Ohio voters approved a constitutional amendment on Tuesday that ensures access to abortion and other forms of reproductive health care, the latest victory for abortion rights supporters since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade last year.
Ohio became the seventh state where voters decided to protect abortion access after the landmark ruling and was the only state to consider a statewide abortion rights question this year.
“The future is bright, and tonight we can celebrate this win for bodily autonomy and reproductive rights,” Lauren Blauvelt, co-chair of Ohioans United for Reproductive Rights, which led support for the amendment, told a jubilant crowd of supporters.
The outcome of the intense, off-year election could be a bellwether for 2024, when Democrats hope the issue will energize their voters and help President Joe Biden keep the White House. Voters in Arizona, Missouri and elsewhere are expected to vote on similar protections next year.
Heather Williams, interim president of the Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee, which works to elect Democrats to state legislatures, said the vote in favor of abortion rights was a “huge victory.”
“Ohio’s resounding support for this constitutional amendment reaffirms Democratic priorities and sends a strong message to the state GOP that reproductive rights are non-negotiable,” she said in a statement.
President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris issued statements celebrating the amendment’s win, emphasizing that attempts to ban or severely restrict abortion represent a minority view across the country. Harris hinted at how the issue would likely be central to Democrats’ campaigning next year for Congress and the presidency, saying “extremists are pushing for a national abortion ban that would criminalize reproductive health care in every single state in our nation.”
Ohio’s constitutional amendment, on the ballot as Issue 1, included some of the most protective language for abortion access of any statewide ballot initiative since the Supreme Court’s ruling. Opponents had argued that the amendment would threaten parental rights, allow unrestricted gender surgeries for minors and revive “partial birth” abortions, which are federally banned.
OK as someone not from the US.
How the hell dose that work. When a state has a requirement in its law. To allow something that contradicts a federal law.
Seems like it would be something only added as a middle finger to the federal gov law. Rather then a change that is able to happen?
So, first things: There’s definitely no provision in this Ohio state amendment that allows partial birth abortions. That’s just right wing lies. The Ohio amendment only enshrines the individual right to make one’s own medical decisions.
But hypothetically, if it did, then the situation kind of all depends on whether or not the federal government chose to enforce its law or not. We’ve had that situation with cannabis for a decade now after the first states passed laws legalized cannabis for purely recreational consumption.
Cannabis is still banned by the federal government to this day, but legal in 24 states. Over the course of the past decade, the feds have declined to bother trying to override states on this issue. If a state really and honestly did try to allow partial birth abortions, on the other hand, I think the feds would take them to court over it. A federal lawsuit generally puts the state law on pause until the court case is complete and a final decision is issued.
Basically if there’s a conflict between state and federal law, they go to court and ask the court to interpret whether or not the Constitution grants power over that particular issue to the feds or not. The Constitution is written in a way that outlines what powers are granted to the federal government. Whatever isn’t explicitly stated in the Constitution is assumed to belong to the state governments.
“Opponents had argued…”
Partial birth abortions aren’t really a thing.
Yes, our federal system is confusing, but no, Ohio doctors are not just going to risk prison because the state constitution allegedly conflicts with federal law.
Simply put, federal law trumps state law due to the constitution’s Supremacy Clause. We see the opposite of this in many states’ weed laws. Illegal on the federal level, but legal at the state level.