2024 New York Proposal 1

Last updated

2024 New York Proposal 1
Flag of New York.svg
November 5, 2024 (2024-11-05)
Amendment to Protect Against Unequal Treatment
Results
Choice
Votes %
Check-71-128-204-brightblue.svgYes4,757,09756.99%
Light brown x.svgNo2,857,66334.23%
Blank votes732,8348.78%
Valid votes8,347,59499.74%
Invalid votes21,5690.26%
Total votes8,369,163100.00%
Registered voters/turnout12,426,60267.35%
2024 New York Proposal 1 results map by county.svg
Source: New York State Board of Elections [1] [2]

New York Proposal 1 was a 2024 ballot proposal for a legislatively referred constitutional amendment to the New York Constitution called the Amendment to Protect Against Unequal Treatment, and informally known as the Equal Rights Amendment. It includes several rights in the New York State Constitution's Equal Protection Clause, with its chief purpose to preserve the right to abortion. It also adds a prohibition of discrimination on attributes such ethnicity, gender identity, disability, or reproductive autonomy.

Contents

The amendment was approved in consecutive legislating sessions in 2022 and 2023. While the text of the amendment was determined by the legislature, the wording of the ballot proposal about the amendment went through several changes and legal challenges before the Board of Elections' draft was replaced by an Albany County Judge. In the leadup to the election, the proposal was the subject of misinformation, with false claims that it would facilitate undocumented immigrant voting or enable children to receive gender-affirming care without parental involvement.

The proposal was approved by voters in a referendum on November 5, 2024, with 56.99% in support, 34.23% opposed, and 8.78% of votes blank. It took effect on January 1, 2025.

Content

The amendment, also known as the Equal Rights Amendment, [3] expands the Constitution of New York's Equal Protection Clause, which is limited to protecting people from denial of rights on the basis of "race, color, creed, or religion". [4] [5] The full text of the proposal is: [6]

Adds anti-discrimination provisions to State Constitution. Covers ethnicity, national origin, age, disability, and sex, including sexual orientation, gender identity and pregnancy. Also covers reproductive health care and autonomy.

It modified section 11 of article 1 of the state constitution this way (removals struck, additions underlined): [7]

§ 11. a. No person shall be denied the equal protection of the laws of this state or any subdivision thereof. No person shall, because of race, color, ethnicity, national origin, age, disability, creed or, religion, or sex, including sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, pregnancy, pregnancy outcomes, and reproductive health care and autonomy, be subjected to any discrimination in his or hertheir civil rights by any other person or by any firm, corporation, or institution, or by the state or any agency or subdivision of the state, pursuant to law.
b. Nothing in this section shall invalidate or prevent the adoption of any law, regulation, program, or practice that is designed to prevent or dismantle discrimination on the basis of a characteristic listed in this section, nor shall any characteristic listed in this section be interpreted to interfere with, limit, or deny the civil rights of any person based upon any other characteristic identified in this section.

Effects

The amendment expands the state constitution's protections against discrimination, including ethnicity, national origin, age, disability, sex (including sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender expression), pregnancy and pregnancy related outcomes, and reproductive healthcare and autonomy. [8] By including protections related to pregnancy outcomes and reproductive healthcare, the amendment enshrines the right to abortion and other reproductive services into the state constitution. This constitutional protection makes it more challenging for future legislatures to enact laws that would restrict access to these services. [9] The explicit inclusion of sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender expression strengthens legal protections for LGBTQ+ individuals. This change is intended to prevent discrimination in areas such as employment, housing, and public accommodations. [10]

History

In January 2017, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo called for the right to abortion to be enshrined into the New York Constitution. [11] In 2019, Cuomo again called for a conditional amendment to protect abortion rights in the state at an event with Hillary Clinton at Barnard College, after the Democratic Party took back control of the New York State Senate in the 2018 election, and shortly before the passage of the Reproductive Health Act. [12] [13]

