The Missouri State Supreme Court ruled with little time to spare on Tuesday that an amendment proposal enshrining abortion and reproductive rights in the state constitution will be placed back on the November ballot, overturning a lower court ruling that had removed it just days before.
The decision, coming less than three hours before the state’s deadline to finalize the language and questions to appear on election ballots, orders Missouri Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft (R) to “certify to local election authorities that Amendment 3 be placed on the Nov. 5, 2024, general election ballot,” and to “take all steps necessary to ensure that it is on said ballot.”
The order from the state’s highest court came just days after a lower court ruled in favor of arguments from anti-abortion activists and lawmakers who sued to have the measure stricken from the ballot. Cole County Judge Christopher Limbaugh issued a ruling late last week agreeing with those individuals that the proposal, which would enshrine in the state constitution “a person’s fundamental right to reproductive freedom,” was too vague, in violation of state rules relating to ballot initiatives.
Limbaugh’s reasoning was dubious, as the ballot measure explicitly stated that a “yes” vote would protect “the right to make and carry out decisions about all matters relating to reproductive health care, including but not limited to prenatal care, childbirth, postpartum care, birth control, abortion care, miscarriage care, and respectful birthing conditions,” and that lawmakers could not regulate abortion care until the point of fetal viability.
The Missouri Supreme Court overruled Limbaugh’s decision, finding that the amendment measure should remain on the ballot and that it did not violate ballot initiative rules.
The day before the State Supreme Court ruled on the matter, Ashcroft also tried to decertify the measure through his own office. The court found his action to be improper, noting that he had previously certified the initiative.
“Any action taken to change that decision weeks after the statutory deadline expired is a nullity and of no effect,” the court ruled.
By 3:30 pm on Tuesday afternoon, the measure was listed once again on the Missouri Secretary of State office’s website.
Abortion rights proponents, including organizations aligned with the movement to pass the measure, lauded the Missouri Supreme Court’s action.
“What this decision really says today is that we deserve to be on the ballot. That people deserve to make this decision for themselves,” said Tori Schafer, an attorney with the ACLU of Missouri.
Rachel Sweet, a campaign manager for Missourians for Constitutional Freedom, the group that managed the signature drive and subsequent push for the measure to be on the November ballot, also celebrated the ruling, and noted that it would impact similar movements in the years ahead.
“This fight was not just about this amendment — it was about defending the integrity of the initiative petition process and ensuring that Missourians can shape their future directly,” Sweet said.
Like many other statewide abortion rights initiatives that have passed since 2022, when the federal Supreme Court upended protections established in Roe v. Wade, the Missouri ballot measure is viewed as likely to be approved by voters this fall. According to a St. Louis University/YouGov poll in August, 52 percent of Missourians support the measure, while only 34 percent said they oppose it. A simple majority vote is all that is needed to pass it into law.
We’re not backing down in the face of Trump’s threats.
As Donald Trump is inaugurated a second time, independent media organizations are faced with urgent mandates: Tell the truth more loudly than ever before. Do that work even as our standard modes of distribution (such as social media platforms) are being manipulated and curtailed by forces of fascist repression and ruthless capitalism. Do that work even as journalism and journalists face targeted attacks, including from the government itself. And do that work in community, never forgetting that we’re not shouting into a faceless void – we’re reaching out to real people amid a life-threatening political climate.
Our task is formidable, and it requires us to ground ourselves in our principles, remind ourselves of our utility, dig in and commit.
As a dizzying number of corporate news organizations – either through need or greed – rush to implement new ways to further monetize their content, and others acquiesce to Trump’s wishes, now is a time for movement media-makers to double down on community-first models.
At Truthout, we are reaffirming our commitments on this front: We won’t run ads or have a paywall because we believe that everyone should have access to information, and that access should exist without barriers and free of distractions from craven corporate interests. We recognize the implications for democracy when information-seekers click a link only to find the article trapped behind a paywall or buried on a page with dozens of invasive ads. The laws of capitalism dictate an unending increase in monetization, and much of the media simply follows those laws. Truthout and many of our peers are dedicating ourselves to following other paths – a commitment which feels vital in a moment when corporations are evermore overtly embedded in government.
Over 80 percent of Truthout‘s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and the remaining 20 percent comes from a handful of social justice-oriented foundations. Over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors, many of whom give because they want to help us keep Truthout barrier-free for everyone.
You can help by giving today. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.