1). “Kamala Harris Needs To Call Out Ballot Attacks: At tomorrow's debate, the VP should explain what 'back to the states' really means”, Sep 09, 2024, Jessica Valenti, Abortion, Every Day, at < https://jessica.substack.com/
2). “Judge rules Missouri ballot measure to protect abortion rights is invalid: Ruling, which may be reviewed by appellate court, could strike reproductive rights measure off November ballot”, Sat 7 Sep 2024, Maya Yang, The Guardian, at < https://www.theguardian.com/
3). “Missouri Supreme Court to decide fate of abortion amendment”, Sep 9, 2024, Natanya Friedheim & Fletcher Mantooth, Columbia Missourian, at < https://www.
4). “Report on 'X' (Formerly Twitter) of Florida State Agencies Working to Intimidate People who Signed the Petition to put Protection for Reproductive / Abortion Rights on the Florida State Ballot”, Sep 06, 2024, Jessica Valenti and Issac Menasche, 'X' formerly Twitter, at < https://x.com/JessicaValenti/
5). “ 'Unhinged and Undemocratic': Florida Cops Question Abortion Petition Signers : 'This is what state-authorized election interference looks like,' said the ACLU of Florida”, Sep 06, 2024, Jessica Corbett, Common Dreams, at < https://www.commondreams.org/
6), “Florida Uses Its Election Police to Intimidate Voters Who Signed Abortion Petitions”, Sep 06, 2024, Anon, All Voting is Local, at < https://allvotingislocal.org/
7). “Critics blast Florida’s Amendment 4 website as unlawful ‘taxpayer-funded political ad’: ‘This is what we would expect to see from an authoritarian regime,’ ACLU director says”, Sep 06, 2024, Skyler Swisher, Orlando Sentinel, at < https://www.orlandosentinel.
~~ recommended by dmorista ~~
Introduction by dmorista: As we get closer to the actual election day Rethug operatives are working hard to try to derail the two most important Abortion Reproductive Freedom ballot initiatives, namely those in Missouri and Florida. In Item 1)., “Kamala Harris Needs ….”, Valenti points out that in Missouri a district state judge, who is Rush Limbaugh's cousin no less, ruled that the Missouri ballot proposal 3 cannot appear on the ballot for some ridiculous reason. Item 2)., “Judge rules Missouri ballot measure ….”, and Item 3)., “Missouri Supreme Court ….”, discuss the issue at greater length. The Missouri State Supreme Court will rule on the case after a meeting today, Sept 10, 2024. The Court can just do nothing and the ballot proposal will be removed authmatically at 5 PM, not to appear on this year's election ballot.
In Florida the overtly fascist regime of Ron DeSantis is using the coercive power of the state to try to defeat Proposal 4 there. Three reports in Item 4)., “Report on 'X' ….”, Item 5)., “ 'Unhinged and Undemocratic': ….”, and Item 6). “Florida Uses Its Election Police ….”, all point out that agents from the Florida Election Police (founded by DeSantis to use against former felons who thought their voting rights had been restored) and other agencies are actually going door-to-door looking for people who signed the Proposal 4 petition, trying to find fraud. And Item 7)., “Critics blast Florida’s ….”, points out that: “The Florida Agency for Health Care Administration launched a webpage ….”, last Thursday promoting and propagating lies about Proposal 4.
Seeing as both ballot proposals were on a winning path these heavy handed operations are a last-ditch effort to thwart the ability of the population of those two important states to implement the reforms wanted by a large majority of their respective populations.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Kamala Harris Needs To Call Out Ballot Attacks
After months of work and hundreds of thousands of signatures, Missourians may not get to vote on abortion rights after all. On Friday, a judge—who just so happens to be Rush Limbaugh’s cousin—ruled that the pro-choice measure slated for November’s ballot was invalid. This comes just a few days after Florida Republicans launched a ‘fraud’ investigation into 36,000 already-verified signatures in support of Amendment 4, with police showing up to voters’ homes to question them.
