Ohio Abortion Law: Who Voted And Why?

In October 2024, an Ohio judge struck down a state law that banned most abortions, ruling that it was unconstitutional. The law, which was passed in 2019, prohibited doctors from performing abortions after the detection of fetal cardiac or embryonic activity, which can be as early as six weeks into pregnancy. The ruling was made in light of a 2023 voter referendum that protected abortion access in the state constitution. The referendum, known as Issue 1, passed with 57% of the vote, guaranteeing a person's right to an abortion and other reproductive care up until fetal viability, which is usually about 23 to 24 weeks.

The 2023 voter referendum

On November 7, 2023, Ohio voters approved a constitutional amendment, known as Issue 1, to protect abortion rights in the state. This amendment guarantees the right to abortion and other reproductive care up until fetal viability, which is usually around 23 to 24 weeks. The vote was a significant victory for abortion rights advocates, as it marked the seventh state to protect abortion rights through a ballot measure since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022.

The amendment passed with approximately 57% of voting Ohioans' support, despite efforts from anti-abortion rights groups to make it more difficult for the amendment to succeed. These groups attempted to raise the passage threshold for constitutional amendments to 60%, but this proposal was rejected by Ohio voters in a special election in August 2023.

In his ruling, Judge Jenkins stated that the Ohio abortion prohibition flouted the language in the voter-approved amendment to the state constitution, which protected reproductive healthcare. He emphasized that "Ohio voters have spoken" and that "the Ohio Constitution now unequivocally protects the right to abortion." This ruling was celebrated by abortion rights advocates, who viewed it as a demonstration of the power of Ohio's Reproductive Freedom Amendment.

The role of the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. Wade was pivotal, as it returned power over abortion legislation to individual states. This empowered Ohio's Republican lawmakers to implement a law prohibiting most abortions after the detection of fetal cardiac activity, as early as six weeks into pregnancy.

However, the Supreme Court's decision also sparked a backlash, with voters in Ohio approving a reproductive rights amendment to the state's constitution in 2023, which took effect in December 2023. This amendment guarantees the right to "make and carry out one's own reproductive decisions," effectively protecting abortion access.

The Supreme Court of Ohio, with a Republican majority, will have the final say on abortion access decisions following the passage of this amendment. This has led to concerns about the objectivity of the court, with abortion rights organizations and ethics attorneys questioning the court's stance on the issue.

The outcome of the 2024 Supreme Court justice elections will also have a significant impact on abortion care in Ohio. Abortion rights supporters have emphasized the importance of electing justices who will enforce the amendment, rather than ignore it.

The state constitutional amendment

In October 2024, an Ohio judge, Christian Jenkins, struck down the state's abortion ban, deeming it unconstitutional. This decision was based on a voter-approved amendment to the state constitution, which protects reproductive healthcare rights, including abortion. The amendment, known as Issue 1 or the Reproductive Freedom Amendment, was passed in November 2023 with 57% of Ohioan voters in support.

The amendment gives every person in Ohio "the right to make and carry out one's own reproductive decisions". This directly contradicts the 2019 abortion ban, which prohibits doctors from performing abortions after the detection of fetal cardiac or embryonic activity, which can be as early as six weeks into a pregnancy.

The abortion ban had been enforced since June 2022, when the US Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade. However, in August 2024, a Franklin County Common Pleas Judge, David C. Young, temporarily blocked several Ohio laws that forced abortion patients to wait a minimum of 24 hours after receiving state-mandated information in person before accessing their desired abortion care. This was the first ruling based on the Reproductive Freedom Amendment to the Ohio Constitution, which took effect in December 2023.

Following the decision by Judge Young, Judge Jenkins' ruling was the second to be made in light of the state constitutional amendment. Jenkins stated that "Ohio voters have spoken. The Ohio constitution now unequivocally protects the right to abortion". This ruling permanently blocked the abortion ban, ensuring that reproductive healthcare rights are protected by the state constitution.

The decision by Judge Jenkins was significant as it showed the power of the Reproductive Freedom Amendment in practice. It also highlighted the intentions of Ohio voters, who sought to protect the fundamental right to abortion and prevent the state from infringing on this right, except when necessary to protect the health of a pregnant person.

The role of the Attorney General

In 2019, the Ohio Senate Bill 23, also known as the "Heartbeat Act," was passed, banning abortions after the detection of a fetal heartbeat, which usually occurs around six weeks into a pregnancy. Yost played a pivotal role in enforcing this law when the opportunity arose after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022. He filed court motions to enact the six-week abortion ban, arguing that the previous injunction against the law should be dissolved due to the change in legal precedent.

