Abortion rights groups sue Missouri over 'blatantly incorrect' ballot issue descriptions

PO1 William "Chip" Nagel
"A group seeking to scale back Missouri’s ban on most abortions is suing over how Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft described the measures and how much state Auditor Scott Fitzpatrick estimated they could cost.

The Missouri Women and Family Research Fund filed six initiatives earlier this year that would allow for abortions in the case of rape, incest, fatal fetal abnormalities or risks to health or safety of a mother. Several also would allow abortions up to 12 weeks of pregnancy.

A lawsuit filed on Thursday from fund Executive Director Jamie Corley contends that the way Ashcroft summarized the initiatives “are intentionally argumentative, insufficient, and unfair.”

“Secretary Ashcroft described certain provisions of the initiative petitions in antagonistic and blatantly incorrect terms likely to prejudice voters against the measures,” the lawsuit states. “The law requires Missourians be presented with unbiased summaries of these petitions, which seek nothing more than to establish the right for Missouri women to make reproductive health care decisions for themselves.”

Corley said in a statement that voters "should heed these political moves as a canary in the coal mine for the lengths some politicians will take to keep the government involved in a woman — or child’s — pregnancy, even if that pregnancy is a result of rape."

“When we go to court it provides an opportunity to remind Missourians that we have the most extreme, punitive abortion law in the country, and it’s clear some politicians will do whatever they can to see that it stays on the books,” Corley said.

Corley’s suit specifically takes issue with language stating that some of the initiatives “nullify Missouri laws protecting the right to life.” The suit says the initiatives would not repeal Missouri laws relating to abortion — only ones that conflict with the provisions of the initiative petitions.

“The first bullet point is also unfair and insufficient because it uses the phrase 'protecting the right to life,'” the suit says. “That phrase is politically charged and will bias individuals against [the initiative petitions].”

Additionally, the lawsuit takes issue with language saying some versions of the initiative “allow abortions at any age without government interference from conception to live birth” and “prohibit abortions regarding an alleged rape or sexual assault unless reported to a specific crisis hotline.”"...