Arkansas Attorney General Rejects ‘Misleading’ Abortion Ballot Measure Wording
Arkansas Attorney General Tim Griffin has rejected the proposed wording for an abortion ballot measure aimed at expanding access to the procedure in the state. Griffin, who is a Republican, deemed some of the phrasing tinged with partisan coloring and misleading. He argued that the proposal focuses solely on abortion, rather than reproductive healthcare in general.
This rejection comes at a time when supporters of legal abortion have been successful in multiple states with ballot initiatives aimed at reversing legislative restrictions on abortion since the landmark Roe v. Wade decision.
Deception is the common theme in every abortion ballot measure. Abortion activists have repeatedly used unclear language to mislead voters into embedding unlimited abortion in their state constitutions, stated Kelsey Pritchard, SBA Pro-Life America state public affairs director. Pritchard added that groups supporting abortion rights must resort to misleading advertisements to achieve their goals due to the lack of support for second- and third-trimester abortions among Americans.
The proposed amendment, titled the Arkansas Reproductive Healthcare Amendment, was submitted by Arkansans for Limited Government on November 9. However, the wording of both the title and other phrases throughout the proposal raised concerns, leading to the attorney general’s rejection.
The amendment, as currently written, seeks to prohibit the state government from restricting access to abortion within 18 weeks of conception, with exceptions allowed in cases of rape, incest, fatal fetal anomaly, or to protect the pregnant individual’s life or health. Presently, Arkansas law only allows abortion if it is necessary to save the life of the mother.
Although Griffin’s authority to certify wording for ballot measures is not based on the merits of the proposals’ content, his seven-page rejection highlighted several instances of potentially misleading language that would need to be addressed before the process of collecting signatures for ballot access can proceed.
One of the issues Griffin raised was the lack of clarity regarding whether the intent was to limit government action concerning abortion itself or access to abortion. Clarifying the nature of the proposed restriction in the ballot title was deemed necessary to avoid potential misconceptions.
Additionally, Griffin emphasized the distinction between a pregnant woman’s physical and mental health. Many opponents of abortion access argue that this distinction could enable late-term abortions through mental health diagnoses.
The ballot committee expressed their appreciation for the attorney general’s thorough review and impartial response, as reported by the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette. They stated their intention to collaborate with the amendment drafter to revise and refine the language of the proposed amendment.
In conclusion, Arkansas Attorney General Tim Griffin’s rejection of the wording for an abortion ballot measure has sparked a legal dispute. While supporters of the amendment aim to expand abortion access, Griffin deems certain phrases misleading and tinged with partisan coloring. The controversy highlights the ongoing battle over reproductive rights and the tactics used by both sides to influence public opinion.
