Montana Approves Signatures for Upcoming Abortion Ballot Question
Fellow State Arizona Rejects Similar Challenge
The most recent development in the ongoing abortion debate in the United States comes from Montana, where the Secretary of State authorized a measure for the November ballot to establish a right to abortion in the state’s constitution. This development makes Montana the latest state joining eight others to facilitate such an initiative.
Court Rebuffs Anti-Abortion Groups
In another closely parallel development in Arizona, anti-abortion groups faced a setback when the Supreme Court dismissed their appeal against a similar measure. It is important to note that the court’s decision does not insinuate backing for the measure. They dismissed the appeal on the grounds that the technical objections raised by the anti-abortion groups over the language used on ballot petitions were invalid.
Ground-Breaking Signatures
The proposition’s sponsoring coalition collected more than 117,000 signatures to place it on the ballot, almost double the requisite 60,039. This number of submissions is unprecedented for any ballot measure in the state’s history. The Secretary of State communicated the certification to the coalition via email on Tuesday.
Implications for Senate Race
The upcoming ballot could also influence the Senate race, where the Democratic party currently holds a slim majority. National Democrats, along with abortion rights groups, have significantly funded these measures in both states with an aim to drive voter turnout to favor the Democrats contending for the Senate. In Montana, the incumbent Senator Jon Tester is one of the most vulnerable from the party.
Conservative Opposition
The Montana Governor, Greg Gianforte and the Republican-controlled Legislature, well-known for their conservative stance, have consistently attempted to ban or restrict abortion. As it stands, Montana law permits abortion until viability — the stage at which a fetus can survive outside the womb (generally around 24 weeks of pregnancy). This is due to a state Supreme Court decision from 1999, which interpreted the state Constitution’s right to privacy as inclusive of a right to “procreative autonomy.”
Preserving Procreative Autonomy
Pro-choice advocates argue that having a measure of this kind is crucial to protecting future court members from overturning the aforementioned decision. Given that court members are elected, there is a potential risk of a shift in the composition and consequently, a potential threat to the ruling.
Closing
As the debate continues to boil over, it’s clear that the November ballots in Arizona and Montana represent key moments in the broader national conversation on abortion rights. Advocates on both sides are closely watching these developments as they unfold. As a witness to these events, it is thought-provoking to see the democratic process play out and underline the power of collective will to determine constitutional rights.