To amend the constitution in New York, the state legislature must pass the amendment twice in separate legislative sessions. Only at that point do citizens vote on its approval. [14] [15] On July 1, 2022, shortly after the overturning of Roe v. Wade, the New York Senate passed the resolution in favor of the amendment by a vote of 49–14, then the New York Assembly also adopted it by a vote of 98–43. [16] On January 24, 2023, in the following legislative session, the New York Senate again passed it by a vote of 43-20 and the New York Assembly again passed it by a vote of 97–46, therefore allowing the referendum to take place. [5]

On May 7, 2024, Livingston County Supreme Court justice Daniel J. Doyle ruled that the referendum cannot take place, since the New York Attorney General issued an opinion of the proposed amendment after lawmakers voted on it, rather than before. [17] New York Governor Kathy Hochul stated that the referendum will still take place in November 2024. [17] On June 18, 2024, the New York State Appellate Court put the referendum back on the ballot. [18]

Proposal wording changes

In 2023, when the amendment had already been passed, state legislature passed a law to require ballot questions to be written at an eighth-grade reading level. [19] [20] When the bipartisan State Board of Elections (BOE) set out to develop the wording, they could not come to an agreement. Finally, Democrats, who wanted to make sure to meet the deadline, agreed to the wording Republicans proposed, written at a college reading level and omitting the terms "abortion" and "LGBT". [3] [21] [19] Board commissioners admitted at the time that it probably violated the "plain language" law. The attorney general's office proposed a new version, and when the BOE was subsequently sued by voters, [22] they sought to require the board to adopt the attorney general's language. [21] [19]

The attorney general's proposed language was: [21]

Protects against unequal treatment by New York and local governments no matter your sex, age, disability status, ethnicity, or national origin. Protects LGBT and pregnant people. Protects abortion.

When ruling on the case, Albany County Judge David Weinstein simply decided to implement his own version of the proposal, against the wishes of either side's lawyers and bypassing the BOE. [3] Absent an appeal, that is the version which appears on the ballot. [19]

Analysis

New York already has several anti-discrimination laws, and the amendment does not create any new rights. By proposing to add rights to the State Constitution, rather than existing only in laws that can be overturned by legislators, it aims to make those rights more difficult to take away if the balance of power in state government were to change. [23] [19] [13] According to Cornell University constitutional law professor Michael C. Dorf, the amendment would protect the right to abortion in the state of New York by ensuring that prohibiting abortion would be an unconstitutional form of health-care discrimination because they would be "singling out one form of reproductive health care, and not other kinds of health care". [24] While several parties have been critical of the final draft excluding the word "abortion" in its text, other advocates argue doing so helps to preserve rights of woman for all pregnancy outcomes, as well as for in vitro fertilization and contraception. [25] [26]

According to The New York Times , the debate over Proposal 1 "has been rife with misinformation". [27] Regarding gender, the proposal does not affect parental rights or parents' role in their children's health-care decisions, such as gender-affirming care. [23] [13] It also does not affect the law regarding participation in sports; transgender women have been permitted to participate in women's sports in New York since 2019. [25] On the subject of immigration, the proposal does not affect existing immigration laws, and does not change state requirements to vote, contrary to false claims that the proposal would make it easier for undocumented immigrants to vote. [27] [28] Hell Gate NYC said many of the arguments against the proposal were "lies, plain and simple", highlighting a quote by Elise Stefanik which included several of them: "Proposition 1 would give our hard earned NY taxpayer dollars to illegals, fund sex change operations for minors without parental consent, and force schools to allow men and boys in women and girls sports and bathrooms". [19]

Support and opposition

The amendment was supported by a number of Democratic politicians in the state, including Governor Kathy Hochul, U.S. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries. It was also supported by "left-leaning" organizations such as the NAACP, the New York Civil Liberties Union, and Planned Parenthood. Supporters argued that the amendment would help protect reproductive rights, and would help reduce discrimination in the state. [29] A campaign in support of the amendment, titled "New Yorkers for Equal Rights", was launched in June 2023. [30] [13] While it had ambitious goals for fundraising, it received some criticism for how it managed its money. [31] [32]