Arkansas voters lost the chance to have a say on abortion rights two weeks ago, when GOP leaders forced the issue off the ballot using a paperwork technicality. And today, the same conservative legal group that stopped Missouri voters from weighing in on abortion will make a similar case in front of Nebraska’s Supreme Court.
This is what Republicans mean when they say abortion should be left up to the states: Not that voters should get to decide, but that GOP-led legislatures and judges should feel free to use every dirty trick in the book to make sure abortion stays banned. Republicans like democracy in their talking points, not on their ballots.
And that’s exactly what Vice President Kamala Harris should remind voters of at the presidential debate tomorrow, when Donald Trump inevitably claims that abortion is a states issue. In addition to pointing out that the disgraced former president would sign a national ban and enforce the Comstock Act, Harris has an opportunity to tie Trump to the avalanche of outrageous attacks on democracy.
Whether it’s Ohio’s top election official colluding with anti-abortion groups to draft a biased ballot summary, texts sent to Missouri voters claiming that pro-choice petitioners were trying to steal their identities, or anti-abortion activists pressuring South Dakota voters to rescind their support for a pro-choice petition while impersonating the secretary of state’s office—if Trump wants to brag he ‘gave abortion back to the states,’ let’s remind voters what that really means.
Republicans know that when voters have a say on abortion rights, abortion rights wins. And so they’ll do anything they can to keep voters as far away from abortion as possible—even if it means dismantling democracy in the process. It’s necessary to make that crystal clear to voters. Because while Harris has a massive advantage over Trump on abortion rights, his strategy of flip-flopping and feigning moderation has been working.
A recent poll from Navigator found that while battleground state voters understood that a Trump presidency would bring a bevy of conservative attacks with it, abortion rights was the one issue voters weren’t so sure would be on the line. Other polls show that voters don’t necessarily link Trump to attacks on abortion rights or blame him for the end of Roe. That’s because he’s been consistently inconsistent—confusing voters about where he stands, and relying on mainstream media coverage to further muddy the waters.
Harris has the chance tomorrow to remind Americans that the rhetoric doesn’t match the reality: It’s easy for Trump to punt abortion to the states when he knows that Republicans are making it impossible for voters to weigh in. And no matter what Trump says about abortion—or pretends to believe—it doesn’t change the fact that he’s enabled country-wide attacks that not only strip voters of their right to abortion, but their right to have a say.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Judge rules Missouri ballot measure to protect abortion rights is invalid
Ruling, which may be reviewed by appellate court, could strike reproductive rights measure off November ballot
A Missouri judge has ruled that a ballot measure asking voters whether abortion rights should be enshrined in the state constitution is invalid, potentially jeopardizing an election scheduled for November.
In a ruling issued on Friday, Cole county circuit judge Christopher Limbaugh said that the reproductive rights petition – also known as amendment 3 – led by Missourians for Constitutional Freedom did not comply with state law.
Abortion rights activists are hopeful an appellate court could reverse Limbaugh’s decision, but for now it remains unclear whether voters will be able to decide the issue as scheduled on 5 November, the same day as the presidential election.
According to Limbaugh, his decision came as a result of the campaign’s “failure to include any statute or provision that will be repealed, especially when many of these statues are apparent”. He went on to add: “The court must conclude that the defendant-intervenors’ initiative petition was insufficient.”
Limbaugh, however, also said he “recognizes the gravity of the unique issues involved in this case and the lack of direct precedent on point”. He ruled that he would wait until Tuesday for the amendment to be removed from the ballot, giving an appellate court time to decide whether or not to uphold his ruling.
Under amendment 3, Missourians would be granted the constitutional right to an abortion up until fetal viability, in addition to protections surrounding other reproductive healthcare needs such as birth control and in vitro fertilization. The amendment would also provide protections against criminal prosecution for individuals who assist with abortions.
Missouri was the first state to officially outlaw abortion after the US supreme court eliminated the federal abortion rights that had previously been established by the Roe v Wade decision.
A total of 14 states have now enacted near-total bans on the procedure, though a clear majority of Americans generally favor legalizing access to abortion. But with abortion almost completely banned in the state with very limited exceptions, Missouri is among the most restrictive when it comes to reproductive freedoms.
