{"id":2954,"date":"2026-08-21T10:09:08","date_gmt":"2026-08-21T10:09:08","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/valutednews.com\/?p=2954"},"modified":"2026-08-21T10:09:08","modified_gmt":"2026-08-21T10:09:08","slug":"missouris-amendment-3-could-repeal-voter-approved-abortion-rights-propublica","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/valutednews.com\/?p=2954","title":{"rendered":"Missouri\u2019s Amendment 3 Could Repeal Voter-Approved Abortion Rights \u2014 ProPublica"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/div>

<\/p>\n

\n

Two years ago, abortion opponents in Missouri tried to defeat Amendment 3, a ballot initiative to enshrine reproductive rights in the state constitution, by falsely telling voters<\/a> that it would allow gender transition surgeries for minors \u2014 even though it wouldn\u2019t.<\/p>\n

Voters approved Amendment 3 anyway<\/a>, overturning the near-total abortion ban enacted by Missouri\u2019s GOP-dominated legislature that had taken effect after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down Roe v. Wade in 2022.<\/p>\n

Now Republican leaders in the state are trying to repeal those rights<\/a> again, using the same issue. They placed a new amendment on the November ballot, also called Amendment 3,\u00a0that would restore Missouri\u2019s abortion ban while allowing limited exceptions but also constitutionally prohibit gender transition care for minors \u2014 though the state has banned surgeries and new prescriptions of puberty blockers and hormones by law since August 2023.<\/p>\n

For the Missouri GOP, Election Day can often seem like Groundhog Day. The party holds a supermajority in the legislature and controls every statewide office, yet voters have repeatedly used the initiative petition process to enact policies Republican leaders oppose<\/a>. By gathering enough signatures, citizens have placed proposals directly on the ballot, then persuaded voters to expand Medicaid<\/a>, legalize marijuana<\/a>, raise the minimum wage<\/a> and restore abortion rights<\/a>.<\/p>\n

This month, that disconnect became an electoral humiliation for Republican leaders. More than 80% of voters rejected their attempt<\/a> to make it nearly impossible for citizens to amend the state constitution. It was even worse for Gov. Mike Kehoe\u2019s plan to phase out the state income tax: More than 83% voted no<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Missouri Republicans have become \u201cdrunk with power,\u201d said Ken Warren, a professor emeritus of political science at Saint Louis University and associate director of the SLU\/YouGov Poll. \u201cBecause they control everything, they think they can do what they want \u2014\u00a0and they can\u2019t.\u201d<\/p>\n

The new Amendment 3 on the November ballot shows how Republicans, using misleading language, a carefully chosen distraction and even a recycled name, are trying to undo one of those defeats. In 2024, a yes vote on Amendment 3 protected abortion rights. In November, voters will again be asked to vote yes on Amendment 3 \u2014 this time to take them away.<\/p>\n

Republican leaders say voters never intended to approve a nearly unlimited right to abortion. They argue that Missourians would prefer an abortion ban with limited exceptions for rape, incest, medical emergencies and fetal anomalies \u2014 particularly when it is paired with restrictions on gender transition care for minors.<\/p>\n

It would not take much to reverse the 2024 result. Abortion rights passed 51.6% to 48.4% \u2014 meaning a shift of about 48,000 voters would have defeated the measure.<\/p>\n

Critics call the inclusion of gender care \u201cballot candy,\u201d a way to make an unpopular proposal easier to swallow. They say the tactic is especially cynical because it promises voters a prohibition that, in large part, Missouri already has<\/a>. State law already bans gender transition surgery for minors and, through August 2027, bars minors from starting puberty blockers or cross-sex hormones for gender transition. Amendment 3 would place the restrictions in the state constitution without an expiration date.<\/p>\n

The two provisions bundled together differ enormously in scope. Repealing reproductive rights would affect the healthcare options available to a state with about 6.3 million people. The restrictions on gender transition care concern a small number of minors receiving highly specialized treatment.<\/p>\n

