In a blow to abortion opponents in Ohio, aimed at enshrining access to the procedure in state's constitution will not be split into two separate issues 鈥� one about abortion, and one about other reproductive healthcare.
In a unanimous ruling Thursday, the Ohio Supreme Court sided with the bipartisan Ohio Ballot Board over a pair of anti-abortion voters who had argued that abortion should be considered as its own, separate question.
Justices disagreed, freeing Ohio Physicians for Reproductive Rights and Ohioans for Reproductive Freedom to continue to gather signatures aimed at making the November ballot. Their deadline is July 5.
A decision the other way would have invalidated the groups' statewide efforts so far, forcing them to go back to the drawing board and collect new signatures, and twice as many.
But in its majority opinion, the court found that the proposed amendment's call to protect an individual's right to make their own decisions about a continuum of reproductive care issues 鈥� contraception, fertility treatment, continuing one's own pregnancy, miscarriage care and abortion 鈥� met the standard of applying to the 鈥渟ame general purpose.鈥�
鈥淓ven if we accept relators鈥� argument that abortion is a 鈥榰nique鈥� act that is 鈥榠nherently different鈥� from other reproductive decisions, the decision to obtain an abortion is still a reproductive decision,鈥� the majority said.
In a concurring opinion by Chief Justice Sharon Kennedy, three justices disagreed on the legal basis for determining the board did not abuse its discretion. She wrote that the question 鈥渋s not whether the proposed amendment has a single subject, purpose, or object. Rather, it is whether the proposal is a single amendment鈥� 鈥� which, in this case, it is.
"The proposed amendment at issue in this case is one stand-alone amendment. It would create a wholly new provision in the Ohio Constitution: Article I, Section 22," Kennedy wrote. 鈥淭hat should end the analysis.鈥�
The Ohio Ballot Board considered whether to advance the proposed abortion question as one or two issues at , determining it was a single issue.
The body is chaired by Republican Secretary of State Frank LaRose, controlled by a GOP majority and represented in court by Republican Attorney General Dave Yost, all abortion foes. During the meeting, panel member Republican state Sen. Theresa Gavarone expressed her opposition to abortion and said she would vote against the proposed amendment 鈥� but she acknowledged that that was not the issue before the panel that day.
Ohio's Republican-controlled Legislature has set an for voters to decide whether to raise the threshold for passing future constitutional amendments from the simple majority that Ohio's had in place since 1912 to a . The outcome of that election 鈥� should it survive two legal challenges and go forward as planned 鈥� would determine the percentage required to pass the abortion issue this fall.