A Missouri judge claims that a GOP official’s presentation of an abortion-rights legislation is inaccurate

 MISSOURI’S COLUMBIA — A Missouri judge decided on Thursday that a Republican politician opposed to abortion utilized deceptive wording to encapsulate a ballot question intended to reinstate abortion rights in the state. Judge Cotton Walker of the Cole County Circuit Court rejected an explanation of the amendment provided by the office of Republican Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft, who opposes abortion.

Walker found Ashcroft’s phrasing to be “unfair, insufficient, inaccurate, and misleading” in his ruling. Walker revised the summary to inform voters that the bill would repeal Missouri’s abortion prohibition and permit, with certain restrictions, the restriction or outright ban of abortion beyond fetal viability.

Following the overturning of Roe v. Wade by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2022, Missouri outlawed nearly all abortions. The amendment would establish a “constitutional right to make decisions about reproductive health care, including abortion and contraceptives,” according to Walker’s wording.

Abortion leading to death

In Missouri, polling places display the ballot language to inform voters of the consequences of selecting “yes” or “no” on occasionally complex ballot items. According to Ashcroft’s description, if the proposition is approved, “the right to abortion at any time of a pregnancy would be enshrined in the Missouri Constitution.”

“Moreover, it will forbid any control over abortion, including safeguards for women having abortions and forbid any legal or criminal action against any individual who performs an abortion and injures or kills the expectant mother,” writes Ashcroft. Andrew Crane, the assistant attorney general, defended Ashcroft’s summary in court.

He cited a section of the amendment that shields “any person” who consensually helps someone exercise their right to reproductive freedom from punishment or legal action. According to Crane, if that clause were to become law, all restrictions on abortion would be meaningless.

Dangerous and unregulated abortions

In legal documents, the woman’s attorneys contended that Ashcroft’s portrayal is inaccurate and that legislatures had the authority to control abortions beyond viability.

In 2023, the campaign also filed a lawsuit against Ashcroft for the way his administration worded a ballot description of the amendment. Like ballot wording, ballot summaries are high-level summaries of amendments. However, ballots do provide summaries. The proposal would permit “dangerous and unregulated abortions until live birth,” according to Ashcroft’s ballot description.

Ashcroft revised his summary when a three-judge panel of the Western District Court of Appeals determined it to be politically biased. Walker’s ballot language is mostly taken from the summary provided by the Court of Appeals.