Las Vegas Sun

March 29, 2024

Courts:

Judge dismisses challenge to ‘personhood’ initiative

Updated Monday, Dec. 19, 2011 | 3:52 p.m.

CARSON CITY -- A district judge has ruled that supporters can move forward in collecting signatures on an initiative petition to ban abortion in Nevada. District Judge James E. Wilson Jr. denied the petition of the measure's opponents, who sought to declare the proposed constitution amendment illegal.

To placed the measure on the November ballot, the Nevada Prolife Coalition must gather the signatures of 72,352 registered voters, including at least 18,088 from each of the state's four congressional districts.

The so-called personhood initiative has already become an election-year issue, with Democrats seeking to use it as a wedge issue to peel pro-life voters away from conservative Republicans who don't support a blanket ban on abortion. Democrats have also used the proposed initiative in an attempt to draw attention to the evolving positions of some top Republicans on the issue of abortion.

Not all anti-abortion advocates support the personhood initiative, arguing it may do more to hurt their efforts than help.

The group has not collected any signatures. The deadline for submitting them to the Secretary of State's office is June 19.

Elisa Cafferata, president of the Nevada Advocates for Planned Parenthood Affiliates, said she was disappointed by the court's ruling. She intends to consult with her attorneys before deciding whether to appeal. She maintained the language in the petition was unclear.

Six individuals represented by the American Civil Liberties Union filed suit, claiming Nevada Prolife Coalition's petition was invalid because it dealt more than one subject and its language was unclear.

But Judge Wilson said in a decision today that the prolife initiative "may have effects in various areas including common birth control methods, the treatment of ectopic pregnancy, in vitro fertilization treatment and stem cell research. But those effects flow from a single subject and purpose, prohibiting the taking of prenatal life."

Wilson also rejected the argument that the petition was unclear. There was a mix-up in the submission of the petition and the judge ordered the Secretary of State to substitute the first description on the initiative to correct the problem.

The proposed constitutional amendment would have to be approved in two elections before it could become law.

It would amend the constitution adding that the "unalienable right to life of every prenatal person is protected." It says "The intentional taking of a prenatal person's life should never be allowed in this state. For the purpose of this section only, the term prenatal person‚ includes every human being at all stages of biological development before birth."

In his decision, Wilson said a court must make every effort to sustain and preserve the people's constitutional right to amend their constitution through the initiative process.

He said the group challenging the petition "bears the burden of demonstrating that the measure is clearly invalid."

Join the Discussion:

Check this out for a full explanation of our conversion to the LiveFyre commenting system and instructions on how to sign up for an account.

Full comments policy