Yost's actions were met with opposition from abortion rights advocates and resulted in legal challenges. In 2024, Hamilton County Common Pleas Judge Christian Jenkins struck down the six-week abortion ban, deeming it unconstitutional. Judge Jenkins criticized Yost, stating that he "evidently didn't get the memo" about returning the power over abortion to the states and upholding reproductive rights.

Despite the voter-approved amendment to the state constitution protecting reproductive rights, Yost continued to fight for certain provisions of the abortion ban to remain in place. He argued that 14 other provisions of the state law, including requirements for fetal heartbeat checks and a 24-hour waiting period, should be upheld. However, Judge Jenkins ruled that these provisions were also unconstitutional due to the broad wording of the ballot measure, which prohibited any burden on the ability to exercise abortion rights.

Yost's office maintained that they were fighting for "'other provisions' of the law rather than the ban itself. They asserted that their role as legal representatives of the state compelled them to provide the strongest arguments on behalf of their client, in this case, the state of Ohio. However, critics argued that the continued legal battle went against the voters' will and questioned the motivation behind delaying a final ruling on the matter.

In conclusion, the role of the Attorney General in Ohio's abortion law debate has been complex and controversial. Yost's efforts to defend and enforce abortion restrictions have faced legal challenges and criticism from those advocating for reproductive rights. His actions highlight the political and legal complexities surrounding abortion legislation in Ohio and the nation.

The impact on healthcare providers

In 2019, Ohio Governor Mike DeWine signed the Human Rights and Heartbeat Protection Act, banning abortions after any embryonic cardiac activity is detected. This law only went into effect in June 2022, after the US Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade. The law did not make exceptions for rape, incest, or fetal inviability, with the only exception being a medical emergency.

The impact of this law on healthcare providers in Ohio was significant. Healthcare providers filed suit to permanently end the legislation, as it drove patients to seek reproductive care outside the state and put several clinics at risk of closure. The law also resulted in patients having to travel out of state to access abortions. For example, a young girl who was sexually assaulted in Columbus, Ohio, had to go to Indiana for an abortion.

In September 2022, abortion providers filed affidavits in Cincinnati as part of a lawsuit to stop the enforcement of the six-week abortion ban. These affidavits detailed instances of minors who had been sexually assaulted and had to leave the state to obtain abortions, as well as several women who threatened suicide or self-harm due to their inability to receive an abortion. The affidavits also included cases of women with cancer who were refused abortions and could not receive cancer treatment while pregnant.

In July 2019, a federal judge temporarily blocked state officials and specific county prosecutors from enforcing the abortion prohibition against state abortion providers. This injunction, however, did not prevent county prosecutors outside the specified counties from enforcing the criminal prohibition on post-embryonic cardiac activity abortions or prosecuting those who aided or abetted abortions after embryonic cardiac activity.

In August 2023, Ohio Issue 1 was put to a referendum, aiming to make it more challenging for voter-led initiatives to be proposed and approved. This issue was related to abortion rights, as November 2023 Ohio Issue 1, a referendum to restore Roe v. Wade-era access to abortion in the state, was set to appear on the ballot. The Republican state representative, Brian Stewart, intended to stop a range of referendum issues, including abortion rights. The referendum passed with 57% of the vote, a heavy turnout for an off-year election.

In November 2023, the Right to Reproductive Freedom Amendment went into effect, protecting reproductive choices, including abortion. As a result, abortion providers in Ohio can now see patients up to 21 weeks and 6 days of gestation.

In March 2024, the ACLU of Ohio filed a lawsuit on behalf of abortion providers, challenging the 24-hour waiting period restriction. They argued that this restriction was unconstitutional under the Right to Reproductive Freedom with Exceptions for Health and Safety Amendment, creating an undue burden on patients seeking reproductive healthcare. As of August 2024, there is a preliminary injunction against the laws enforcing Ohio's 24-hour waiting period, allowing patients to obtain same-day abortion procedures.

In summary, the abortion law in Ohio has had a significant impact on healthcare providers, with many filing lawsuits to challenge the legislation. The law has resulted in patients seeking care out of state, endangering the operations of several clinics, and creating additional burdens for patients seeking reproductive healthcare. The recent referendum and amendments have provided some relief to healthcare providers, restoring access to abortion services and removing certain restrictions.

Frequently asked questions