In response to Limbaugh’s ruling, Rachel Sweet, the campaign manager for Missourians for Constitutional Freedom, said that the group’s effort “remains unwavering in our mission to ensure Missourians have the right to vote on reproductive freedom”, the Kansas City Star reported.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Missouri Supreme Court to decide fate of abortion amendment
- By Natanya Friedheim and Fletcher Mantooth
The Missouri Supreme Court will hear a case Tuesday to decide whether Amendment 3, enshrining a right to abortion in the state constitution, will appear on the Nov. 5 ballot.
Cole County Circuit Judge Christopher Limbaugh ruled Friday evening that the proposed amendment should not be on the ballot because it violates state law by failing to list existing laws that would be repealed if the amendment passes.
Limbaugh, cousin of conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh, did not issue an injunction striking the amendment from the ballot to allow time for appeals courts to review his ruling.
If the Missouri Supreme Court agrees with Limbaugh, Amendment 3 will not appear on the Nov. 5 ballot. Tuesday is also the constitutional deadline to print absentee ballots, locking in place what will appear on ballots.
The Supreme Court has scheduled oral arguments for 8:30 a.m., and if there is no ruling by 5 p.m. Tuesday, the abortion amendment will not be included in the printed ballots, according to JoDonn Chaney, spokesperson for the Secretary of State’s office. It was unclear how quickly the court would issue a ruling.
Chaney added that under state law no changes can be made to the ballot after 5 p.m. Tuesday, meaning there would be no way to reintroduce the amendment to voters during this election cycle.
Missourians for Constitutional Freedom, the campaign behind the amendment, appealed Limbaugh’s Friday decision. The case bypassed a hearing by the Court of Appeals, which said the constitutional questions posed by the ruling were under the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.
If passed, Amendment 3 would legalize abortion up to the point of fetal viability. It would enable the government to restrict abortion after fetal viability unless “needed to protect the life or physical or mental health of the pregnant person” as determined by a “treating health care professional.”
Daily Headlines
Start your day with the latest news stories for Columbia.
The amendment also includes language shielding women and those performing or assisting in abortions from prosecution.
In an emergency motion filed Sunday afternoon, attorneys for Missourians for Constitutional Freedom asked the court to allow Amendment 3 to be placed on the ballot.
Missouri became the first state to ban abortion two years ago, minutes after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, the constitutional right to the procedure. The state permits limited exceptions to the ban for the health of the mother.
Friday’s case stems from a lawsuit against Missouri Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft by anti-abortion activists and lawmakers. The plaintiffs include anti-abortion activist Kathy Forck and shelter operator Marguerite Forrest, Sen. Mary Elizabeth Coleman, R-Arnold, and state Rep. Hannah Kelly, R-Mountain Grove. They said they are withholding comment until after Tuesday’s court hearing.
Abortion Action Missouri, Planned Parenthood’s Missouri affiliates and the American Civil Liberties Union of Missouri makeup the Missourians for Constitutional Freedom coalition. Attorney Loretta Haggard represents the campaign. In their brief on appeal, they argue that Limbaugh ignored judicial precedent in Missouri and expanded the scope and relief of the law he relied on in his decision.
Columbia Mayor Barbara Buffaloe has joined Kansas City Mayor Quinton Lucas, St. Louis Mayor Tishuara Jones and St. Louis County Executive Sam Page in a brief filed with the court seeking that it keep the amendment on the ballot.
Their argument is that the state constitution recognizes that “all political power is vested in and derived from the people,” and voters will be deprived of their constitutional rights if the amendment is removed.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Missouri Supreme Court to decide fate of abortion amendment
- By Natanya Friedheim and Fletcher Mantooth
The Missouri Supreme Court will hear a case Tuesday to decide whether Amendment 3, enshrining a right to abortion in the state constitution, will appear on the Nov. 5 ballot.
Cole County Circuit Judge Christopher Limbaugh ruled Friday evening that the proposed amendment should not be on the ballot because it violates state law by failing to list existing laws that would be repealed if the amendment passes.
Limbaugh, cousin of conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh, did not issue an injunction striking the amendment from the ballot to allow time for appeals courts to review his ruling.
