tied to nuisance complaints rather than aesthetics.

What if homeowners feel targeted?

Vásquez emphasized that HOA boards are legally required to enforce rules consistently.

“The Board of Directors has a duty to implement regulations in an equitable manner across the entire community,” he said.

If homeowners believe they are being unfairly singled out, the first step is reviewing the HOA’s governing documents to confirm whether the association actually has authority to regulate the issue at hand.

MORE COVERAGE | HOA still not specifying ‘nuisance’ in Germantown, Md. family’s Christmas decorations

Can issues be resolved without going to court?

Yes, and in most cases, that’s the recommended path.

HOAs must follow state condo and HOA laws, which typically require formal processes for enforcement, including notices of violations and opportunities for hearings.

“It would be ideal for homeowners to act quickly and request a hearing with the board,” Vásquez said. “They should present their case and allow the board to decide whether the violation and fines can withstand scrutiny.”

Do homeowners have any recourse after signing HOA bylaws?

Once a homeowner buys into an HOA-regulated community, they are generally bound by its bylaws, Vásquez said.

“As long as those bylaws comply with federal and state laws, homeowners’ hands may be tied,” he explained.

However, bylaws can be changed, usually through a supermajority vote of the community. Homeowners may also have stronger grounds to challenge newly adopted amendments, as long as they act promptly.

Vásquez added that staying engaged in HOA meetings and decisions is critical.

“Homeowners have to pay attention to what’s going on in their community so they can challenge changes in a timely manner,” he said.

Source link

Maryland

Attempted traffic stop leads to arrest of Maryland man wanted for kidnapping

Published

12 hours ago

December 13, 2025

Press Room

Attempted traffic stop leads to arrest of Maryland man wanted for kidnapping

Frederick County Sheriff’s Office (FCSO) announced the arrest of a man wanted for kidnapping on Thursday afternoon.

Suba Washington Jr., 27, of Williamsport, Maryland, was apprehended in Frederick after an attempted traffic stop early Thursday morning, according to deputies.

The pursuit

When officers tried to pull over a Hyundai Elantra in the 7300 block of Crestwood Blvd., the driver, later identified as Washington, refused to stop.

Deputies were later notified that Washington was wanted on charges of kidnapping, first-degree assault, second-degree assault, and reckless endangerment in Washington County, Maryland.

As Washington fled northbound on Route 85, he struck a car near Crestwood Blvd. and Buckeystown Pike; however, the driver of the vehicle was unharmed as the suspect continued onto northbound I-270 and then westbound I-70.

Washington’s tires were eventually flattened after deputies deployed stop sticks near the Middletown exit.

Though the pursuit still wasn’t over, as the vehicle managed to cross over into Washington County, where the Washington County Sheriff’s Office (WCSO) and Maryland State Police (MSP) aided in apprehension.

Washington was taken into custody after his vehicle approached the Route 40 exit, coming to a full stop on the highway.

The charges

A 17-year-old in the passenger seat was found with Washington during the pursuit. The teenager was released to WSCO.

According to FCSO, Washington Jr. was taken to the Frederick County Adult Detention Center and charged with numerous traffic citations, including reckless driving, negligent driving, and two counts of attempting to elude law enforcement.

Source link

Maryland

Maryland to launch study on economic impacts of climate change

Published

1 day ago

December 12, 2025

Press Room

Maryland to launch study on economic impacts of climate change

Maryland will launch a study to analyze the economic impacts of climate change to determine the costs associated with storm damage and health outcomes.

The move is part of the Moore-Miller administration’s strategic approach to investing in a clean energy economy and modernizing the state’s energy infrastructure.

“While the federal government has spent the past year rolling back climate protections and driving up energy costs, Maryland is taking a responsible step toward understanding the true price tag of climate change,” Gov. Wes Moore said in a statement. “This study will give us a clear, data-driven look at the real burden taxpayers are shouldering as climate change drives more extreme and costly weather events.”

The RENEW Act Study will be funded by investments and state sources, including $30,000 from philanthropic funding and $470,000 from the Strategic Energy Investment Fund, to assess the burden that Marylanders are paying due to intense weather events and environmental shifts.

Marylanders on climate change

The announcement comes months after Maryland lawmakers opposed a proposal by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to recind its 2009 endangerment finding, which determined that greenhouse gases were a danger to public health.

Lawmakers raised concerns that the move would mean engine and vehicle manufacturers would not be required to measure, control or report greenhouse gas emissions. They also raised concerns that the decision could impact climate change and harm local communities.

The EPA said it intended to retain regulations for pollutant and toxic air measurement and standards. In September, the agency initiated the formal process to reconsider the finding.

In March, a Johns Hopkins University poll found that nearly 73% of surveyed Baltimore City and County residents were concerned that climate change would affect them.

According to the study, city residents were more concerned about personal harm from climate change than county residents. However, county residents expected to see higher costs in the next five years due to climate change.

About 70% of Baltimore area residents believe climate change will increase costs for homeowners and businesses in the next five years, the study found.

An April report ranked the Washington/Baltimore/Arlington region as the 36th worst in the country and second worst in the mid-Atlantic region for ozone smog. The report graded Baltimore County an “F” for ozone smog.

Source link