PoliticsRead Next
Investigative
Two more emergencies at Chicago-area abortion businesses
Cassy Cooke
·Spotlight Articles
Virginia judge allows challenge to state's pro-abortion amendment
A Virginia judge will hear a challenge to the state's pro-abortion constitutional amendment that is on the ballot this November, seeking to invalidate it if it passes.
A Virginia judge has set a hearing date for a challenge to the state's pro-abortion constitutional amendment, which will be voted on this Election Day.
The hearing is set for 10 days after the vote.
Filed by the Founding Freedom Law Center, the lawsuit seeks to invalidate the amendment if it passes, citing a procedural error.
Judge Jack Hurley of the Tazewell Circuit Court set a hearing date of November 13, 10 days after the election, during which the Founding Freedom Law Center (FFLC) will argue to invalidate the pro-abortion amendment if it passes, citing a procedural error.
Hurley's decision comes despite the Commonwealth's motion to prevent it.
According to the lawsuit:
While the Ballot Language could forthrightly explain that the Proposed Amendment would ‘establish’ or ‘declare’ a freedom for abortion, it instead falsely pretends the right already exists and is only intended to be ‘protect[ed].’ Undoubtedly, this presents a deceptive and biased word choice. The Ballot Language fails to disclose that Virginia voters are being asked to approve a near-absolute ‘fundamental right to reproductive freedom.’
The ballot question reads:
Should the Constitution of Virginia be amended to (i) protect the freedom to make personal decisions about prenatal care, childbirth, postpartum care, birth control, abortion, miscarriage management, and fertility care; (ii) protect doctors, nurses, and patients from being punished for these decisions; and (iii) allow for restrictions on access to abortion during the third trimester of pregnancy except when the patient’s health is at risk or the pregnancy cannot survive?
According to The Federalist, the amendment would make abortion a right throughout pregnancy for virtually any reason, including the loophole for a mother's mental health. It would also remove the parental notification requirement for a minor's abortion and relax licensure and safety requirements for abortionists. The lawsuit states the amendment would also “end or severely limit Virginia’s… ability to prohibit statutory rape... and... ability to regulate the emerging assisted reproductive technology industry.”
FFLS is asking that the court recognize that the ballot language violates the Virginia Constitution and is therefore invalid. The group says that procedures were not properly followed.
Copies of the ballot language should have been sent to the clerks of the circuit courts to be posted on the front doors of the courthouse for voter "awareness," "at least three months prior to the November 2025 general election."
But this was not done, said the lawsuit.
"We're not asking the court to decide one outcome over another. We’re asking that the question be posed to voters honestly, and then let the citizens decide. That hasn’t happened," said plaintiff Meagan Kade. "So we have no choice but to challenge what they’ve done."
The lawsuit seeks to prevent the certification of election results in favor of the ballot amendment and claims that the language “profoundly misleads by omission and misrepresentation” voters.
Live Action News is pro-life news and commentary from a pro-life perspective.
Our work is possible because of our donors. Please consider giving to further our work of changing hearts and minds on issues of life and human dignity.
Contact editor@liveaction.org for questions, corrections, or if you are seeking permission to reprint any Live Action News content.
Guest Articles: To submit a guest article to Live Action News, email editor@liveaction.org with an attached Word document of 800-1000 words. Please also attach any photos relevant to your submission if applicable. If your submission is accepted for publication, you will be notified within three weeks. Guest articles are not compensated (see our Open License Agreement). Thank you for your interest in Live Action News!
Cassy Cooke
·
Guest Column
Mary Strow
·
Politics
Cassy Cooke
·
Politics
Bridget Sielicki
·
Politics
Nancy Flanders
·
Pop Culture
Cassy Cooke
·
Investigative
Nancy Flanders
·
Analysis
Nancy Flanders
·
Pop Culture
Nancy Flanders
·Politics
Nancy Flanders
·
Investigative
Nancy Flanders
·Virginia judge allows challenge to state's pro-abortion amendment
A Virginia judge will hear a challenge to the state's pro-abortion constitutional amendment that is on the ballot this November, seeking to invalidate it if it passes.
A Virginia judge has set a hearing date for a challenge to the state's pro-abortion constitutional amendment, which will be voted on this Election Day.
The hearing is set for 10 days after the vote.
Filed by the Founding Freedom Law Center, the lawsuit seeks to invalidate the amendment if it passes, citing a procedural error.
Judge Jack Hurley of the Tazewell Circuit Court set a hearing date of November 13, 10 days after the election, during which the Founding Freedom Law Center (FFLC) will argue to invalidate the pro-abortion amendment if it passes, citing a procedural error.
Hurley's decision comes despite the Commonwealth's motion to prevent it.
According to the lawsuit:
While the Ballot Language could forthrightly explain that the Proposed Amendment would ‘establish’ or ‘declare’ a freedom for abortion, it instead falsely pretends the right already exists and is only intended to be ‘protect[ed].’ Undoubtedly, this presents a deceptive and biased word choice. The Ballot Language fails to disclose that Virginia voters are being asked to approve a near-absolute ‘fundamental right to reproductive freedom.’
The ballot question reads:
Should the Constitution of Virginia be amended to (i) protect the freedom to make personal decisions about prenatal care, childbirth, postpartum care, birth control, abortion, miscarriage management, and fertility care; (ii) protect doctors, nurses, and patients from being punished for these decisions; and (iii) allow for restrictions on access to abortion during the third trimester of pregnancy except when the patient’s health is at risk or the pregnancy cannot survive?
According to The Federalist, the amendment would make abortion a right throughout pregnancy for virtually any reason, including the loophole for a mother's mental health. It would also remove the parental notification requirement for a minor's abortion and relax licensure and safety requirements for abortionists. The lawsuit states the amendment would also “end or severely limit Virginia’s… ability to prohibit statutory rape... and... ability to regulate the emerging assisted reproductive technology industry.”
FFLS is asking that the court recognize that the ballot language violates the Virginia Constitution and is therefore invalid. The group says that procedures were not properly followed.
Copies of the ballot language should have been sent to the clerks of the circuit courts to be posted on the front doors of the courthouse for voter "awareness," "at least three months prior to the November 2025 general election."
But this was not done, said the lawsuit.
"We're not asking the court to decide one outcome over another. We’re asking that the question be posed to voters honestly, and then let the citizens decide. That hasn’t happened," said plaintiff Meagan Kade. "So we have no choice but to challenge what they’ve done."
The lawsuit seeks to prevent the certification of election results in favor of the ballot amendment and claims that the language “profoundly misleads by omission and misrepresentation” voters.
Live Action News is pro-life news and commentary from a pro-life perspective.
Our work is possible because of our donors. Please consider giving to further our work of changing hearts and minds on issues of life and human dignity.
Contact editor@liveaction.org for questions, corrections, or if you are seeking permission to reprint any Live Action News content.
Guest Articles: To submit a guest article to Live Action News, email editor@liveaction.org with an attached Word document of 800-1000 words. Please also attach any photos relevant to your submission if applicable. If your submission is accepted for publication, you will be notified within three weeks. Guest articles are not compensated (see our Open License Agreement). Thank you for your interest in Live Action News!
Cassy Cooke
·Guest Column
Mary Strow
·Politics
Cassy Cooke
·Politics
Bridget Sielicki
·Politics
Nancy Flanders
·Pop Culture
Cassy Cooke
·Investigative
Nancy Flanders
·Analysis
Nancy Flanders
·Pop Culture
Nancy Flanders
·Politics
Nancy Flanders
·Investigative
Nancy Flanders
·