If the Missouri Supreme Court agrees with Limbaugh, Amendment 3 will not appear on the Nov. 5 ballot. Tuesday is also the constitutional deadline to print absentee ballots, locking in place what will appear on ballots.
The Supreme Court has scheduled oral arguments for 8:30 a.m., and if there is no ruling by 5 p.m. Tuesday, the abortion amendment will not be included in the printed ballots, according to JoDonn Chaney, spokesperson for the Secretary of State’s office. It was unclear how quickly the court would issue a ruling.
Chaney added that under state law no changes can be made to the ballot after 5 p.m. Tuesday, meaning there would be no way to reintroduce the amendment to voters during this election cycle.
Missourians for Constitutional Freedom, the campaign behind the amendment, appealed Limbaugh’s Friday decision. The case bypassed a hearing by the Court of Appeals, which said the constitutional questions posed by the ruling were under the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.
If passed, Amendment 3 would legalize abortion up to the point of fetal viability. It would enable the government to restrict abortion after fetal viability unless “needed to protect the life or physical or mental health of the pregnant person” as determined by a “treating health care professional.”
Daily Headlines
Start your day with the latest news stories for Columbia.
The amendment also includes language shielding women and those performing or assisting in abortions from prosecution.
In an emergency motion filed Sunday afternoon, attorneys for Missourians for Constitutional Freedom asked the court to allow Amendment 3 to be placed on the ballot.
Missouri became the first state to ban abortion two years ago, minutes after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, the constitutional right to the procedure. The state permits limited exceptions to the ban for the health of the mother.
Friday’s case stems from a lawsuit against Missouri Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft by anti-abortion activists and lawmakers. The plaintiffs include anti-abortion activist Kathy Forck and shelter operator Marguerite Forrest, Sen. Mary Elizabeth Coleman, R-Arnold, and state Rep. Hannah Kelly, R-Mountain Grove. They said they are withholding comment until after Tuesday’s court hearing.
Abortion Action Missouri, Planned Parenthood’s Missouri affiliates and the American Civil Liberties Union of Missouri makeup the Missourians for Constitutional Freedom coalition. Attorney Loretta Haggard represents the campaign. In their brief on appeal, they argue that Limbaugh ignored judicial precedent in Missouri and expanded the scope and relief of the law he relied on in his decision.
Columbia Mayor Barbara Buffaloe has joined Kansas City Mayor Quinton Lucas, St. Louis Mayor Tishuara Jones and St. Louis County Executive Sam Page in a brief filed with the court seeking that it keep the amendment on the ballot.
Their argument is that the state constitution recognizes that “all political power is vested in and derived from the people,” and voters will be deprived of their constitutional rights if the amendment is removed.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"This is what state-authorized election interference looks like," said the ACLU of Florida.
Floridians and reproductive rights advocates responded with alarm on Friday to Tampa Bay Timesreporting that Florida law enforcement officers have been sent to the homes of multiple voters who signed a petition to get an abortion rights measure on the November ballot.
While Isaac Menasche told the newspaper that he isn't sure which agency the plainclothes officer who came to his home is with, fellow Lee County resident Becky Castellanos said Florida Department of Law Enforcement Officer Gary Negrinelli showed his badge and gave his card.
Both visits were about potential fraud related to the petition for Amendment 4, which would outlaw pre-viability abortion bans in Florida. Menasche was asked if he signed the petition, which he had. Negrinelli inquired about Castellanos' relative, who also signed the petition.
"This is pure voter intimidation, just like with the 'election police' in 2022. It's Gestapo tactics."
The officer inquiries appear "to be part of a broad—and unusual—effort by Gov. Ron DeSantis' administration to inspect thousands of already verified and validated petitions for Amendment 4 in the final two months before Election Day," the Times reported.
The Republican governor signed the state's six-week ban that would end if the ballot measure passes. He has also faced criticism for creating an Office of Election Crimes and Security, whose work has led to the arrest of Floridians who believed they were legally allowed to vote following the passage of a referendum that restored voting rights to many people with past felony convictions.
