Two medical advocacy organizations and a local town council member have filed a legal challenge against a proposed constitutional amendment in Virginia that would establish protections for abortion rights. The lawsuit, filed Thursday in Tazewell Circuit Court, claims the ballot question voters will see this fall fails to adequately inform them about the amendment’s full implications.
The plaintiffs include the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, the Virginia Medical Freedom Alliance, and Meagan Kade, who serves on the Bluefield Town Council. They have named the state board of elections, the Virginia Department of Elections, legislative clerks, and the Tazewell general registrar as defendants in the case.
At the center of the dispute is the wording of the ballot question, which asks voters whether the Virginia Constitution should be amended to protect personal decisions about prenatal care, childbirth, postpartum care, birth control, abortion, miscarriage management, and fertility care. The question also mentions protecting medical professionals and patients from punishment for these decisions and allowing third-trimester abortion restrictions except when patient health is at risk or the pregnancy is not viable.
According to the plaintiffs, this language obscures several significant consequences they believe would result from the amendment’s passage. They argue the amendment would eliminate requirements for parental notification and consent before minors obtain abortions, remove the state’s ability to enforce statutory rape laws by establishing unlimited age rights to consensual sexual activity, permit unlicensed individuals to perform abortions with immunity from state penalties, prevent enforcement of health standards for abortion facilities, and block regulation of commercial surrogacy arrangements.
Josh Hetzler, an attorney with the Founding Freedom Law Center representing the plaintiffs, stated that constitutional amendment ballot questions must be presented neutrally and cannot be deceptive or fraudulent. The organization argues the current language violates Virginia’s constitutional requirements for amendment submissions.
Supporters of the amendment have defended the ballot language, maintaining that it accurately represents the measure’s intent and that existing safeguards for abortion care would remain intact. State Senator Jennifer Boysko, who sponsored the Senate version of the amendment, emphasized that Virginia voters have consistently expressed support for reproductive freedom without political interference.
Attorney General Jay Jones characterized the legal challenge as an attempt to circumvent the democratic process and silence voter voices. He pledged to defend the amendment process, calling reproductive healthcare a fundamental healthcare issue.
The lawsuit was filed in Tazewell County, located in southwestern Virginia approximately 220 miles from the state capital of Richmond. The same courthouse has recently hosted other challenges to constitutional amendments, including cases related to congressional redistricting.
This legal challenge emerges against the backdrop of the 2022 Supreme Court decision that overturned federal abortion protections, leaving states to determine their own abortion policies. Democrats in Virginia have argued the constitutional amendment is necessary to protect reproductive rights at the state level.
The plaintiffs are seeking a court declaration that the ballot language is misleading and an injunction that would prevent certification of the amendment regardless of how voters decide. Under Virginia’s constitution, amendments must pass through the General Assembly twice and then receive voter approval through a referendum.
A separate legal challenge filed in March by a Bedford County politician claimed the legislature failed to follow proper procedures requiring circuit court clerks to post proposed amendments three months before elections. In response, Democrats passed legislation retroactively removing that disclosure requirement.
Virginia voters will also consider other constitutional amendments this fall, including measures to automatically restore voting rights to individuals with felony convictions and to remove obsolete language prohibiting same-sex marriage.
Leave a Reply