In the November 2024 General election, one sentiment was made abundantly clear: women – young and older, conservative and liberal – voted overwhelmingly to protect their reproductive rights and that included access to safe abortions.
A record-breaking ten states had initiatives or measures on the ballot that allowed voters to have a direct say in the future of abortion access in their states. They all passed.
In Missouri, Amendment 3 (the Right to Reproductive Freedom Initiative) was passed in seven of the state’s 114 counties. St. Louis City, St. Louis County and St. Charles County accounted for 554,372 of the “yes” votes in the state, about 36% of the total. St. Louis County accounted for 338,486 votes, St. Charles County had about 120,000, the city accounted for almost 98,000 and Jefferson County represented about 60,000 “yes” votes.
Yet, in less than six months after the passage of Amendment 3, the Missouri House gave first-round approval to putting abortion rights back on the ballot. House Joint Resolution 73 (HJR 73), which passed the House in mid-April, is a measure that seeks to undo protections for reproductive rights.
“It protects women,” said Rep. Brian Seitz, a Republican from Branson. “What Amendment 3 took away from them, this legislation seeks to restore.”
Opponents of placing the initiative on the November 2026 general election ballot say it will give voters the right to amend the state constitution and put a near-total ban on most abortions. The resolution, which passed with a 94-50 vote, aims to eliminate access to abortion in all pregnancies except in cases of rape, incest, medical emergencies, or fetal anomalies.
Rep. Raychel Proudie, a Democrat from Ferguson who challenged the notion that voters were uninformed said so in contentious debates on the House floor:
“I don’t know who we think we are to assume that the people did not know what they were voting for on the same day they voted for us,” Proudie argued.
“You wanna overturn the will of the people because you didn’t like the result?” Rep. Michael Burton, a Democrat from Lakeshire, asked GOP legislators.
Bridgette Dunlap, in a commentary for the Missouri Independent, phrased it more personally:
“The implication is that I, like all women, need to be protected from my choices about my family, life and health care. I also need to be protected from the vote that I cast in November to take away the state’s authority to make those decisions for me,” Dunlap wrote. “This is because I, like the majority of Missouri voters, lack the intelligence to have understood what I was voting for on a widely and fiercely debated issue.”
Tori Schafer, the director of policy and campaigns at the ACLU of Missouri defined HJR 73 as another misleading way to reinstate a total abortion ban.
“This deceptive amendment is a Trojan horse to reinstate Missouri’s total abortion ban and all the medically unnecessary restrictions that made access to abortion unattainable prior to the passage of the Right to Reproductive Freedom Initiative last November,” Schafer said, adding: “Missourians want honesty, respect, and access to abortion but HJR 73 is the antithesis to all of these values.”
Meanwhile, while GOP legislators work to curtail reproductive rights next year, the Missouri Supreme Court just issued an order that basically results in a de facto abortion ban today.
Last week, the Court ordered a Jackson County judge to vacate her previous rulings that have allowed abortions to resume in the state. The order directed Jackson County Circuit Judge Jerri Zhang to “reevaluate” two of her rulings (in December and February respectively) that effectively allowed abortions to resume in the state. Leaders of the state’s Planned Parenthood chapters said the order “puts our state back under a de facto abortion ban.”
A trial had been set for January 2026, but Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey, a Republican, asked the Missouri Supreme Court for an order forcing Zhang to vacate her orders. On May 27, the Supreme Court ruled in the state’s favor.
The court’s decision, Bailey said in a press statement, was a “win for women and children.”
Proponents of abortion rights, however, say the court’s ruling also follows efforts in the Republican-controlled Legislature to repeal Amendment 3 at the ballot box.
Mallory Schwarz, director of Abortion Action Missouri, an abortion-rights group, said in a statement that Bailey and anti-abortion politicians have “weaponized our political system against Missourians.”
“Our coalition has dealt with setbacks like this before, and we know how to support people accessing care despite a hostile political environment,” Schwarz said. “This is not over,” she said, “and I’m confident that ultimately abortion care will continue in Missouri.”
Schwarz isn’t the only reproductive rights advocate who sees an upside to recent legislative pro-life activities. Yes, there may be another abortion ban on the ballot next year but there also might be a mid-term payback for right-leaning legislators who have defied the will of the people.
Sen. Tracy McCreery, D-St. Louis, speaking with the Missouri Independent, said, “If this was going to happen, attempting to undo the will of the voters relating to reproductive health care, I’m glad it’s happening now,” she said.
“It will allow grassroots people to hit the doors, educate people, that kind of thing. So, there definitely will be a campaign like no one has ever seen.”
Sylvester Brown Jr. is the Deaconess Foundation Community Advocacy Fellow.