As the Times detailed Friday:
Since last week, DeSantis' secretary of state has ordered elections supervisors in at leastfour counties to send to Tallahassee at least 36,000 petition forms already deemed to have been signed by real people. Since the Timesfirst reported on this effort, Alachua and Broward counties have confirmed they also received requests from the state.
One 16-year supervisor said the request was unprecedented. The state did not ask for rejected petitions, which have been the basis for past fraud cases.
While Department of State spokesperson Ryan Ash said the agency has "uncovered evidence of illegal conduct with fraudulent petitions" and "we have a duty to seek justice for Florida citizens who were victimized," a representative for the coalition behind Amendment 4 criticized the state effort.
"This is very clearly a fishing expedition," ACLU of Florida spokesperson Keisha Mulfort, whose group is part of Floridians Protecting Freedom, told the Times. "It is more important than ever for Floridians to reject these authoritarian tactics and vote yes on Amendment 4 in November."
Promoting the report on social media, the ACLU of Florida added, "This is what state-authorized election interference looks like."
Democrats in the state were similarly critical. Florida state Rep. Anna V. Eskamani (D-42) shared a social media post in which Menasche described feeling "shaken" and "troubled" by the encounter with the officer.
"This is unhinged and undemocratic behavior being pushed by DeSantis and his cronies in an effort to continue our state's near total abortion ban," said Eskamani. "It's clear voter intimidation and plain corruption—continue to call it out and fight back. Vote @yes4florida and spread the word."
Responding to Eskamani, Pamela Castellana, chair of the Brevard Democratic Executive Committee, said: "This literally took my breath away. This is pure voter intimidation, just like with the 'election police' in 2022. It's Gestapo tactics. If you live in Florida you know. If you don't—please help me get the word out. Stop authoritarianism."
Journalist Jessica Valenti argued Friday that Republicans "don't care that voters want abortion rights restored—and if they need to dismantle democracy to keep it banned, so be it."
— (@)
"We've seen lots of Republican attacks on pro-choice ballot measures—but what makes this one especially insidious is that it's trying to gaslight Americans into thinking that voters don't really want abortion rights restored, but that the overwhelming support is fabricated," she added.
In addition to raising concerns about the fraud allegations, Amendment 4 supporters are outraged over the Florida Agency for Health Care Administration on Thursday launching a webpage claiming that the ballot measure "threatens women's safety."
Florida Senate Minority Leader Lauren Book (D-35) pledged that she is looking into "appropriate legal action," while Bacardi Jackson, executive director of the ACLU of Florida, said in a statement that "this kind of propaganda issued by the state, using taxpayer money and operating outside of the political process, sets a dangerous precedent."
"This is what we would expect to see from an authoritarian regime," added Jackson, "not in the so-called 'Free State of Florida.'"
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Florida Uses Its Election Police to Intimidate Voters Who Signed Abortion Petitions
September 6, 2024
TALLAHASSEE — All Voting is Local Action’s Florida State Director Brad Ashwell issued the following statement in response to the news Friday that Florida investigators are going door-to-door to question voters on whether or not they signed a petition supporting Amendment 4, which would offer abortion protections for Floridians:
“Gov. DeSantis is using his election police to intimidate voters who dare to have beliefs that differ from his. This opens the door towards making voters and all Floridians feel unsafe for voicing their constitutionally protected opinions on important issues like abortion.
“It’s been clear from day one that the purpose of the election police was to harass voters who don’t have the same viewpoints as the governor. By going after a petition for Amendment 4, which is already on the ballot, Gov. DeSantis is undermining the will of voters and stomping over their democratic freedoms for his own political gain.”
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Critics blast Florida’s Amendment 4 website as unlawful ‘taxpayer-funded political ad’
‘This is what we would expect to see from an authoritarian regime,’ ACLU director says
A state website targeting an abortion rights ballot initiative is under fire from Democrats and advocacy groups who accuse Florida’s Republican leaders of pushing an unlawful “taxpayer-funded political ad.”
The Florida Agency for Health Care Administration launched a webpage on Thursday that blasts Amendment 4, proclaiming that existing Florida law “protects women” while the initiative enshrining abortion rights into the state constitution “threatens women’s safety.”