The New York Republican State Committee and the New York Catholic Conference opposed the amendment, while Republican state senator George Borrello and state assemblyman Christopher Tague spoke out against it on religious grounds. [33] [34] [23] Former congressman Lee Zeldin campaigned against the bill, calling it an "attack on women's rights and girls' rights". [13] With the majority of New Yorkers in favor of protecting abortion rights, many opponents focused on transgender issues, suggesting that including age among anti-discrimination provisions would give children the same power as parents. The Coalition to Protect Kids, which was primarily funded by an anti-abortion activist, formed to defeat the proposal; the Coalition referred to Proposal 1 as the "Parent Replacement Act". [13] A small number of wealthy donors provided millions to campaigns opposing the proposal. [31] Shortly before Election Day, Richard Uihlein gave $6.5 million to a political action committee (PAC), Vote No on Prop 1, to oppose the amendment. The PAC-funded advertisements falsely claiming the amendment would give undocumented immigrants the right to vote. [31] [27] [28]

The wording of the proposal received criticism from multiple perspectives. An opinion piece in the National Review called the language "vague and all-encompassing", arguing that it provided too much latitude to future progressive litigants. [35] Hell Gate NYC called the language "a bland gruel of obfuscation", blaming Republicans for producing language which fails New York's "plain language" law and subsequently led to the version installed by Judge Weinstein. [19]

Opinion polls

Poll sourceDate(s)
administered		Sample
size [a] 		Margin
of error		ForAgainstDon't know/refused/won't vote
Siena College Research Institute [36] October 13–17, 2024872 (LV)± 4.1%69%22%9%
Siena College Research Institute [37] September 11–16, 20241,003 (LV)± 4.3%64%23%13%
Siena College Research Institute [38] July 12–13 & 16–17, 2024805 (RV)± 4.1%59%27%15%
Siena College Research Institute [39] May 13–15, 20241,191 (RV)± 3.9%59%26%15%
  1. ↑ Key: A – all adults; RV – registered voters; LV – likely voters; V – unclear

Results

On November 5, 2024, at 9:00 PM ET, polls in New York closed. On the same night, at 9:31 PM PT, the Associated Press projected the passage of Proposal 1. [40] According to the certified results from the New York Board of Elections, the proposal passed with 56.99% in support, 34.23% opposed, and 8.78% of votes blank. [1] According to The New York Times , although the proposal faced right-wing opposition, it succeeded in several counties where voters otherwise voted for Donald Trump, the Republican presidential candidate. [41] The constitution was amended on January 1, 2025. [42]

