Pro-lifers in Michigan fight “abortion rights” petition

Two members of a four-member Michigan canvassing board were visibly irritated to spend a half hour on a Wednesday morning in March talking about the word “the.” For the second time in two months, the Board of State Canvassers was considering approval of a petition submitted by Reproductive Freedom for All (RFFA), a coalition of abortion advocacy groups, to put a pro-abortion constitutional amendment on the November ballot. According to the lawyer who pointed out the error, the addition of that definite article violated the wording for petitions as outlined in state statute.

“This is a very simple fix,” lawyer Eric Doster said. “But a necessary one if this petition is to comply with the form requirements of Michigan Election Law.” (One line of the petition reads, “We, the undersigned … respectively petition for amendment to the constitution.” According to the statute, it should read “amendment to constitution.”) Doster represented Citizens to Support MI Women & Children, an alliance of state pro-life groups opposing the amendment.

Both pro-life and pro-abortion activists are focused on the Michigan petition as the country awaits a decision from the U.S. Supreme Court in the abortion law case Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health. If the justices determine states should have more freedom to protect babies from pre-viability abortions, a never-repealed Michigan law passed in 1846 and revised in 1931 would go back into effect. It punishes those who perform abortions and would make Michigan one of the safest states for unborn babies. In response, RFFA is pushing for the constitutional amendment to wipe out all existing pro-life state laws and establish a “right to reproductive freedom,” including childbirth and “abortion care.” If the petition succeeds, the state could become an abortion destination. Pro-life groups are working to preserve the law that predates Roe v. Wade, which legalized abortion nationwide.

The month before the March meeting, Doster pointed out that the text in a logo on the back of the petition did not match the required 8-point font outlined in the statute. The board agreed at the time and withheld approval, requiring RFFA to fix the font size. RFFA made the change before the Michigan Supreme Court later ruled it was unnecessary.

When Doster raised the wording error in March, board members criticized what they called “last-minute gamesmanship” but once more agreed: The abortion coalition would have to edit the petition again. This time, they granted approval to RFFA if the group would remove the extra definite article. “Whether I liked the wording or not … it doesn’t matter,” Doster said later. “The Legislature is the one that chose the statutory language, and [the coalition] added an extra word. And in this case the word was ‘the.’”

Since RFFA had already printed some petitions, the board’s decision puts into question the validity of any signatures affixed to petitions with “the” in place. RFFA has until July 11 to collect 425,059 signatures if it wants to get the amendment on the ballot in November.

“I think most people will be very surprised if they actually get that number of signatures. That’s a really heavy lift,” said Dan Jarvis, research and policy director for the Michigan Family Forum. Under Michigan law, groups have to collect signatures within 180 days of filing a petition, and those seeking a constitutional amendment have to file the petition with all the signatures by July 11. RFFA didn’t start collecting signatures until March 6, more than 50 days into the 180-day period. That was likely due in part to the delay caused by the logo font.

But Anna-Marie Visser, director of communications and education at Right to Life of Michigan, pointed out that the groups behind RFFA, including the American Civil Liberties Union and Planned Parenthood, are well-funded and will probably splurge to deploy canvassers: “So it wouldn’t be surprising for them to have all these signatures.” Visser said her group is focusing on educating Michiganders about the state’s existing pre-Roe law and, if the initiative makes it to the ballot, encouraging them not to vote for the amendment.

Even if the amendment effort fails, Michigan’s existing executive branch poses a problem to pro-life efforts. State Attorney General Dana Nessel has said she would not enforce the pre-Roe law, and abortion-friendly Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, a Democrat, won’t sign pro-life legislation. Jarvis said pro-life bills working their way through the Legislature (including some to ban fetal tissue research and others to prohibit abortions based on gender, race, and disability) will likely receive approval in both chambers only to die on Whitmer’s desk.

“Being that it’s an election year, the Legislature is glad to force her to do these two vetoes,” Jarvis said. At least three of the pro-life Republican candidates in the governor’s race this year have vocalized support for the state’s pre-Roe law. Visser said Right to Life of Michigan has not endorsed a gubernatorial candidate yet, although it has endorsed pro-life Tom Leonard for attorney general.

If Whitmer remains in office and the U.S. Supreme Court leaves Roe in effect, Jarvis said state pro-life groups would likely turn to a citizens’ initiative to pass incremental pro-life laws like protecting babies from targeted abortions. A citizens’ initiative that receives enough signatures would only require approval from the Legislature, meaning the governor wouldn’t be able to stop it.