Missouri Court Orders Clearer Wording on GOP Measure to Undo Abortion Rights

An appeals court in Missouri has ordered the rewording of a misleading explainer for a Republican-backed ballot measure that aims to undo a previously passed initiative that expanded abortion and reproductive rights in the state.

The order from the three-judge panel within Missouri’s Western District of Appeals represents the second time in just a few months that the explanation accompanying the anti-abortion ballot measure was found to be confusing or deceptive.

Following the 2022 Supreme Court ruling Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health, which upended federal recognition of abortion rights, a “trigger law” in Missouri automatically banned abortion in the state. In 2024, abortion rights activists spearheaded a ballot initiative campaign and garnered enough signatures to force a vote on the measure in November, which Missouri voters subsequently passed.

That initiative, now known as Article I Section 36 of the state constitution, recognizes abortion rights up to the point of fetal viability, and allows abortion after that point if it’s to protect the life or health of a pregnant person.

After that vote, Missouri state GOP lawmakers immediately began considering ways in which they could still restrict abortion. Republicans eventually advanced their own anti-abortion initiative measure in May through the state legislature, known as HJR 73, which will appear on the ballot in 2026.

In September, however, a state judge ruled that the explanation that would appear with the initiative was unclear, and might be confusing to voters. Shortly after that ruling, Missouri Secretary of State Denny Hoskins (R) rewrote the explainer, which was approved by that judge.

But Anna Fitz-James, a medical doctor and proponent of the 2024 initiative, appealed that ruling with the help of the American Civil Liberties Union. The appeals court agreed with her complaint, finding that the revised wording was still problematic.

The post-September explainer offered by Hoskins asks voters if they want to “repeal” the results of the 2024 initiative, without detailing which reproductive rights were included, and “allow abortions for medical emergencies, fetal anomalies, rape, and incest.” A voter could feasibly believe that the Republican-backed initiative was emboldening some abortion rights based on that language, Fitz-James asserted, rather than actually restricting rights that were recognized last year.

The appeals court ruled on Thursday — less than 24 hours after hearing oral arguments in the case — that, while the language wasn’t ambiguous enough to warrant removing the ballot measure altogether, it needed further alterations.

“While we agree with the circuit court that HJR 73 passes constitutional muster, we conclude that both statements fail to sufficiently advise voters that HJR 73, if enacted, would repeal and replace Article I Section 36, as well as inform voters of its additional effects,” the court ruled. “Therefore, we certify to the Secretary of State a revised summary statement and fair ballot language statement.”

Per the court’s order, the initiative will now ask voters if they want to “repeal the 2024 voter-approved Amendment providing reproductive healthcare rights, including abortion through fetal viability,” providing a clearer idea of what will happen if voters choose “yes” on the ballot.

Both sides could technically appeal the decision, but it seems that the matter is resolved at this point.

Missouri Attorney General Catherine Hanaway lauded the court’s decision to keep the initiative in place, stating “there was no legitimate reason to displace” the language now inserted into the explainer.

The ACLU also expressed satisfaction with the outcome, noting that it makes the measure clearer to voters, who have already approved pro-abortion language.

“It is crucial that Missourians know they are being asked to end the protections for reproductive health care that we just passed in the last general election,” said Tori Schafer, director of policy and campaigns at the ACLU of Missouri.