2014 Tennessee Amendment 1

Last updated

Amendment 1
Flag of Tennessee.svg
November 4, 2014 (2014-11-04)

Shall Article I, of the Constitution of Tennessee be amended by adding the following language as a new, appropriately designated section: Nothing in this Constitution secures or protects a right to abortion or requires the funding of an abortion. The people retain the right through their elected state representatives and state senators to enact, amend, or repeal statutes regarding abortion, including, but not limited to, circumstances of pregnancy resulting from rape or incest or when necessary to save the life of the mother.
Results
Choice
Votes %
Check-71-128-204-brightblue.svgYes729,16352.60%
Light brown x.svgNo657,19247.40%
Valid votes1,386,355100.00%
Invalid or blank votes00.00%
Total votes1,386,355100.00%

Tennessee Constitutional Amendment 1 results 2014.svg
2014 Tennessee Amendment 1 Results by CD.svg
Yes
  70–80%
  60–70%
  50–60%

No

  70–80%
  60–70%
  50–60%
Source: Tennessee Secretary of State [1]

The Tennessee Constitutional Amendment: 1, commonly known as Amendment 1 or the No State Constitutional Right to Abortion and Legislative Power to Regulate Abortion Amendment, is an approved legislatively referred constitutional amendment to the Constitution of Tennessee that appeared on the ballot on November 4, 2014. [2] The amendment would ensure that Constitution of Tennessee, would not support, fund, or protect the right to an abortion.

Contents

Precinct results 2014 Tennessee Amendment 1 Results by Precinct.jpg
Precinct results

Content

The amendment added the following to Article I of the Constitution of Tennessee:

"Nothing in this Constitution secures or protects a right to abortion or requires the funding of an abortion. The people retain the right through their elected state representatives and state senators to enact, amend, or repeal statutes regarding abortion, including, but not limited to, circumstances of pregnancy resulting from rape or incest or when necessary to save the life of the mother." [3]

The following is the official text from the Tennessee Secretary of State, that appeared on the ballot:

"Shall Article I, of the Constitution of Tennessee be amended by adding the following language as a new, appropriately designated section?

Nothing in this Constitution secures or protects a right to abortion or requires the funding of an abortion. The people retain the right through their elected state representatives and state senators to enact, amend, or repeal statutes regarding abortion, including, but not limited to, circumstances of pregnancy resulting from rape or incest or when necessary to save the life of the mother."

A vote for Amendment 1 supports ensuring the Constitution of Tennessee does not uphold most abortions and supporting the General Assembly having power to pass laws regarding the regulation of abortion.

A vote against Amendment 1 opposes this amendment and restricts the General Assembly from creating legislation or passing laws that regulate abortion.

Supporters

Governor Bill Haslam, was one of the well-known supporters of Amendment 1 Governor Bill Haslam (2012).jpg
Governor Bill Haslam, was one of the well-known supporters of Amendment 1

Officials and politicians, mainly Republicans, voiced their opposition for the amendment, both during the vote on it in the General Assembly and when it appeared on the ballot. Pro-life organizations, such as Tennessee Right to Life and Americans United for Life, also voiced strong support for the amendment. Leslie Hunse, the education director for Tennessee Right to Life, said, "We want our constitution to go back to neutral on the issue of abortion, so we can pass some common sense regulations to protect mothers and children." [4]

"Yes on 1" was the main organization supporting the campaign, with signs and television advertisements.

Opponents

Vote NO on One Tennessee led the campaign in opposition to the ballot measure. Representatives, senators, and some faith leaders opposed the amendment. The ACLU and Planned Parenthood, among other large organizations, also opposed the amendment, and contributed large campaign contributions up to the election. Planned Parenthood organizations nationwide, spent a total of nearly $2 million, in campaign contributions opposing Amendment 1, while the ACLU donated $135,000 in opposition. [2]

State Senator Roy Herron said, "Their pitch is that this would make the constitution neutral on abortion. How would they like the Constitution neutral on the Second Amendment so legislators could outlaw the right to bear arms? How about making the First Amendment neutral?"

Nashville-based, statewide newspaper, The Tennessean, also opposed this amendment, stating, "Making any type of law immune from a court challenge is shortsighted, prejudicial — and in the case of what should be a woman's own decision about her health — downright dangerous. For those reasons, The Tennessean recommends a vote of no on Amendment 1."