Results by county
CountyYesYes %NoNo %BlankBlank %Valid votes
Albany 92,48961.32%51,16733.92%7,1754.76%150,831
Allegany 6,78934.52%12,21062.08%6703.41%19,669
Bronx 266,97072.84%53,48714.59%46,07212.57%366,529
Broome 48,04152.46%37,07340.49%6,4557.05%91,569
Cattaraugus 12,92037.48%18,94454.96%2,6057.56%34,469
Cayuga 17,48947.60%17,87348.65%1,3783.75%36,740
Chautauqua 24,15642.09%30,92253.88%2,3174.04%57,395
Chemung 18,64849.18%17,03944.94%2,2295.88%37,916
Chenango 8,78938.67%11,41750.23%2,52311.10%22,729
Clinton 20,28956.00%14,31039.50%1,6334.51%36,232
Columbia 21,10958.35%13,70437.88%1,3663.78%36,179
Cortland 11,03849.43%9,94144.52%1,3516.05%22,330
Delaware 10,42044.53%11,72450.10%1,2555.36%23,399
Dutchess 84,49754.87%62,14340.35%7,3614.78%154,001
Erie 241,01052.21%186,24840.35%34,3417.44%461,599
Essex 9,88650.63%8,44643.26%1,1946.11%19,526
Franklin 9,41748.09%8,85345.21%1,3136.70%19,583
Fulton 9,15737.91%13,45555.70%1,5446.39%24,156
Genesee 10,48136.38%17,06659.23%1,2654.39%28,812
Greene 11,14743.53%13,02450.86%1,4375.61%25,608
Hamilton 1,24936.29%1,95656.83%2376.89%3,442
Herkimer 11,74640.48%15,55053.59%1,7185.92%29,014
Jefferson 18,48142.79%22,41351.89%2,2965.32%43,190
Kings 567,10866.15%149,30417.41%140,92716.44%857,339
Lewis 4,15431.36%8,63265.17%4593.47%13,245
Livingston 12,85040.92%17,47855.65%1,0783.43%31,406
Madison 16,67348.67%16,42947.95%1,1583.38%34,260
Monroe 201,61554.89%143,93239.19%21,7625.92%367,309
Montgomery 8,12438.85%11,09853.07%1,6908.08%20,912
Nassau 364,43150.63%289,78540.26%65,5459.11%719,761
New York 515,39578.59%84,14612.83%56,2968.58%655,837
Niagara 47,49946.02%50,66849.09%5,0424.89%103,209
Oneida 47,05046.44%48,50947.88%5,7645.69%101,323
Onondaga 133,32457.56%77,80533.59%20,4818.84%231,610
Ontario 29,08547.83%28,99247.68%2,7314.49%60,808
Orange 82,48246.29%78,56344.09%17,1569.63%178,201
Orleans 5,94732.50%10,84659.27%1,5068.23%18,299
Oswego 24,16844.25%27,81850.94%2,6284.81%54,614
Otsego 14,57750.87%12,60944.00%1,4695.13%28,655
Putnam 26,14046.34%26,26946.57%4,0037.10%56,412
Queens 469,50465.30%158,31422.02%91,12412.67%718,942
Rensselaer 39,09349.11%34,13342.88%6,3708.00%79,596
Richmond 92,49745.99%90,22344.86%18,4179.16%201,137
Rockland 66,51543.98%68,33245.19%16,37910.83%151,226
St. Lawrence 18,61541.79%22,45350.40%3,4817.81%44,549
Saratoga 67,67850.96%58,12443.77%7,0055.27%132,807
Schenectady 41,14356.28%28,90239.54%3,0554.18%73,100
Schoharie 6,49040.04%9,01955.65%6984.31%16,207
Schuyler 4,35845.59%4,96551.94%2362.47%9,559
Seneca 7,01746.09%7,62350.07%5863.85%15,226
Steuben 17,50738.28%26,37157.66%1,8544.05%45,732
Suffolk 391,06950.84%331,22843.06%46,8606.09%769,157
Sullivan 16,17445.48%16,16745.46%3,2259.07%35,566
Tioga 11,40445.97%12,71951.27%6872.77%24,810
Tompkins 33,37671.51%10,15621.76%3,1406.73%46,672
Ulster 59,76259.77%34,71034.71%5,5215.52%99,993
Warren 17,11747.14%17,89749.29%1,2973.57%36,311
Washington 12,57243.60%15,00252.03%1,2624.38%28,836
Wayne 18,15940.35%25,22556.04%1,6253.61%45,009
Westchester 290,36962.45%135,00729.03%39,6058.52%464,981
Wyoming 5,63929.05%13,03167.13%7413.82%19,411
Yates 4,19939.43%6,21458.35%2362.22%10,649
Totals4,757,09756.99%2,857,66334.23%732,8348.78%8,347,594

See also

Related Research Articles

<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.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">State equal rights amendments</span> Provide various degrees of legal protection against discrimination

States have passed state equal rights amendments (ERAs) to their constitutions that provide various degrees of legal protection against discrimination based on sex. With some mirroring the broad language and guarantees of the proposed Federal Equal Rights Amendment, others more closely resemble the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Abortion in Colorado is legal at all stages of pregnancy. It is one of seven states without any term restrictions as to when a pregnancy can be terminated.

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 Nebraska is mostly illegal after the 12th week of pregnancy.

