While there was a glimmer of hope for pro-life advocates in Missouri that a pro-abortion constitutional amendment would not be on the ballot in November, the state's Supreme Court has now extinguished that with its Tuesday decision ordering that the measure be placed on the ballot. 

The ruling came in response to a late Friday decision by Cole County Circuit Judge Chris Limbaugh, finding that Amendment 3 did not properly comply with both constitutional and statutory requirements that all constitutional and statutory measures that will be repealed by the proposed amendment be disclosed. 

Will Abortion Be on the Ballot in Missouri in November?
Latest Court Ruling Calls That Into Question

Given time constraints regarding the deadline for printing ballots, the Supreme Court issued its decision Tuesday, indicating full opinions would follow. 

Cole County Circuit Judge Christopher Limbaugh did not agree. On Friday he ruled that the campaign did not meet the sufficiency requirement through a “failure to include any statute or provision that will be repealed, especially when many of these statutes are apparent.”

While Limbaugh recommended the amendment be taken off the ballot, he ultimately left the decision up to a higher court.

Four days later, the Supreme Court ultimately ruled in favor of Missourians for Constitutional Freedom.

“What this decision really says today is that we deserve to be on the ballot,” said Tori Schafer, an attorney with the ACLU of Missouri, which is part of the coalition behind the amendment. ”That people deserve to make this decision for themselves.”

If passed on Nov. 5, the amendment would go into effect 30 days later. At that point, Schafer said there will likely be a series of legal challenges to clarify what the amendment means.

“But it’s very clear that when the amendment goes into effect, our state’s total abortion ban is over,” Schafer said.

Currently, Missouri has one of the strongest laws against abortion — triggered immediately by the Dobbs decision in 2022. If Amendment 3 passes, that law will essentially be gutted. 

To be clear, I'm not arguing against the matter being placed on the ballot at all — that is part and parcel of the deal bought by having Roe v. Wade overturned and the matter sent back to the states. And while state legislatures can legally enact measures to address the issue — as Missouri's has — so, too, can the people have a say via the initiative petition process. 

My objection is this: Missouri already has a whopping 119 amendments to its Constitution — in large part because the bar for passing constitutional amendments is so low at 50 percent. And because the Missouri legislature has played games for years on the issue of initiative petition reform, that means all Amendment 3 will need to pass in November is 50 percent plus one. 

Moreover, the language of the measure is couched in terms of "reproductive health care," which is defined to include abortion and contraceptives. Many voters will assume that absent the measure, access to birth control will be (or become) limited. 

The proposed Amendment reads: 

Be it resolved by the people of the state of Missouri that the Constitution be amended:

Section A. Article I of the Constitution is revised by adopting one new Section to be known as Article I, Section 36 to read as follows:

Section 36. .1 This Section shall be known as "The Right to Reproductive Freedom Initiative."

2. 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.

3. 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.

4. Notwithstanding subsection 3 of this Section, the general assembly may enact laws that regulate the provision of abortion after Fetal Viability provided that under no circumstance shall the Government deny, interfere with, delay, or otherwise restrict an abortion that in the good faith judgment of a treating health care professional is needed to protect the life or physical or mental health of the pregnant person.

5. No person shall be penalized, prosecuted, or otherwise subjected to adverse action based on their actual, potential, perceived, or alleged pregnancy outcomes, including but not limited to miscarriage, stillbirth, or abortion. Nor shall any person assisting a person in exercising their right to reproductive freedom with that person's consent be penalized, prosecuted, or otherwise subjected to adverse action for doing so.

6. The Government shall not discriminate against persons providing or obtaining reproductive health care or assisting another person in doing so.

7. If any provision of this Section or the application thereof to anyone or to any circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of those provisions and the application of such provisions to others or other circumstances shall not be affected thereby.

8. For purposes of this Section, the following terms mean:

(1)"FetalViability", the point in pregnancy when, in the good faith judgment of a treating health care professional and based on the particular facts of the case, there is a significant likelihood of the fetus's sustained survival outside the uterus without the application of extraordinary medical measures.

(2) "Government".

a. the state of Missouri; or

b. any municipality, city, town, village, township, district, authority, public subdivision or public corporation having the power to tax or regulate, or any portion of two or more such entities within the state of Missouri.

The "Fair Ballot Language" regarding the Amendment reads: 

A “yes” vote establishes a constitutional right to make decisions about reproductive health care, including abortion and contraceptives, with any governmental interference of that right presumed invalid; removes Missouri's ban on abortion; allows regulation of reproductive health care to improve or maintain the health of the patient; requires the government not to discriminate, in government programs, funding, and other activities, against persons providing or obtaining reproductive health care; and allows abortion to be restricted or banned after Fetal Viability except to protect the life or health of the woman.

A “no” vote will continue the statutory prohibition of abortion in Missouri.

If passed, this measure may reduce local taxes while the impact to state taxes is unknown.

There's a significant chance that in November, Missouri will go from being one of the most pro-life states to having abortion up to the point of viability enshrined in its constitution. To all who advocate for life, please pass the word along to any Missouri voter you know: Vote NO on Amendment 3 in November.