Nebraska Voters Tricked into Signing Anti-Abortion Amendment

7.1.24

Click to skip ahead: Ballot Measure Updates from Nebraska, Arizona, Nevada and Arkansas. In the States, news from Iowa, North Carolina, Missouri and more. In Anti-Abortion Strategy, how ‘parental rights’ messaging is doing tangible damage. In the Nation, who I’m reading on the SCOTUS decisions. And in 2024 news, how to move forward from last week’s debate.

---

Ballot Measure Updates

Lots of ballot measure news this week, so let’s start there. (And buckle up!)

Abortion will officially be on the ballot this November in Nevada, where state officials have signed off on a proposed pro-choice amendment. Nevadans for Reproductive Freedom collected more than twice the 103,000 signatures they needed to qualify for the ballot, and the secretary of state’s office has announced that they verified the signatures.

Nevada is one of several pro-choice states that are seeking to enshrine abortion rights in the state constitution to add an extra layer of protection for reproductive rights. Lindsey Harmon, president of ballot initiative group, said, “We can’t take anything for granted in a post-Dobbs world and that’s why we are really doubling down on the protections we have in statute currently.”

Anti-abortion groups are responding by telling voters that abortion is already legal and ‘safe’, so they shouldn’t bother voting for the amendment. We saw how well that turned out with Roe!

Great news out of Arizona, where abortion rights advocates say they’ve collected more signatures than any other initiative in the state’s history! Arizona for Abortion Access spokesperson Dawn Penich told public radio station KJZZ, “Despite all the other political noise, I have never seen clarity and enthusiasm for a citizens’ initiative like I have with the Abortion Access Act.”

The group says that more than 7,000 volunteers helped circulate petitions, and they’re expected to submit over 800,000 signatures in support of putting abortion on the ballot. (Once again, more than twice the number needed.)

Abortion rights has been center stage in Arizona ever since the state Supreme Court voted in favor of an 1864 abortion ban, which has since been repealed.

It wouldn’t be ballot measure news if there wasn’t something about the anti-abortion attacks on democracy. I told you last week that Nebraska voters had been falling for Republicans’ fake ‘pro-choice’ ballot measure—an amendment that would actually enshrine the state’s 12-week abortion ban in the state constitution. (The conservative campaign is using language similar to the real pro-choice measure to confuse Nebraskans and divert votes.)

Abortion rights advocates are holding an event today until 7pm to help people who were tricked into signing the wrong petition and want to remove their names. Nebraska Sen. Megan Hunt tweeted that there will be notaries on hand and that they’ll deliver affidavits on voters’ behalf to the secretary of state’s office. Folks who haven’t signed anything yet are also welcome to go and support the real Protect Our Rights petition.

Horrifying that this is necessary, but it’s par for the course in terms of what we’ve seen from anti-abortion groups and legislators. They know voters support abortion rights and will do anything they can to stop people from having a say.

Quick hits:

• The deadline for Arkansas abortion rights advocates to turn in signatures is coming up fast: Arkansans for Limited Government need to submit over 90,000 signatures by July 5th.

• KFF Health News on why pro-choice measures won’t automatically undo abortion bans;

• And if you need a reminder about which states are consider abortion rights ballot measures this November, the Associated Press has a rundown.

In the States

Last week, the Iowa Supreme Court ruled in favor of a 6-week abortion ban—a ruling that won’t just impact the state, but the entire midwest. When the ruling came down, I pointed out that Gov. Kim Reynolds used some familiar anti-abortion messaging; she claimed that the judges upheld the “will of the people.”

The phrase has become common among anti-abortion politicians, eager to distract from the fact that abortion bans are being passed against voters’ wishes. Iowa House Speaker Pat Grassley said something similar, claiming in a statement, “The Legislature is elected by the people, and for too long, the courts have stood in the way of Iowans having their voices heard on this matter.”

As I noted last week, this is just a way for Republicans to argue that voters don’t need a direct say on abortion rights because they already make their voices heard through their legislators.

