Current:Home > StocksArkansas Supreme Court upholds rejection of abortion rights petitions, blocking ballot measure -NextFrontier Finance
Arkansas Supreme Court upholds rejection of abortion rights petitions, blocking ballot measure
View
Date:2025-04-20 02:58:21
LITTLE ROCK, Ark. (AP) — The Arkansas Supreme Court upheld the state’s rejection of signature petitions for an abortion rights ballot initiative on Thursday, keeping the proposal from going before voters in November.
The ruling dashed the hopes of organizers, who submitted the petitions, of getting the constitutional amendment measure on the ballot in the predominantly Republican state, where many top leaders tout their opposition to abortion.
Election officials said Arkansans for Limited Government, the group behind the measure, did not properly submit documentation regarding the signature gatherers it hired. The group disputed that assertion and argued it should have been given more time to provide any additional documents needed.
“We find that the Secretary correctly refused to count the signatures collected by paid canvassers because the sponsor failed to file the paid canvasser training certification,” the court said in a 4-3 ruling.
Following the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2022 decision removing the nationwide right to abortion, there has been a push to have voters decide the matter state by state.
Arkansas currently bans abortion at any time during a pregnancy, unless the woman’s life is endangered due to a medical emergency.
The proposed amendment would have prohibited laws banning abortion in the first 20 weeks of gestation and allowed the procedure later on in cases of rape, incest, threats to the woman’s health or life, or if the fetus would be unlikely to survive birth. It would not have created a constitutional right to abortion.
The ballot proposal lacked support from national abortion rights groups such as Planned Parenthood because it would still have allowed abortion to be banned after 20 weeks, which is earlier than other states where it remains legal.
Had they all been verified, the more than 101,000 signatures, submitted on the state’s July 5 deadline, would have been enough to qualify for the ballot. The threshold was 90,704 signatures from registered voters, and from a minimum of 50 counties.
In a earlier filing with the court, election officials said that 87,675 of the signatures submitted were collected by volunteers with the campaign. Election officials said it could not determine whether 912 of the signatures came from volunteer or paid canvassers.
Arkansans for Limited Government and election officials disagreed over whether the petitions complied with a 2013 state law requiring campaigns to submit statements identifying each paid canvasser by name and confirming that rules for gathering signatures were explained to them.
Supporters of the measure said they followed the law with their documentation, including affidavits identifying each paid gatherer. They have also argued the abortion petitions are being handled differently than other initiative campaigns this year, pointing to similar filings by two other groups.
State records show that the abortion campaign did submit, on June 27, a signed affidavit including a list of paid canvassers and a statement saying the petition rules had been explained to them. Moreover, the July 5 submission included affidavits from each paid worker acknowledging that the group provided them with all the rules and regulations required by law.
The state argued in court that this documentation did not comply because it was not signed by someone with the canvassing company rather than the initiative campaign itself. The state said the statement also needed to be submitted alongside the petitions.
veryGood! (831)
Related
- Trump's 'stop
- Ohio Gov. DeWine asks Biden for major disaster declaration for East Palestine after train derailment
- Game-Winning Father's Day Gift Ideas for the Sports Fan Dad
- Pink’s Daughter Willow Singing With Her Onstage Is True Love
- The Super Bowl could end in a 'three
- What’s Behind Big Oil’s Promises of Emissions Cuts? Lots of Wiggle Room.
- Judge limits Biden administration's contact with social media companies
- The EPA Proposes a Ban on HFC-23, the Most Potent Greenhouse Gas Among Hydrofluorocarbons, by October 2022
- Rolling Loud 2024: Lineup, how to stream the world's largest hip hop music festival
- YouTuber Grace Helbig reveals breast cancer diagnosis: It's very surreal
Ranking
- New Zealand official reverses visa refusal for US conservative influencer Candace Owens
- Kendall Jenner and Bad Bunny’s Matching Moment Is So Good
- Kim Zolciak Won't Be Tardy to Drop Biermann From Her Instagram Name
- Multiple shark attacks reported off New York shores; 50 sharks spotted at one beach
- 2 killed, 3 injured in shooting at makeshift club in Houston
- China Ramps Up Coal Power Again, Despite Pressure to Cut Emissions
- Proof Tom Holland Is Marveling Over Photos of Girlfriend Zendaya Online
- IRS warns of new tax refund scam
Recommendation
San Francisco names street for Associated Press photographer who captured the iconic Iwo Jima photo
Trees Fell Faster in the Years Since Companies and Governments Promised to Stop Cutting Them Down
Man fishing with his son drowns after rescuing 2 other children swimming at Pennsylvania state park
The BET Award Nominations 2023 Are Finally Here: See the Full List
Dick Vitale announces he is cancer free: 'Santa Claus came early'
A New Book Feeds Climate Doubters, but Scientists Say the Conclusions are Misleading and Out of Date
These Cities Want to Ban Natural Gas. But Would It Be Legal?
Massachusetts Can Legally Limit CO2 Emissions from Power Plants, Court Rules