NRL News

No to Michigan’s Proposition 3: Pro-abortion Proposal that is too confusing, too extreme

by | Oct 31, 2022

The Reproductive Freedom for All proposed constitutional amendment is not about reproductive freedom, which already exists. Planned Parenthood and the ACLU’s amendment would radically distort Michigan’s Constitution to create a new unlimited right to abortion, which would spill over and affect many other issues.

This poorly-worded amendment would repeal dozens of state laws, including our state’s ban on tax-funded abortions, the partial-birth abortion ban, and fundamentally alter the parent-child relationship by preventing parents from having input on their children’s health.

Learn more about what the constitutional amendment would do.

Click here for the official language that was on the petition when it was circulated. This word salad changes every law regarding pregnancy in Michigan in just 400-words. Please read for yourself. Click here to read the approved language with the 60 spacing errors corrected that will be in the Michigan constitution if Proposal 3 passes.

Current Status

 On July 11, at 10 AM, the Reproductive Freedom for All coalition or as we know them by, the anything-goes abortion coalition, submitted over 750,000 signatures to the Bureau of Elections for approval.

We know this is a large number of signatures considering they only needed 425,059 valid signatures to qualify for the November ballot. Our team was able to get access to the sample that was drawn by the Bureau of Elections and consisted of 513 petitions. No challenges to the sample were submitted on our end or from the Bureau of Elections. Ultimately, the Bureau of Elections recommended to the Michigan Board of Canvassers that the amendment be placed on the November ballot due to the correct number of valid signatures being collected and submitted.

Although no challenges to the signatures were presented, our legal team did find a form error within the amendment text. While checking through the petitions, it appeared that several sentences were jumbled together to make words that were over 100 characters. An example of this is THEREISASIGNIFICANTLIKELIHOOD and OFTHEFETUS’SSUSTAINEDSURVIVALOUTSIDETHE.

After our team determined that each and every petition that was submitted included these errors, a challenge was prepared and submitted. The arguments to our challenge were presented at the August 31st Board of Canvassers meeting where the board deadlocked in a 2-2 vote, resulting in the amendment not advancing to the November ballot.

On September 8th, the Michigan Supreme Court ruled in a 5-2 vote to approve the RFFA amendment for the November ballot. This ruling legally required the Michigan Board of Canvassers to approve the amendment, despite previous reservation about the form.

We have yet to hear an explanation from the RFFA abortion coalition as to why their amendment has been riddled with errors from the moment it was created. Vague clarification has been offered during media interviews as to why the language includes children, changes the definition of fetal viability, and allows for any health care professional to participate in abortions. We find this to be strange, deceptive, and sneaky. We hope that the RFFA coalition will use the coming weeks leading into the election to provide analysis so the public can make an informed vote, especially absentee ballot voters.

Leading up to the November 8th election, we plan to continue to educate Michiganders on the amendment. People need to know that the proposed language threatens women and children and would have dangerous unforeseeable consequences for all citizens if passed.

It is unclear whether the anything-goes RFFA coalition intended on proposing the most radical constitutional amendment in the U.S. or if the language was unintentionally poorly worded, either way, we cannot allow for such language to be written into our state forever. We cannot allow for phrases like “perceived pregnancy outcome” to be added or the definition of fetal viability to be changed without any explanation.

Categories: State Legislation