To help, donate to the Iowa Abortion Access Fund today. And for a breakdown on the state Supreme Court’s ruling and the details of Iowa’s ban, read Abortion, Every Day’s coverage here.

“We won't stand idly by while they try to control our bodies and futures. We demand reproductive justice for all, and that means fighting against unjust laws like this one here in Iowa.” Eighteen-year old Danika Jacobsen, Iowa.

North Carolina’s 12-week abortion ban took effect one year ago today, and NC Health News reports on what the law has meant for the people seeking and providing care in North Carolina. The ban’s 72 hour waiting period, for example, makes it much more difficult for patients traveling from out-of-state. Katherine Farris, abortion provider and chief medical officer at Planned Parenthood South Atlantic, points out that many people don’t have enough money for three days in a hotel, three days of child care, and three days of of work:

“These aren’t just numbers to us. These are real human beings that sit in front of me in my office, and I see the burden this has put on them.”

Speaking of North Carolina, The News & Observer has a roundup of some of the things Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson—the Republican gubernatorial candidate—has said about abortion. My particular favorite is when he insisted abortion is “about killing the child because you weren’t responsible enough to keep your skirt down.”

Abortion rights doesn’t just play a role in elections for presidents, governors, and state reps—every elected official matters. Take what’s happening in Missouri, where voters in Jackson County will decide who to support as a prosecutor. The Kansas City Star points out that one of the three Democratic candidates running for the office, John Gromowsky, said he’d prosecute abortion providers:

“You can’t just wholesale say I’m not going to prosecute the law. When you knowingly and willfully refuse to prosecute and enforce the laws of the state, you have forfeited the office.”

Quite a statement for someone seeking the Democratic nomination! Local prosecutors have been in the spotlight since Roe was overturned; after all, they get to decide what cases to bring forward, and which to deprioritize. That’s why Republicans have passed laws that punish or remove pro-choice prosecutors. Texas, for example, allows citizens to petition for the removal of a prosecutor who declines to target abortion cases.

And in Florida, Gov. Ron DeSantis removed prosecutor Andrew Warren for the same. When Warren brought a suit against the Republican governor, DeSantis got 15 state attorneys general to sign on to an amicus brief arguing that it’s just fine and dandy to remove prosecutors who don’t do what you want.

Remember: this is a democracy issue. Prosecutors are elected officials, put into office to use their discretion on which cases to pursue. Anti-abortion Republicans want to get in the way of that.

Quick hits:

• A judge in Kentucky has ruled against three women who brought a religious freedom challenge to the state’s abortion ban;

• Texas’ abortion ban is costing the state’s economy $23 billion a year;

• And the Associated Press about the leak of an abortion draft order from the Wisconsin Supreme Court.

Anti-Abortion Strategy

You all know one of the big conservative talking points on abortion is ‘parental rights,’ and the idea that young people are being coerced into abortion by predatory adults. That’s what has driven ‘anti-trafficking’ laws in Idaho and Tennessee, and how Republican leaders in states like Missouri are defending their efforts to defund Planned Parenthood—they claim it’s all to protect children.

Now a story out of New Hampshire demonstrates just how dangerous this messaging is: You may have seen headlines over the last few weeks about a New Hampshire losing their job for taking a student to get an abortion. The story first sparked attention when New Hampshire Education Commissioner Frank Edelblut published an op-ed claiming that a teacher had called out sick “so they [could] take a student—without parental knowledge—to get an abortion.”

The ensuing coverage (especially from conservative outlets) was low on details, and made it appear as if this was a story of a predatory teacher surreptitiously bringing a child to end a pregnancy—perhaps to cover tracks of abuse.

The truth? A female teacher directed an 18-year-old legal adult to a community health center, urged her to make her own informed decision, and later drove the student to an appointment after they had exhausted all other options for transportation. In other words, this was a good teacher.

