Gov. Abigail Spanberger is currently considering whether to sign a bill to codify contraceptive access in Virginia, but for progressive policymakers in the state, the real battle for “reproductive rights” will take place this November.
This is when voters in the commonwealth will decide whether to enshrine abortion on demand into the state constitution with House Joint Resolution No. 1. Similar ballot measures in other states have struck down pro-life laws, such as Ohio’s law for the proper disposal of fetal remains. But HJ1 is the most extreme of these ballot measures due to its vague legal wording.
Current Virginia law is already extremely permissive, allowing abortion all the way through the second trimester. In the third trimester, three doctors must certify that “the pregnancy is likely to result in the death of the woman or substantially and irremediably impair the mental or physical health of the woman.”
The proposed amendment would change this rule to only need one physician (namely an abortion provider) to determine if it would protect the “life or physical or mental health of the pregnant individual.”
Voters might mistakenly think that terms like “physical and mental health” provide real guardrails. But they don’t. Physical and mental health are not defined in the proposal. That means an abortion provider could decide that almost anything counts as a threat to someone’s “mental health.” For example, a late-term abortion could be approved simply because the mother says having a baby would be too stressful. The legislature could have clearly defined those terms, but it didn’t.
That’s not the only way this measure is extreme. Virginia Democrats never use the word “woman” in the resolution. Their decision to use “pregnant individual” suggests someone other than women can become pregnant.
Democrats also voted down an amendment to the ballot measure that would allow protections for babies who are born alive after surviving botched abortion attempts.