Abortion in Vermont is legal at all stages of pregnancy. A 2014 Pew Research Center poll showed 70% of adults in the state believed abortion should be legal in most or all cases, the second highest percentage in the country. The 2023 American Values Atlas reported that, in their most recent survey, 76% of Vermonters said that abortion should be legal in all or most cases. The state funds abortions deemed medically necessary for low-income women via Medicaid.

The social policy of the Joe Biden administration is intended to improve racial equity, increase access to safe and legal abortions, tighten restrictions on gun sales, among other aims. A number of policies aim to reverse the former policies of President Donald Trump, including the "Muslim" travel ban and loosened anti-discriminatory policies relating to LGBT people.

<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.

The following is a list of ballot measures, whether initiated by legislators or citizens, which had been certified to appear on various states' ballots during the 2024 United States elections. Those which did not make on the ballot are included on the page but their status is noted that they did not appear on the ballot.

<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">2024 Maryland Question 1</span> Voter referendum

The 2024 Maryland Question 1 was a voter referendum that appeared on the ballot on November 5, 2024. It established in the Constitution of Maryland a right to reproductive freedom. The referendum was approved overwhelmingly, with more than three times as many voters voting in favor of it than against it, and only losing in Garrett County.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2024 Florida Amendment 4</span> Proposed amendment to the Florida Constitution

Florida Amendment 4 was a proposed amendment to the Florida Constitution, which failed on November 5, 2024. Through a statewide referendum, the amendment achieved 57% support among voters in the U.S. state of Florida, short of the 60% supermajority required by law. Despite its failure to pass, the double digit percentage majority that it received is considered by some to be indicative of a nationwide consensus on abortion, similar to similar referendums in other moderately conservative swing states such as Michigan, Ohio, Missouri, and Arizona, the last of which had an abortion rights amendment pass with a 3/5 majority, although unlike Florida it did not actually need one.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2022 Vermont Proposal 5</span> 2022 ballot initiative

The 2022 Vermont reproductive rights initiative, officially titled the "Reproductive Liberty Amendment", and listed on the ballot as Proposition 5, was a legislatively referred constitutional amendment that was adopted on November 8, 2022, by a landslide majority of 76.8% of voters. It codified reproductive rights in the Constitution of Vermont. It was signed into the constitution by Republican governor Phil Scott on 13 December 2022.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2024 Missouri Amendment 3</span> Missouri Right to Reproductive Freedom Initiative

2024 Missouri Constitutional Amendment 3, also known as the Right to Reproductive Freedom Initiative, was a constitutional amendment that appeared on the ballot on November 5, 2024. The initiative amended the Constitution of Missouri to legalize abortion in Missouri until fetal viability. The amendment narrowly passed.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2024 Nebraska Initiative 439</span> Proposed amendment to the Nebraska Constitution

Nebraska Initiative 439, officially titled "Nebraska Right to Abortion Initiative", was a proposed constitutional amendment that appeared on the November 5, 2024 ballot in Nebraska. If passed, it would have amended the Nebraska Constitution to establish a right to abortion until fetal viability. It and Initiative 434 were mutually exclusive; the one with more votes in favor would become law in the event both amendments passed.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2024 Montana Initiative 128</span>

Initiative 128 was a ballot initiative that appeared on the ballot on November 5, 2024, to establish in the Constitution of Montana a right to abortion up to fetal viability. The initiative was approved by 58 percent of voters.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2024 Nebraska Initiative 434</span> Proposed amendment to the Nebraska Constitution

Nebraska Initiative 434, officially titled "Nebraska Protect Women & Children Initiative" or "Prohibit Abortions After the First Trimester Amendment", and listed on the ballot as Initiative Measure 434, was a proposed constitutional amendment that appeared on the November 5, 2024 ballot in Nebraska. It amends the Nebraska Constitution to ban elective abortions in the second and third trimester, though it allows more restrictive laws such as the 12-week ban passed by the Legislature in 2023, which like the constitutional amendment includes exceptions for rape, incest and medical emergencies. Initiative 434 and Initiative 439 were mutually exclusive; only the one with more votes in favor would become law in the event both amendments passed.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2024 Nevada Question 6</span> Proposed amendment to the Nevada Constitution

2024 Nevada Question 6 is a proposed constitutional amendment for the state of Nevada in the United States, that would protect the right to an abortion until fetal viability, which is generally considered about 23 or 24 weeks, or when necessary to protect the life or health of the pregnant patient. The Question initially appeared on the November 5th, 2024, ballot in Nevada. The ballot measure was approved with 64.4% of the votes. As Question 6 was approved in 2024, a second vote will be held on November 3, 2026.

