AG Yost rejects attempt to repeal the pro-abortion amendment, as Ohio lawmakers fight against abortion
Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost rejected the summary language for a proposed constitutional amendment intended to repeal and replace the pro-abortion amendment in the Ohio Constitution, saying the proposal needs improvement.
The proposed constitutional amendment titled “Reproductive Healthcare and Legislative Authority Over Abortion,” which was filed on May 21, would repeal and replace Article I, Section 22 of the Ohio Constitution, according to Yost’s Monday press release.
Article I, Section 22 of the Ohio Constitution said that “every individual has a right to make and carry out one’s own reproductive decisions, including but not limited to decisions” on things like abortion, according to the Ohio Laws and Administrative Rules.
Yost wrote in his decision that the petition’s title and summary did not meet the standards of fair and truthful representations of the proposed amendment.
“Upon review of the summary, we identified a misstatement that would mislead a potential signer as to the actual scope and effect of the proposed amendment,” Yost wrote to the petitioners in his response letter.
Yost wrote in the press release that petitioners may revise and resubmit their materials for further review.
“The above instance is just one example of a material misstatement and, alone, is sufficient to reject the submitted petition. Thus, without reaching the balance of the summary, I am unable to certify the summary as a fair and truthful statement of the proposed amendment,” he wrote in the letter to the petitioners.
While the petitioners are rewriting the petition so that they can begin gathering more than 413,000 voter signatures needed to put their proposal on the November ballot, Republican state lawmakers oppose abortion by introducing bills.
One of those bills is House Bill 370, which was introduced by state Reps. Levi Dean, R-Xenia, and Johnathan Newman, R-Troy. The bill intends to “acknowledge the sanctity of innocent human life, created in the image of God, which should be equally protected from the beginning of biological development to natural death.”
The bill is currently referred to the Judiciary Committee.
Another bill, House Bill 347, which was introduced by state Reps. Mike Odioso, R-Green Twp., and Josh Williams, R-Sylvania Twp., would “amend sections 2305.11 and 2307.46 and to enact section 2317.58 of the Revised Code to enact the Share the Health and Empower With Informed Notices, or SHE WINS, Act regarding abortion informed consent.”
The bill passed the state House and is now before the state Senate Health Committee.
“She Wins does not seek to relitigate Ohio voters’ 2023 decision, but rather to provide women with the full, coercion-free protections of informed consent when making a stressful, life-altering decision. The She Wins Act’s definitions and structure maintain pre-existing Constitutionality, regulations and informed consent standards of care,” Odioso said in prepared testimony before the committee on May 20.
Williams agreed with Odioso in his testimony on the same day, writing that “a patient’s informed consent be secured a minimum of 24 hours before an abortion is performed and that women are fully informed of the physical and psychological risks associated with having an abortion.”
“The goal is not to create obstacles, but to ensure that when a woman is facing one of the most difficult decisions of her life, she is empowered with clarity, time, and honest medical information. She should not be rushed or pressured into a decision, and she will not be uninformed in the State of Ohio. This bill is a carefully measured step toward healthcare transparency, patient empowerment, and legal accountability,” he wrote.
Many left-wing and pro-abortion organizations, including Planned Parenthood Advocates of Ohio, Abortion Forward, and Just Choice, opposed the bill in their testimonies.
