The Ohio Supreme Court set a schedule on Tuesday for briefs and evidence in a lawsuit claiming that the Ohio Ballot Board erred by approving a proposed abortion constitutional amendment as one issue.
Earlier this month, the Ohio Ballot Board unanimously certified that the proposed constitutional amendment by the Ohioans for Reproductive Freedom, a coalition of radical pro-abortion activists that includes Planned Parenthood, Pro-Choice Ohio, the Abortion Fund of Ohio, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Ohio, along with the Ohio Physicians for Reproductive Rights that would legalize abortion throughout the state called “The Right to Reproductive Freedom with Protections for Health and Safety,” incorporated only one constitutional amendment and therefore advanced to the signature gathering stage.
The constitutional amendment proposal would add Section 22 to Article 1 of the state constitution. The proposal would remove Ohio’s parental notification legislation when a minor wants an abortion and the requirement that abortionists adhere to fundamental hospital health and safety standards. The proposal also aims to permit abortions after babies have heartbeats and can feel pain.
The lawsuit claims that the proposed amendment contains multiple topics and requests that the Supreme Court direct the Ballot Board to reverse its determination that the proposal only contained one amendment and to break it up into several proposals.
Cincinnati -area attorney Curt Hartman is representing the plaintiffs Margaret DeBlase of Montgomery County and John Giroux of Hamilton County.
Abortion, according to DeBlase and Giroux, is distinct from other reproductive issues. They only claim there are more than one constitutional amendments in the proposal; they don’t specify how many in their request.
They contend that while some of the proposed activities would create a constitutional right to an individual abortion, others are concerned with “the interests and rights of a third party, i.e., the unborn child.”
Members of the Committee to Represent Petitioners, Nancy Kramer, Aziza Wahby, David Hackney, Jennifer McNally, and Ebony Speakes-Hall, are among the respondents in this action. Ohioans for Reproductive Freedom selected these individuals to make up the committee that will represent the petitioners for the proposed amendment that is now gathering signatures to be put on the ballot.
In a recent response to the lawsuit, the attorney for that committee asked the court to dismiss it, claiming that DeBlase and Giroux “lack standing to bring their Complaint,” “fail to state a claim upon which can be granted,” and “fail to meet the requirements for mandamus relief.”
The Ohio Supreme Court approved the respondents’ move for an accelerated evidence and briefing schedule on Tuesday. The deadline for submitting all relevant court documents, including arguments in favor of and against the lawsuit and supporting evidence, is April 7th.
According to Cincinnati Right to Life, Ohio cannot allow special interest groups to circumvent the law or mislead Ohio voters.
“This Mandamus action establishes that Ohio law must be followed and that no special interest can mislead Ohio voters when trying to place such a drastically radical initiative on the ballot,” Cincinnati Right to Life said.
If DeBlase and Giroux succeed in convincing the Supreme Court of their arguments, abortion activists would need to get 413,000 signatures from valid registered voters for each proposal to get on the ballot in November, instead of 413,000 signatures for one proposal, which abortion activists are trying to collect by July 5th.
– – –
Hannah Poling is a lead reporter at The Ohio Star and The Star News Network. Follow Hannah on Twitter @HannahPoling1. Email tips to [email protected]
Photo “Ohio Supreme Court” by Sixflashphoto. CC BY-SA 4.0.
