The sanctity of life is on the ballot across the country. We’ve already warned about Virginia’s Amendment 1, a deceptively worded measure that entrenches in the state’s constitution a right to abortion (and to sex changes) regardless of age. Idaho’s Proposition 1 and Nevada’s Question 6 are similarly noxious, essentially ensuring abortion on demand while preventing the legislature from establishing any guidelines on abortion or transgender “care,” even for minors.

Virginia’s Amendment 1 would take the state’s already-liberal abortion laws and expand them. Existing law permits third-trimester abortions only if the pregnancy is likely to result in death or “substantially or irremediably impair the mental or physical health of the woman,” and requires three physicians to affirm that such conditions exist. The new language, by contrast, would require only that the attending physician deem the abortion “medically indicated” to protect the woman’s “life or physical or mental health.”

Any condition of mental discomfort could be used to justify a late-term abortion. The language makes abortion “an individual’s right” without excepting minors. Parents would appear to have no say; even a parental-notification law might not get past this amendment.

The broad language could also be interpreted by the state court to include gender-transition surgeries, since they have reproductive consequences. And a provision that Virginia law “shall not” prosecute any action taken to help someone exercising their “right” to abortion hamstrings authorities in the event of medical negligence or misconduct.

Proposition 1 in Idaho is similarly radical. Idaho is a deep-red state, and current law prohibits abortions at any point in pregnancy, with strict exceptions for cases in which a mother’s life is at risk and first-trimester carveouts for rape and incest. The language would establish a new statutory right to “reproductive freedom and privacy,” covering everything from abortion to fertility treatments to contraception. As with the Virginia measure, the state “cannot infringe” on a “person’s voluntary exercise” of this right “unless such state action is narrowly tailored.”

The language provides no distinctions for minors or carveouts for parental consent. Abortion becomes legal up to fetal viability, after which the state can prohibit abortion “except in cases of medical emergency,” the meaning of which is to be “liberally construed in favor of reproductive freedom” by the person performing the abortion. Any time an abortionist considers pregnancy a cause of mental distress, an abortion would be allowed, even late in pregnancy. The fetus is considered viable only if it has a “significant likelihood of survival outside of the uterus without extraordinary medical measures.” What counts as extraordinary is left to the discretion of the abortion provider.

Meanwhile, Nevada’s Question 6 explicitly creates a constitutional right to abortion; the initiative won on the ballot in the 2024 election and must win again in 2026 to become law. The state’s laws are already quite permissive, allowing abortion up until 24 weeks of pregnancy, and afterward if a physician considers it necessary for the mother’s health, including her mental health. As with Idaho and Virginia’s measures, “all individuals” would be granted a fundamental right to abortion “up to fetal viability” that is protected from state intervention unless justified by a compelling interest.

Only Missouri, and its Amendment 3, provides hope for a saner outcome in the abortion battle. In 2024, against the backdrop of a law that prohibited abortion even in cases of rape or incest, its voters ratified a “constitutional right to reproductive freedom” similar in scope to the ones now proposed in other states. Pro-lifers are putting forward an amendment that prohibits abortion, with exceptions for “medical emergency, fetal anomaly, rape, or incest.” The law defines a “medical emergency” as a condition in which maintaining the pregnancy “creates a serious risk of substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function.” Transgender procedures are also essentially prohibited for minors.

It would be better to govern abortion by legislative deliberation that allows for amendments and clarification rather than via misleadingly written slogans placed on ballots. Voters deserve better, and so do unborn children.