Notable endorsements

Yes on 1
State officials
Former state legislators
  • David Fowler (R), former member of the Tennessee Senate, from the 11th district
Organizations
  • Tennessee Right to Life
Notable Individuals
Vote NO on One Tennessee
State officials
Former state legislators
  • Roy Herron (D), former member of the Tennessee Senate, from the 24th district
Organizations

Polling

Poll sourceDate(s)

administered

Sample

size

Margin

of error

For

Amendment 1

Against

Amendment 1

Undecided
Middle Tennessee State University [5] October 22–26, 2014600± 4.0%39%32%29%
Remington Research [6] September 24–25, 2014600± 4.0%50%22%28%
Vanderbilt University [7] April 28-May 18, 20141,505± 3.4%23%71%6%

Lawsuit regarding counting of votes

George et al. v. Haslam et al.

In 2014, Tracey E. George, along with 4 others, filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for Middle Tennessee, alleging that the state's method of counting votes for the amendment was unconstitutional. They argued that the state violated the Tennessee Constitution by not ensuring that voters who supported the amendment also voted in the gubernatorial race. The state's defense claimed their approach was based on constitutional interpretation and historical practice. The court denied the state's request to dismiss the case. In response, state attorneys filed a counter-suit in a Williamson County court, asserting that their vote-counting method aligned with the state constitution. [8] [9]

Judge Kevin H. Sharp Kevin Sharp.jpg
Judge Kevin H. Sharp

On April 21, 2016, Williamson County Judge Michael Binkley sided with the state, allowing votes from individuals who didn't participate in the gubernatorial race to be counted for the amendment. However, the next day, federal judge Kevin H. Sharp ruled against the state in the original federal lawsuit. He stated that only votes from individuals who also voted for gubernatorial candidates should be considered valid for the amendment. Judge Sharp emphasized the inequality in weighing votes, where those who voted against Amendment 1 and for governor were not given the same significance as those who voted in favor of the amendment but did not participate in the governor's race. Consequently, Sharp ordered the state to recount the 2014 election results. [10] [11]

On April 26, 2016, Tennessee Attorney General Herbert Slatery appealed Sharp's ruling to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, asserting that the matter of determining the required vote to amend the Tennessee Constitution should be decided by state law and Tennessee courts. State attorneys requested a postponement of the recount until the appeal was resolved, citing the need to avoid additional strain on election officials preparing for upcoming elections. On January 9, 2018, the Sixth Circuit, in a unanimous decision, stated that the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate how the state had diluted their votes, emphasizing that federal intervention in a lawful state election process was unwarranted. The court concluded that the controversy surrounding the 2014 approval of Amendment 1 needed resolution. The plaintiffs then appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which declined to hear the case on October 1, 2018. [12] [13]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution</span> 1868 amendment addressing citizenship rights and civil and political liberties

The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution was adopted on July 9, 1868, as one of the Reconstruction Amendments. Usually considered one of the most consequential amendments, it addresses citizenship rights and equal protection under the law and was proposed in response to issues related to formerly enslaved Americans following the American Civil War. The amendment was bitterly contested, particularly by the states of the defeated Confederacy, which were forced to ratify it in order to regain representation in Congress. The amendment, particularly its first section, is one of the most litigated parts of the Constitution, forming the basis for landmark Supreme Court decisions such as Brown v. Board of Education (1954) regarding racial segregation, Loving v. Virginia (1967) regarding interracial marriage, Roe v. Wade (1973) regarding abortion, Bush v. Gore (2000) regarding the 2000 presidential election, Obergefell v. Hodges (2015) regarding same-sex marriage, and Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard (2023) regarding race-based college admissions. The amendment limits the actions of all state and local officials, and also those acting on behalf of such officials.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Constitution of Tennessee</span> Basic governing document of the U.S. state of Tennessee

The Constitution of the State of Tennessee defines the form, structure, activities, character, and fundamental rules of the U.S. State of Tennessee.

The Tennessee Marriage Protection Amendment, also known as Tennessee Amendment 1 of 2006, is a state constitutional amendment banning same-sex unions. The referendum was approved by 81% of voters. It specified that only a marriage between a man and a woman could be legally recognized in the state of Tennessee. This prohibited same-sex marriages within the state, reinforcing previously existing statutes to the same effect until it was overturned by the Obergefell v. Hodges ruling in June 2015.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">1998 Alaska Measure 2</span> Referendum banning same-sex marriage

