The Good, Bad, And Ugly Of 2024’s Abortion Ballot Referendums

Heading into last week’s contest, Democrat activists managed to place radical pro-abortion initiatives on the ballot in 10 states across the country. With some of them funded by wealthy left-wing and dark money groups, these campaigns sought to deceive voters into enshrining baby-killing into their states’ respective constitutions.

With most ballots tabulated in each state, the projected outcomes of these referendums produced some wins and losses for America’s pro-life movement. Here’s a breakdown of these proposed amendments and whether voters have approved or rejected them.

The Good

There were several significant wins for pro-lifers and unborn babies in several states throughout the country.

In South Dakota, voters overwhelmingly rejected Amendment G. As The Federalist’s Jordan Boyd previously reported, that amendment contained “vague and undefined language [that] would allow [abortion] through all nine months of pregnancy as long as a physician deems it necessary for women’s ‘health,’” and “open[ed] the door for outside activists like Planned Parenthood and the American Civil Liberties Union to sue to eliminate parental rights and conscience protections for doctors who have moral or religious objections to abortion.”

Unfinalized results from The New York Times show 58.6 percent of electors voting against Amendment G and 41.4 percent voting in support. The measure’s failure came after it was reported that an out-of-state left-wing advocacy group founded by Illinois Democrat Gov. J.B. Pritzker gave $500,000 to a group behind the campaign seeking to pass the proposal weeks ahead of Election Day.

Pro-lifers also chalked up wins in Nebraska, where dueling pro-life and pro-abortion measures appeared on the state’s 2024 ballot.

More than half of voters (55 percent) have approved Initiative 434 — a constitutional amendment limiting abortion after the first trimester — current results show. So far, a majority of voters (51 percent) have simultaneously rejected Initiative 439, which sought to enshrine a constitutional “right” to abortion in Nebraska’s founding document.

In Florida, where constitutional amendment proposals require at least 60 percent of support from voters to pass, results show that nearly 43 percent of electors have opposed Amendment 4. As previously noted by GOP Gov. Ron DeSantis, the “very opaque” measure ultimately included “no limits on when an abortion can be performed,” effectively allowing the murder of an unborn child “for no reason at all.”

While not specifically related to abortion, the cause for life also experienced a victory in West Virginia, where a slight majority (50.4 percent) of voters have approved a constitutional amendment prohibiting medically assisted suicide, current results show.

The Bad

Unfortunately, last week’s abortion referendum results are not all good news for the unborn. Voters in several “blue” states successfully passed extreme proposals authorizing the murder of babies in the womb.

In Colorado, nearly 62 percent of electors have voted to pass Amendment 79, results show. The proposal codifies a “right” to abortion in the Colorado Constitution and permits taxpayer money to be used for such horrific procedures.

Similar tragic results were also seen in Maryland, where preliminary results show three-quarters of voters approved a constitutional amendment establishing a “fundamental right” to abortion. As The Federalist’s Jordan Boyd previously noted, the measure makes the state’s “sweeping abortion provisions more permanent.”

In New York, while the state already permits unlimited abortion if a medical provider deems it necessary for the physical or mental health of the mother, that didn’t stop roughly 62 percent of voters from approving Proposal 1. As described by Boyd, the deceptively named Equal Rights Amendment “further hamstring[s] legislators who try to bring state law up to par with Americans’ desire to limit abortion.” It also enshrines leftists’ radical gender ideology into the state’s founding document.

The Ugly

It wasn’t only “blue” states in which voters opted to alter their state constitutions to permit the unlimited killing of unborn babies, however. Electors in several historically “red” and battleground states approved such amendments as well.

In Arizona, voters are projected to pass Proposition 139, which establishes a state constitutional “right” to abortion. While ballots are still being tabulated as of this article’s publication, preliminary results show the initiative receiving support from 61.5 percent of voters.

In Missouri, a slight majority (51.6 percent) of voters have approved Amendment 3. That initiative establishes a “constitutional right” to murder unborn babies and effectively overturns the state’s pro-life law prohibiting abortion except in the case of a medical emergency. State Republican lawmakers’ efforts to make passage of the amendment more difficult were thwarted by Senate GOP leadership earlier this year.

Meanwhile, in Montana, nearly 57.6 percent of voters have voted to pass CI-128, which amends the state constitution by enshrining a “right to abortion.” As Boyd noted, under the initiative’s “vague” language, “practically any abortion could be construed to meet the ‘medically necessary’ qualifier required for taxpayer funding under Montana’s Medicaid program.”

While permitted with few limits in the state already, results show nearly two-thirds (64.2 percent) of Nevada electors have approved a ballot initiative creating a constitutional “right” to abortion.

In the Silver State, constitutional amendment proposals produced by citizen-led signature collection campaigns must be passed by voters in two consecutive general elections to amend the state constitution. This means the state’s pro-abortion initiative currently projected to pass will also need to be approved by voters during the state’s next general election to amend the Nevada Constitution.

Shawn Fleetwood is a staff writer for The Federalist and a graduate of the University of Mary Washington. He previously served as a state content writer for Convention of States Action and his work has been featured in numerous outlets, including RealClearPolitics, RealClearHealth, and Conservative Review. Follow him on Twitter @ShawnFleetwood