Known as Jane Doe, the teacher is now suing. She rightly points out that Edelblut made it appear that “Doe helped a minor circumvent New Hampshire’s parental notification law.” The idea wasn’t just to intimidate this teacher, but to try to stoke ‘culture war’ fury using a nonsense example.

Thankfully, the Department of Education has now restored the teacher’s credentials. But this is the kind of harassment campaign we can expect to see more of. Whether it’s the Indiana Attorney General going after Dr. Caitlin Bernard for talking about treating a 10-year-old rape victim, or an education commissioner targeting a teacher—Republican leaders will continue to wield anti-abortion lies about ‘protecting children’ as a weapon.

In the Nation

The New York Times makes clear that the two recent Supreme Court decisions on abortion—one on mifepristone, the other on emergency care—are just “setting the stage” for more restrictions. As I’ve said previously, this is about delaying unpopular rulings until after November. The conservative justices know how angry voters are over abortion bans and restrictions, and they don’t want to add fuel to that fire.

But law professor David Cohen tells the Times the Court can only “sidestep its self-imposed mess” for so long. “Without a national right to abortion care, contentious cases like these are going to come back to the court again and again,” he said.

In The Boston Globe, law professor Mary Ziegler warns how Donald Trump is using the SCOTUS decisions to his benefit:

“[B]y creating the appearance of a pushback against abortion restrictions, the court’s decisions reinforced Trump’s message that voters have nothing to fear from the GOP when it comes to abortion, even if polls generally indicate they do not like the Republican position.”

For more on the SCOTUS rulings on abortion rights, read Moira Donegan at The Guardian, who writes that the decision on emergency abortions “hides conservative justices’ partisan agenda;” and KFF, which has a good breakdown of that EMTALA decision and what happens next.

2024

Last week was rough for President Joe Biden’s campaign—and doubly so for Democratic voters, who are understandably panicking after his debate disaster.

Since then, there have been multiple calls for Biden to step aside as the Democratic presidential candidate. And it isn’t just the editorial board of The New York Times and The New Yorker’s David Remnick— though that would be quite significant on its own. A CBS News/YouGov poll taken after the debate found that 72% of voters believe Biden should not be running for president (up from 63% in February).

Biden’s campaign, however, says there’s no chance that the president will step aside. In fact, deputy campaign manager Rob Flaherty sent a memo to supporters, calling the people advising Biden to pull out of the race, the “bedwetting brigade.”

“That is the best possible way for Donald Trump to win and us to lose. First of all: Joe Biden is going to be the Democratic nominee, period. End of story. Voters voted.”

This is a very bad way to respond to terrified voters. You can’t claim that the election is about the future of democracy just to pooh-pooh legitimate concerns about a candidate’s ability to win and do their job. If the stakes are that high (and we all know they are) there needs to be room for a conversation about what to do next.

Despite the public declarations, it’s clear that Biden’s team was as freaked out as the rest of us by the debate. The Boston Globe spoke to eight people “involved in or briefed on” Biden’s debate prep, reporting “aides were bewildered by his performance.”

Meanwhile, major reproductive groups have publicly rallied behind Biden. Amy Littlefield, abortion access correspondent atThe Nation, tweeted about a last-minute meeting held by groups like Planned Parenthood and EMILYs List to “remind voters of the high stakes” of the election.

A joint statement from the groups said, “The choice between the two presidential tickets is crystal clear: Donald Trump represents an existential threat to women in America.”

There’s a second debate planned for September 10th.

Finally, The Philadelphia Inquirer’s editorial board used the panic over Biden as an opportunity to call on Trump to withdraw, writing that his “litany of lies, hyperbole, bigotry, ignorance, and fear mongering” is just more proof that “he is a danger to democracy and unfit for office.” There’s certainly no debate there.

If you missed my column on last week’s debate, you can read it below:

Debate Nightmare

---

If you value Abortion, Every Day, consider becoming a paying supporter! By upgrading now, you can join the AED community at a 20% discount”