Ballot Measure 2 of 1998 is a ballot measure, since ruled unconstitutional, that added an amendment to the Alaska Constitution that prohibited the recognition of same-sex marriage in Alaska. The Ballot measure was sparked by the lawsuit filed by Jay Brause and Gene Dugan, after the two men were denied a marriage license by the Alaska Bureau of Vital Statistics. In Brause v. Bureau of Vital Statistics, 1998 WL 88743, the Alaska Superior Court ruled that the state needed compelling reason to deny marriage licenses to same-sex couples and ordered a trial on the question. In response, the Alaska Legislature immediately proposed and passed Resolution 42, which became what is now known as Ballot Measure 2. Ballot Measure 2 passed via public referendum on November 3, 1998, with 68% of voters supporting and 32% opposing. The Bause case was dismissed following the passage of the ballot measure.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Abortion law in the United States by state</span>

The legality of abortion in the United States and the various restrictions imposed on the procedure vary significantly, depending on the laws of each state or other jurisdiction, although there is no uniform federal law. Some states prohibit abortion at all stages of pregnancy, with few exceptions; others permit it up to a certain point in a woman's pregnancy, while some allow abortion throughout a woman's pregnancy. In states where abortion is legal, several classes of restrictions on the procedure may exist, such as parental consent or notification laws, requirements that patients be shown an ultrasound before obtaining an abortion, mandatory waiting periods, and counseling requirements.

Abortion in Kansas is legal. Kansas law allows for an abortion up to 20 weeks post-fertilization. After that point, only in cases of life or severely compromised physical health may an abortion be performed, with this limit set on the belief that a fetus can feel pain after that point in the pregnancy. In July 2024, the Kansas Supreme Court struck down two abortion restrictions.

Abortion in Michigan is legal throughout pregnancy. A state constitutional amendment to explicitly guarantee abortion rights was placed on the ballot in 2022 as Michigan Proposal 22–3; it passed with 57 percent of the vote, adding the right to abortion and contraceptive use to the Michigan Constitution. The amendment largely prevents the regulation of abortion before fetal viability, unless said regulations are to protect the individual seeking an abortion, and it also makes it unconstitutional to make laws restricting abortions which would protect the life and health, physical and/or mental, of the pregnant individual seeking abortion.

Abortion in Tennessee is illegal from fertilization, except to "prevent the death of the pregnant woman or to prevent serious risk of substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function of the pregnant woman".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2018 West Virginia elections</span>

West Virginia held elections on November 6, 2018. Elections for the United States House and Senate were held as well as two high-profile ballot measures. These elections were held concurrently with other elections nationwide. Primary elections were held on May 8, 2018.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2022 Michigan elections</span>

The 2022 Michigan elections were held on Tuesday, November 8, 2022, throughout Michigan. The Democratic Party made historic gains, taking full control of state government for the first time since 1983. Democrats won control of the Michigan House of Representatives for the first time since 2008, and the Michigan Senate for the first time since 1984. Additionally, incumbent Democratic governor Gretchen Whitmer won reelection by a comfortable margin, with Democrats sweeping every statewide office. Furthermore, the Democrats maintained control of seven seats in the U.S. House of Representatives, while the Republican Party took a net loss of one seat. The elections in Michigan were widely characterized as a "blue wave".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2022 Kansas abortion referendum</span>

The 2022 Kansas abortion referendum was a rejected legislatively referred constitutional amendment to the Kansas Constitution that appeared on the ballot on August 2, 2022, alongside primary elections for statewide offices, with early voting from July 13. If enacted, the amendment would have declared that the Kansas Constitution does not guarantee a right to abortion, giving the Kansas state government power to prosecute individuals involved in abortions, and further declared that the Kansas government is not required to fund abortions.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2022 California Proposition 1</span> Successful referendum on enshrining reproductive rights in the state constitution

Proposition 1, titled Constitutional Right to Reproductive Freedom and initially known as Senate Constitutional Amendment 10 (SCA 10), was a California ballot proposition and state constitutional amendment that was voted on in the 2022 general election on November 8. Passing with more than two-thirds of the vote, the proposition amended the Constitution of California to explicitly grant the right to an abortion and contraceptives, making California among the first states in the nation to codify the right. The decision to propose the codification of abortion rights in the state constitution was precipitated in May 2022 by Politico's publishing of a leaked draft opinion showing the United States Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization. The decision reversed judicial precedent that previously held that the United States Constitution protected the right to an abortion.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2022 Michigan Proposal 3</span>

2022 Michigan Proposal 3, the Right to Reproductive Freedom Initiative, also known as Reproductive Freedom for All, was a citizen-initiated proposed constitutional amendment in the state of Michigan, which was voted on as part of the 2022 Michigan elections. The amendment, which passed, codified reproductive rights, including access to abortion, in the Constitution of Michigan.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2022 Kentucky Amendment 2</span>

