Missouri judge says Republican official’s summary of abortion rights measure is misleading

COLUMBIA, Missouri — A Missouri judge ruled Thursday that an anti-abortion Republican official used misleading language to summarize a ballot question aimed at restoring abortion rights in the state.

Cole County Judge Cotton Walker rejected a description of the amendment written by the office of Republican Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft, an abortion opponent.

In his decision, Walker said Ashcroft’s language was “unfair, insufficient, inaccurate and misleading.”

Walker drafted a new summary explaining to voters that the measure would eliminate Missouri’s abortion ban and allow abortions after a fetus is viable to be restricted or banned, with exceptions.

Missouri banned nearly all abortions after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022.

Walker also says the amendment would create a “constitutional right to make decisions about reproductive health care, including abortion and contraceptives.”

At least nine other states will consider constitutional amendments guaranteeing abortion rights this fall: Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Maryland, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada and South Dakota.

In Missouri, ballot text is displayed at polling stations to help voters understand the impact of voting “yes” or “no” on sometimes complex ballot measures.

Ashcroft’s summary states that a “yes” vote on the proposal would enshrine “the right to abortion at any time during pregnancy in the Missouri Constitution.”

“Furthermore, it will prohibit all regulation of abortion, including regulations designed to protect women who undergo abortions, and will prohibit any civil or criminal recourse against anyone who performs an abortion and injures or kills pregnant women,” Ashcroft said.

Ashcroft spokeswoman JoDonn Chaney said the office is reviewing the judge’s decision.

“Secretary Ashcroft will always stand up for life and ensure the people of Missouri know the truth,” Chaney said.

The amendment itself states that “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 on 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 childbirth.”

Assistant Attorney General Andrew Crane defended Ashcroft’s summary in court. He pointed to a clause in the amendment that protects “any person” from prosecution or punishment if he or she consensually assists someone exercising their reproductive rights. Crane said that if adopted, the provision would render any regulation of abortion ineffective.

Supporters of the measure welcomed Walker’s decision.

“This decision confirms what we’ve known all along: Our opponents are trying to block a vote in November because they know Missourians overwhelmingly support reproductive freedom and will vote yes on Amendment 3,” Rachel Sweet, campaign director for Missourians for Constitutional Freedom, said in a statement Thursday. “Missourians deserve the chance to vote on Amendment 3 based on facts, and today’s decision brings us one step closer to making that happen.”

Lawyers for the woman who proposed the amendment wrote in legal briefs that Ashcroft’s description was misleading and that lawmakers could regulate abortions after viability.

“Missourians are entitled to fair, accurate and sufficient language that will allow them to make an informed vote for or against the amendment without being subjected to misinformation from the Secretary of State,” according to a brief filed by the plaintiff.

This is the second time Ashcroft and the abortion rights campaign have clashed over his official description of the amendment.

The 2023 campaign also sued Ashcroft over how his office described the amendment in a ballot summary. Ballot summaries are high-level overviews of the amendments, similar to ballot language. But the summaries are included on the ballots.

Ashcroft’s vote summary says the measure would allow “unsafe and unregulated abortions up to live birth.”

A three-judge panel of the Western District Court of Appeals found Ashcroft’s summary to be politically partisan and rewrote it. Much of the text on Walker’s ballot is based on the appeals court summary.