Yet supporters want voters focused on the specter of children being used as lab guinea pigs, not the abortion rights the amendment would repeal. A new billboard in the St. Louis suburbs urges them to vote yes and \u201cban transgender surgeries for minors.\u201d<\/p>\n

A website for the political action committee behind the campaign, Her Health, Her Future \u2014 whose treasurer is Missouri first lady Claudia Kehoe \u2014 declares \u201cOUR CHILDREN are not LAB EXPERIMENTS.\u201d It says Amendment 3 would protect children from \u201charmful, sterilizing medical procedures\u201d and restore \u201ccommon sense health and safety standards\u201d for women\u2019s health clinics.<\/p>\n

\"A
The website for the Her Health, Her Future campaign<\/span> Screenshot by ProPublica<\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Neither message explicitly says that the amendment would repeal the constitutional right to abortion that Missourians approved two years ago.<\/p>\n

Claudia Kehoe did not respond to requests for comment submitted to the governor\u2019s office and the PAC. In a written endorsement<\/a> posted on the Her Health, Her Future website, she called the amendment \u201ca critical step toward strengthening our pro-life protections and safeguarding our state\u2019s future.\u201d<\/p>\n

In response to a list of questions that ProPublica submitted to the governor\u2019s office, a spokesperson defended the amendment using much the same language that critics call deceptive. The spokesperson emphasized protecting children from \u201csex-change procedures,\u201d safeguarding women and restoring the state\u2019s power to \u201cregulate\u201d abortion providers. The response did not acknowledge that Amendment 3 would repeal the constitutional reproductive rights Missourians approved in 2024 and replace them with an abortion ban that contains limited exceptions.<\/p>\n

Polling suggests the strategy could work. A survey in February of Missouri voters by the SLU\/YouGov Poll found that nearly 60% supported legal abortion during the first eight weeks of pregnancy. But 67% opposed gender transition medications for minors, and 73% opposed gender transition surgeries. Presented with the amendment\u2019s provisions together, voters favored it 47% to 40%<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Rep. Brian Seitz, a Branson Republican who guided the amendment through the House, denied that supporters were trying to trick voters. He said the gender-affirming treatment was itself a reproductive issue because some procedures could affect a minor\u2019s ability to have children.<\/p>\n

Seitz also disputed that Missourians knowingly approved abortion rights through fetal viability in 2024. He said voters were primarily seeking exceptions for rape, incest, medical emergencies and fetal anomalies \u2014 not what he called \u201cabortion on demand.\u201d<\/p>\n

The new amendment, he said, better reflects what voters intended.<\/p>\n

Abortion rights supporters call that argument a pretext for restoring the state\u2019s abortion ban. A coalition of groups called Stop the Ban has raised more than $5 million to try to explain what the amendment would do and persuade voters to reject it. That total includes $1.25 million contributed on Aug. 3 by former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg.<\/p>\n

Bloomberg\u2019s office did not respond to a request for comment.<\/p>\n

Republicans are always \u201cmoving a goalpost to sort of get their way, and it is my hope that actual patriots are growing tired of it,\u201d said Rep. Raychel Proudie, a Democrat from Ferguson. \u201cYou shouldn\u2019t have to do this if what you\u2019re planning is righteous and in the best interest of people.\u201d<\/p>\n

The effort began with the ballot summary written by lawmakers. It did not tell voters that Amendment 3 would repeal the reproductive rights they had approved two years earlier. Instead, it said the measure would \u201cguarantee access\u201d to emergency care, \u201censure women\u2019s safety during abortions\u201d and \u201cprotect children from gender transition.\u201d<\/p>\n

The summary also mentioned exceptions for rape and incest but omitted that they would apply only during the first 12 weeks of pregnancy.<\/p>\n

Michael Wolff, a former chief justice of the Missouri Supreme Court who is advising the campaign against the amendment, said the language appeared to be \u201cintended to deceive people into thinking that they were going to protect women having abortions.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cIf you just flat-out tell them that you\u2019re going to repeal nearly all of the protection for reproductive health,\u201d he said, \u201cthe people would vote no.\u201d<\/p>\n