References

  1. 1 2 "2024 General Election Results". New York State Board of Elections . Retrieved January 12, 2025.
  2. ↑ "Voter Enrollment by County". New York State Board of Elections . Retrieved November 10, 2024.
  3. 1 2 3 Wang, Beth (August 23, 2024). "Judge Tweaks Language of NY Abortion Rights Ballot Measure (2)". Bloomberg Law .
  4. ↑ "New York State Senate Resolution". New York State Senate Open Legislation. January 13, 2023. Archived from the original on June 28, 2024. Retrieved June 28, 2024.
  5. 1 2 "New York Equal Protection of Law Amendment (2024)". Ballotpedia . Archived from the original on May 7, 2024. Retrieved May 7, 2024.
  6. ↑ "Text of Proposal Number One, a Proposition" (PDF). New York State Board of Elections.
  7. ↑ "Text of Proposal Number One, An Amendment". New York State Board of Elections .
  8. ↑ Izaguirre, Anthony (November 2024). "What is Prop 1? NY votes on controversial constitutional amendment today". WNBC . Retrieved November 9, 2024.
  9. ↑ Izaguirre, Anthony (November 2024). "New York voters pass constitution change that supporters say will protect abortion and trans rights". Associated Press . Retrieved November 9, 2024.
  10. ↑ The Era Project (October 10, 2024). "Explainer on Proposal 1, the New York Equal Rights Amendment on the Ballot". Ms. Magazine . Retrieved November 9, 2024.
  11. ↑ Brody, Leslie (January 30, 2017). "New York Gov. Cuomo Wants to Amend State Constitution to Protect Abortion Rights". The Wall Street Journal . Archived from the original on May 8, 2024. Retrieved May 7, 2024.
  12. ↑ Campbell, Jon (January 7, 2019). "Andrew Cuomo wants to make abortion a constitutional right in New York". Democrat and Chronicle . Archived from the original on June 30, 2024. Retrieved June 30, 2024.
  13. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Ashford, Grace; Fahy, Claire (May 18, 2024). "Why the Equal Rights Amendment Is Again a Hot Topic in New York". The New York Times .
  14. ↑ Campbell, Jon; Bergin, Brigid (May 7, 2024). "Equal Rights Amendment tossed off NY ballot, but an appeal is expected". Gothamist . Retrieved November 3, 2024.
  15. ↑ Weixel, Nathaniel (May 7, 2024). "New York judge tosses abortion-related Equal Rights Amendment from state ballot". The Hill . Retrieved November 3, 2024.
  16. ↑ Young, Shannon (July 1, 2022). "New York's abortion amendment clears first major hurdle". Politico . Archived from the original on May 7, 2024. Retrieved May 7, 2024.
  17. 1 2 Bragg, Chris; Smith, Rachel Holliday. "Judge Strikes Abortion Referendum From November Ballot". New York Focus. Archived from the original on May 8, 2024. Retrieved May 8, 2024.
  18. ↑ Roy, Yancey (June 18, 2024). "NYS appellate court puts Equal Rights Amendment back on Nov. ballot". Newsday . Archived from the original on June 18, 2024. Retrieved June 18, 2024.
  19. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 "Hell Gate's Guide to the Six Ballot Propositions". Hell Gate NYC . November 1, 2024. Retrieved November 2, 2024.
  20. ↑ "Governor Hochul Signs Legislation to Strengthen Democracy in New York". Governor Kathy Hochul. Retrieved November 2, 2024.
  21. 1 2 3 Lewis, Rebecca E. (August 5, 2024). "Board of Elections sued over ERA ballot language". City & State NY. Retrieved November 2, 2024.
  22. ↑ Wang, Beth (August 5, 2024). "'Abortion' Should Be Added to NY Ballot Measure Text, Suit Says". Bloomberg Law .