Kentucky Amendment 2 was a rejected legislatively referred constitutional amendment to the Kentucky Constitution, which was voted on as part of the 2022 elections. If enacted, the amendment would have declared that nothing in the Kentucky Constitution could be construed to protect a right to an abortion or public funding of an abortion.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">November 2023 Ohio Issue 1</span> Referendum to enshrine abortion and contraception in the state constitution

The 2023 Ohio reproductive rights initiative, officially titled "The Right to Reproductive Freedom with Protections for Health and Safety" and listed on the ballot as Issue 1, was a citizen-initiated constitutional amendment adopted on November 7, 2023, by a majority (56.8%) of voters. It codified reproductive rights in the Ohio Constitution, including contraception, fertility treatment, miscarriage care, and abortion up to the point of fetal viability, restoring Roe v. Wade-era access to abortion in Ohio.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2014 Tennessee elections</span>

Tennessee state elections in 2014 were held on Tuesday, November 4, 2014. Primary elections for the United States Senate, United States House of Representatives, governorship, Tennessee Senate, and Tennessee House of Representatives, as well as various judicial retention elections, including elections for three Tennessee Supreme Court justices, were held on August 7, 2014. There were also four constitutional amendments to the Constitution of Tennessee on the November 4 ballot.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2024 Maryland Question 1</span>

The 2024 Maryland Question 1 is a voter referendum to amend the Constitution of Maryland in order to codify the right to reproductive care in Maryland.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2024 Florida Amendment 4</span>

Florida Amendment 4 is a proposed amendment to the Florida Constitution that will be subject to a referendum on November 5, 2024. The amendment would establish a constitutional right to abortion before fetal viability. A 60% supermajority vote is required for the amendment to be approved.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2024 South Dakota Amendment G</span> Proposed amendment to the South Dakota Constitution

South Dakota Amendment G is a proposed constitutional amendment that will appear on the ballot on November 5, 2024. If passed, the amendment would establish a right to abortion in the Constitution of South Dakota up until approximately the second trimester of pregnancy.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2024 Colorado Initiative Measure 89</span> Proposed amendment to the Colorado Constitution

Colorado Initiative Measure 89 is a proposed constitutional amendment that will appear on the ballot on November 5, 2024. If passed, the amendment would establish a right to abortion in the Constitution of Colorado and repeal Amendment 3, a 1984 constitutional ban on public funding for abortions. A 55% supermajority vote is required for the amendment to be approved.

References

  1. "Tennessee Amendment 1 Election Results" (PDF). Tennessee Secretary of State .
  2. 1 2 "Tennessee Amendment 1, No State Constitutional Right to Abortion and Legislative Power to Regulate Abortion Amendment (2014)". Ballotpedia. Retrieved 2023-10-01.
  3. "SENATE JOINT RESOLUTION 127" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2014-07-25. Retrieved 2023-10-01.
  4. Marotta, Lexie. "Amendment 1 starts a conversation". The Lodge. Retrieved 2023-10-01.
  5. "'Too close to call' on Amendment 1: Ballot measure pits abortion against big government | Chattanooga Times Free Press". www.timesfreepress.com. 2014-10-30. Retrieved 2023-10-01.
  6. Wadhwani, Anita. "Duggar family campaigns for Tennessee's abortion amendment". The Tennessean. Retrieved 2023-10-01.
  7. "Vanderbilt University Poll" (PDF). April 28 – May 13, 2014.
  8. Gershman, Jacob (2014-11-14). "Federal Lawsuit Challenges Tennessee Antiabortion Amendment". Wall Street Journal. ISSN   0099-9660 . Retrieved 2023-10-01.
  9. Wadhwani, Anita. "Judge upholds vote count on Tennessee abortion ballot measure". The Tennessean. Retrieved 2023-10-01.
  10. Andrews, Becca. "Here's How Tennessee's Extreme Anti-Abortion Amendment Could Face Its Downfall". Mother Jones. Retrieved 2023-10-01.
  11. Wadhwani, Anita. "Tennessee abortion measure recount tab could be $1M". The Tennessean. Retrieved 2023-10-01.
  12. "U.S. appeals court upholds Tennessee anti-abortion vote". Reuters. 2018-01-09. Retrieved 2023-10-01.
  13. Wadhwani, Anita. "Appeals court upholds vote count on Tennessee abortion measure Amendment 1". The Tennessean. Retrieved 2023-10-01.