A judge ruled the legislature\u2019s summary unfair and ordered it rewritten. He later approved revised language written by Republican Secretary of State Denny Hoskins, a former state legislator who introduced a measure that became part of the 2023 law restricting gender transition care and has publicly endorsed Amendment 3<\/a>.<\/p>\n

But a state appeals court found Hoskins\u2019 language still failed to explain the amendment\u2019s effects and rewrote it to lead with the fact that it would \u201crepeal the 2024 voter-approved amendment<\/a> providing reproductive healthcare rights, including abortion through fetal viability.\u201d<\/p>\n

In an interview, Hoskins defended his initial choice to use the word \u201camend,\u201d rather than \u201crepeal,\u201d because he felt it was more accurate. Asked how his endorsement of the new Amendment 3 squared with his duty to write neutral ballot language, he said his anti-abortion stance was no secret among Missouri voters.<\/p>\n

\u201cI can\u2019t all of a sudden erase my conservative views of the past 16 years in the Missouri Legislature,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n

The intervention was hardly an isolated one<\/a>. During Hoskins\u2019 first 1.5 years in office, courts have rejected or rewritten five ballot summaries from his office involving abortion, education, the initiative petition process and a referendum on the state\u2019s newly gerrymandered congressional map.<\/p>\n

Hoskins said in an interview that the rulings reflected differences of opinion over what constitutes fair and accurate language, noting that the appellate courts had also sometimes rejected revisions made or approved by lower courts.<\/p>\n

But the disputes have gone beyond language. Hoskins has also unilaterally blocked two citizen-led measures from reaching the November ballot. He rejected a proposed constitutional amendment that would make it harder for lawmakers to alter measures approved by voters, saying it was unconstitutional. And he refused to certify a referendum on Missouri\u2019s new congressional map, drawn at President Donald Trump\u2019s urging to help Republicans gain another U.S. House seat, declaring that putting a congressional map to a public vote would be unconstitutional.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Both campaigns sued in state circuit court, where a judge on Wednesday ruled for Hoskins in both cases. In the initiative case<\/a>, the judge held that Hoskins had the authority to block an amendment from the ballot because it violated Missouri\u2019s requirements that an initiative address a single subject and amend a single constitutional article. He also found that its restrictions on lawmakers\u2019 ability to reconsider voter-approved policies was unconstitutional. And in the redistricting case, the judge agreed with Hoskins<\/a> that voters cannot use the state\u2019s referendum power to overturn the legislature\u2019s power to redraw congressional maps.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Both cases are expected to reach the state Supreme Court on expedited appeals.<\/p>\n

Hoskins said he disagreed with any suggestion that he and Republican leaders were defying the will of voters, noting they, too, had been elected. He criticized the opponents of Amendment 3 as \u201cliberal special interest groups\u201d financed by \u201cout-of-state sugar daddies\u201d like Bloomberg.<\/p>\n

State Sen. Maggie Nurrenbern, a Kansas City Democrat, said Hoskins\u2019 actions reflected a broader pattern of interfering with voters\u2019 ability to use the ballot box to reject the Republican agenda.<\/p>\n

\u201cThat\u2019s quite frankly what is maddening to me, is that politicians over and over again are trying to trick voters,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Two years ago, abortion opponents in Missouri tried to defeat Amendment 3, a ballot initiative to enshrine reproductive rights in the state constitution, by falsely telling voters that it would allow gender transition surgeries for minors \u2014 even though it wouldn\u2019t. Voters approved Amendment 3 anyway, overturning the near-total abortion ban enacted by Missouri\u2019s GOP-dominated…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":2955,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"iawp_total_views":0,"fifu_image_url":"","fifu_image_alt":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[20],"tags":[2160,4825,4824,81,4826,2211,4827],"class_list":["post-2954","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-politics","tag-abortion","tag-amendment","tag-missouris","tag-propublica","tag-repeal","tag-rights","tag-voterapproved"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/valutednews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2954","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/valutednews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/valutednews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/valutednews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/valutednews.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=2954"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/valutednews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2954\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/valutednews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/2955"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/valutednews.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=2954"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/valutednews.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=2954"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/valutednews.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=2954"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}