Missouri Supreme Court orders abortion-rights amendment to go before voters.
Missouri's Supreme Court Ruling on Amendment 3
In Coleman v. Ashcroft, filed in the Circuit Court of Cole County, State Senator Mary Elizabeth Coleman and three others challenged the Secretary of State's certification of a reproductive rights initiative petition scheduled to appear on the November ballot.
The initiative petition, which is to appear as "Amendment 3" on the ballot and would amend Missouri's constitution if passed, has been sold as abortion rights law. While it does broadly legalize abortion, it does much more. Some of the areas of current law that Amendment 3 will affect include gender transition therapies for children, reproductive technologies like cloning and IVF for stem cell research, and genital mutilation of a female child. Amendment 3 also provides blanket liability protections to not only abortion providers, but to any other person who provides any other “reproductive health care.”
In Coleman, the plaintiffs made three claims. One, they said that the initiative petition did not include a list of the current laws it would repeal, as specifically required by Missouri law.
For instance, the law did not say it was going to repeal Missouri's ban on abortion.
They said the initiative petition violated the "single-subject rule," which states that initiative petitions must involve only one central subject. The theory was that this law was sold as an abortion rights law, but it involves many other sensitive subjects as noted above.
The plaintiffs argued that the law requires such a challenge to be handled too quickly (basically, the case has to be completely decided and appealed in a few weeks), and that is unconstitutional.
On September 6, 2024, Judge Limbaugh in the Circuit Court of Cole County entered a judgment stating that he agreed with the plaintiffs that the initiative petition failed to include provisions of Missouri law that it repealed, including the general ban on abortion. Judge Limbaugh found the initiative petition insufficient, but he allowed for an appeal to the Supreme Court of Missouri.
The parties quickly briefed the case for the Supreme Court, and on the same day as oral argument--September 10, 2024--the Supreme Court reversed Judge Limbaugh's decision and ruled that Amendment 3 was to appear on the November ballot. The Supreme Court's one-page ruling did not immediately include an opinion explaining its decision.
-Written by Matt Belz
Conclusion
The Missouri Supreme Court's ruling in Coleman v. Ashcroft is a pivotal moment in the ongoing debate over Amendment 3 and its broader implications. By reversing the lower court's decision, the justices have ensured that the initiative will appear on the November ballot, leaving the final determination to Missouri voters. This ruling underscores the complexity of Amendment 3, which extends beyond abortion rights to impact other significant areas of law, including gender transition therapies, reproductive technologies, and legal protections for abortion providers.
The upcoming election will not only be a referendum on reproductive rights but also a broader reflection of how Missourians view these multifaceted issues. As the campaign around Amendment 3 intensifies, the ruling sets the stage for a contentious and closely watched election that could reshape the legal landscape in Missouri for years to come.