Proposal 3: Michigan voters approve abortion rights initiative

Michigan voters approved enshrining the right to an abortion in the state constitution early Wednesday morning through a ballot initiative that knocks down a 1931 state law banning the procedure.

With 98% of estimated votes counted, election results showed Proposal 3 had won the support of 57% of Michigan voters who cast ballots in Tuesday's election.

The approved proposal creates a right to "reproductive freedom" in the state Constitution that now encompasses all decisions related to pregnancy and prohibits infringement except in the case of a "compelling state interest."

In the wake of a U.S. Supreme Court decision this summer that struck down a longstanding Roe v. Wade ruling that required abortion access nationwide, the initiative emerged as a contentious statewide issue at the ballot box Tuesday.

Anti-abortion opponents claim its approval wipes away decades of laws and restrictions mounted around legal abortion.

Darci McConnell, a spokeswoman for the Reproductive Freedom for All group that worked to pass the measure, issued a statement Wednesday saying Michigan is the first state in the country to defeat a statewide abortion ban.

“Today, the people of Michigan voted to restore the reproductive rights they’ve had for 50 years,” McConnell said. “Proposal 3’s passage marks a historic victory for abortion access in our state and in our country – and Michigan has paved the way for future efforts to restore the rights and protections of Roe v. Wade nationwide.”

More:Michigan election results: 2022 midterm statewide and local races

Early Wednesday morning, the American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan was claiming a historic victory that would make Michigan the first state in the nation to pass an affirmative citizen-led constitutional amendment that guarantees the right to abortion.

But Loren Khogali, ACLU of Michigan executive director, said there is more work to do.

"Together, we blazed a trail, making Michigan a national model of what other states can achieve across America. As we celebrate, we also know that there is more work to do. We must ensure that the fundamental right to reproductive freedom is equally accessible to all Michiganders," Khogali said in a statement.

ACLU officials say the new amendment will take effect on Dec. 23.

Several voters were eager to discuss their view of the proposal Tuesday after casting their ballots, including Jessica Naismith, 35, of Warren who said she voted against Proposal 3 because she’s against abortion and worried about the vague wording of the ballot language.

More:What happens next for Michigan abortion access after Prop 3 victory?

"I'm a firm believer that life starts at conception, and that's not something that needs to be messed with," Naismith said. "It's also just alarming ... just the wording of everything and having just a lot of ambiguity and not really knowing exactly what is meant by certain things. And I know that's on purpose."

Proposal 3 generated a record-setting $65 million in combined spending by the campaign committees supporting and opposing the measure.

Eighteen-year-old Hayden Edmonds stood in front of Midland's city hall sign so her mom Jennifer Edmonds could snap a photo to document her daughter’s first time voting this week.

The pair from Midland came out to vote early on Monday afternoon, after school got out for the day, to take part in the voting process together. For Hayden, a senior in high school, the most important thing driving her to vote was Proposal 3. 

“I mostly wanted to vote for saving our reproductive rights,” she said. 

As one of the few seniors in her friend group who is old enough to vote this year, and with the future of reproductive rights in Michigan on the ballot, Hayden said she felt a responsibility to vote for her friends, who will undoubtedly be impacted by the outcome as they enter adulthood.

“With reproductive rights, they told me ‘vote for us’ because they’re 17 or whatever,” she said. “I’m voting for all of them.”

The ballot initiative now adds language to the Michigan Constitution allowing for abortion up to fetal viability, which usually is considered to be around 24 weeks but is defined in the language as when a child can survive outside the womb without "extraordinary medical measures."

The Legislature is allowed to regulate abortion after fetal viability, with an exception for cases in which a health care professional deemed it necessary “to protect the life or physical or mental health of the pregnant individual.”

Proponents of Proposal 3 contend the measure restores what was lost when the Supreme Court struck down its Roe v. Wade ruling in June. That has sent the issue of abortion law back to Michigan, where a 1931 law outlawing abortion in all cases except to save a mother's life remains in legal limbo.

The 91-year-old statute, which has been dormant since the Roe decision in 1973, contains no exceptions for abortions in cases of rape, incest or medical prognosis that the baby would not survive birth.

For Michiganians who hold strong beliefs that life begins at conception and almost every pregnancy should be carried to term, they say the proposal and its broad language will wipe away decades of laws and restrictions mounted around Roe.

Legal experts expect the broad language of Proposal 3 to be the subject of future litigation over restrictions on terminating a pregnancy, regulations for abortion doctors and whether parents still have to be notified and consent to their minor female child having an abortion.

Some voters indicated they support more exemptions for abortion, such as in cases of rape and incest, but thought Proposal 3 goes too far into areas of sterilization.

Jennifer Zitkay, 45, of Northville, said she voted “no” on Proposal 3 because she thought the constitutional amendment language is too broad. But she’s worried that the 1931 ban could lead to the prosecution of physicians who perform abortions.

“They need to rewrite it,” Zitkay said. “It’s not a black-and-white issue. It’s a gray issue.”

jchambers@detroitnews.com

Staff writers Melissa Burke and Kayla Ruble and Politics Editor Chad Livengood contributed to this report.