The top of the webpage states, “Florida is protecting life/ Don’t let the fearmongers lie to you.” Lower down, it reads, “We must keep Florida from becoming an abortion tourism destination state.”
Gov. Ron DeSantis, who oversees the health care agency, is one of the leading opponents of Amendment 4 and is campaigning actively against it. But state officials rejected the notion they are improperly mixing politics and government business, billing the webpage instead as an educational “transparency” resource aimed at setting the record straight.
The American Civil Liberties Union of Florida, along with Democrats, disagreed, saying the approach runs afoul of a law barring the use of state resources for political campaigning.
“This kind of propaganda issued by the state, using taxpayer money and operating outside of the political process sets a dangerous precedent,” Bacardi Jackson, executive director of the ACLU of Florida, said in a statement. “This is what we would expect to see from an authoritarian regime, not in the so-called ‘Free State of Florida.’”
Florida law stipulates that “no employee in the career service” shall “use the authority of his or her position to secure support for, or oppose, any candidate, party, or issue in a partisan election or affect the results thereof.”
Florida Senate Democratic Leader Lauren Book said in a social media post she is looking into “appropriate legal action,” adding that Florida voters should be “free from government interference and propaganda.”
State officials defended the webpage in an unsigned statement and accused the media of not covering the issue correctly.
“Part of the Agency’s mission is to provide information and transparency to Floridians about the quality of care they receive,” AHCA’s statement read. “Our new transparency page serves to educate Floridians on the state’s current abortion law, and provide information on the impacts of a proposed policy change on the ballot in November.”
Agency officials did not respond to inquiries into how much money was spent on the webpage and whether state employees or an outside group were assigned to work on it.
In a social media post, Jason Weida, AHCA’s secretary, said the page was launched “to combat the lies and disinformation surrounding Florida’s abortion laws.” The website includes the state seal, along with AHCA’s logo. AHCA is responsible for administrating Florida’s Medicaid program and regulating the state’s health care providers.
If approved by at least 60% of Florida voters in November, Amendment 4 would undo the state’s six-week abortion ban signed into law by Gov. Ron DeSantis this past year.
The ballot initiative’s summary states in part that, “No law shall prohibit, penalize, delay, or restrict abortion before viability or when necessary to protect the patient’s health, as determined by the patient’s healthcare provider.”
AHCA’s webpage warns that Amendment 4 could result in the Florida Legislature losing the ability to enact “common-sense health care regulations” for abortion, potentially putting women in danger.
Florida currently bans most abortions after six weeks of pregnancy. The law has exceptions for medical emergencies, including if the women’s life is threatened. Abortions for pregnancies involving rape or incest are allowed up until 15 weeks of pregnancy if a woman shows documentation, such as a police report.
Amendment 4 supporters say Florida’s restrictive abortion ban has blocked women from receiving needed care and interfered with their freedom to make their own health decisions. They deny that protecting abortion rights would put women in danger.
If the webpage is challenged legally, state officials could mount a defense because the content does not explicitly tell Floridians to vote against Amendment 4, although it is implicit in its opposition, said Joshua Scacco, a professor at the University of South Florida who studies political messaging.
The courts would also likely consider how the website was funded and whether state employees were assigned to work on it, he said.
“What you are seeing is state government pushing the envelope into this gray area of what is governing and what is campaigning,” Scacco said, adding that both Republicans and Democrats have blurred the lines.
Bob Jarvis, a law professor at Nova Southeastern University, agreed the law isn’t clear cut.
“On the one hand, state agencies are allowed to use public funds to educate the public about ballot issues,” he said. “On the other hand, they are not permitted to use public funds to take sides. Thus, while pro-choice advocates will view the website as taking sides, pro-life advocates will see it as merely educating.”
Ben Wilcox, research director for the government watchdog group Integrity Florida, said he was “gobsmacked” by the language used on the page, which he thinks breaks the wall that is supposed to exist between governing and campaigning.
“It is up to the voters to decide whether something should be in our constitution,” he said. “It’s not the government’s responsibility.”
No comments:
Post a Comment