  23. 1 2 3 Kahn, Rachel (October 9, 2024). "A Guide to the Six Ballot Questions New Yorkers Will Vote on in 2024". The City . Retrieved November 2, 2024.
  24. ↑ Izaguirre, Anthony (July 29, 2024). "In New York, a ballot referendum meant to protect abortion may not use the word "abortion"". CityNews Toronto. Associated Press. Archived from the original on August 2, 2024. Retrieved August 2, 2024.
  25. 1 2 Arbetter, Susan (October 28, 2024). "Q&A: Proposition 1 – New York's lone statewide ballot measure in 2024". NY1 . Retrieved November 2, 2024.
  26. ↑ Johnson, Alexis McGill (November 1, 2024). "Reproductive Freedom Is on the Ballot In New York". The Nation . ISSN   0027-8378 . Retrieved November 2, 2024.
  27. 1 2 3 McFadden, Alyce and Ashford, Grace (October 25, 2024). "What Know To About New York's Six Ballot Measures". The New York Times .
  28. 1 2 "Prop 1 (New York Equal Rights Amendment): What the Amendment Will and Won't Do". New York City Bar Association. Retrieved November 2, 2024.
  29. ↑ Rubinstein, Dana (June 29, 2023). "Democrats to Use $20 Million Equal Rights Push to Aid 2024 N.Y. House Bids". The New York Times . ISSN   0362-4331. Archived from the original on June 28, 2024. Retrieved June 28, 2024.
  30. ↑ Reisman, Nick (June 29, 2023). "How Democrats, advocates are mobilizing for Equal Rights Amendment". NY1 . Archived from the original on June 28, 2024. Retrieved June 28, 2024.
  31. 1 2 3 Ashford, Grace (October 25, 2024). "Mega-Donors Pour $8 Million Into Late Push Against N.Y. Abortion Measure". The New York Times .
  32. ↑ Mahoney, Bill (October 24, 2024). "Campaign for pro-abortion amendment in New York spends big on overhead. Not so much on ads". Politico .
  33. ↑ Reisman, Nick (January 24, 2023). "Equal Rights Amendment will head to New York voters next year". NY1 . Archived from the original on June 28, 2024. Retrieved June 28, 2024.
  34. ↑ Ashford, Grace (July 1, 2022). "New York Moves to Enshrine Abortion Rights in State Constitution". The New York Times . ISSN   0362-4331. Archived from the original on March 22, 2024. Retrieved June 28, 2024.
  35. ↑ Lynch, James (October 1, 2024). "N.Y. Ballot Measure Would Enshrine the Left's Social Revolution in the State Constitution". The National Review .
  36. ↑ "Siena College Poll Conducted by the Siena College Research Institute October 13-17, 2024" (PDF). Siena College Research Institute. Retrieved January 12, 2025.
  37. ↑ "Siena College Poll Conducted by the Siena College Research Institute September 11-16, 2024" (PDF). Siena College Research Institute. Retrieved January 12, 2025.
  38. ↑ "Siena College Poll Conducted by the Siena College Research Institute June 12-13, 2024" (PDF). Siena College Research Institute. Retrieved January 12, 2025.
  39. ↑ "Siena College Poll – May 22, 2024" (PDF). Siena College Research Institute. Retrieved January 12, 2025.
  40. ↑ Meier, Alex (November 6, 2024). "2024 Election Results: New York Prop 1 and NYC Ballot Measures". WNYW . Retrieved November 12, 2024.
  41. ↑ Bellafante, Gina (November 7, 2024). "A Silver Lining for New York Democrats". The New York Times . Archived from the original on December 15, 2024. Retrieved December 24, 2024.
  42. ↑ "New York State Constitution" (PDF). New York State Department of State. January 1, 2025. Retrieved January 12, 2025.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.