Nevada Judge Blocks Second Dangerous Personhood Ballot Initiative

ACLU and Planned Parenthood Demonstrated that Initiative Is Vague and Misleading FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: (212) 549-2666; media@aclu.org LAS VEGAS – A Nevada state judge today declared invalid the second of two ballot initiatives designed to ban all abortions, including in cases of rape or incest, and other vital women’s health services by granting legal protections to fertilized eggs, embryos and fetuses. The initiative, blocked by Judge James Wilson, Jr. of the First Judicial District Court, was found to be so vague and misleading that it could not be permitted to go to the voters under any circumstances. “We are very pleased that the court recognized that this initiative was confusing beyond repair,” said Dane S. Claussen, executive director of the ACLU of Nevada. “With this week’s decisions, we have ensured that voters will not be deceived into supporting a measure that could have banned a range of vital health services.” This initiative was proposed by Personhood Nevada. The American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Nevada and Planned Parenthood Federation of America challenged the initiative and another similar measure on behalf of a group of registered Nevada voters. Both initiatives were intended to outlaw all abortions, even when necessary to save a woman’s life, and also commonly used forms of birth control, including the “pill” and IUDs, as well as in-vitro fertilization and embryonic stem cell research. “Nevadans do not want the government interfering in a woman’s personal and private decision making,” said Elisa Cafferata, president & CEO of Nevada Advocates for Planned Parenthood Affiliates. “We are greatly relieved that the court struck this bad initiative that could have made essential women’s health services illegal in this state.” Similar initiatives have twice been rejected by voters in Colorado (in 2008 and 2010) and most recently this past November in Mississippi. “This is a victory not only for women and families, but also for anyone who cares about the integrity of the initiative process,” said Alexa Kolbi-Molinas, staff attorney with the ACLU Reproductive Freedom Project. “Hopefully the proponents of these initiatives will finally get the message that neither the voters, nor the courts, are buying what they are selling.” More information on this case can be found at: www.aclu.org/reproductive-freedom/chen-et-al-v-personhood-nevada-and-che…

ATTORNEY ADVERTISEMENT:  This communication or portions thereof may be considered "advertising" as defined by Section 6157(c) of the California Business and Professions Code or within the jurisdiction in which you are viewing this.  Nothing in the discussion above is intended to be a representation or guarantee about the outcome of any legal proceeding in which you may be involved.  By providing the information above in this format, Michel & Associates is not soliciting you to hire it to handle a specific legal matter you may currently have or be anticipating commencing in the future.  Notwithstanding the discussion above, you should not act or refrain from acting on the basis of any content on this site without seeking appropriate legal advice regarding your particular circumstances from an attorney licensed to practice law.  This communication is informational only and does not create an attorney-client relationship between you and Michel & Associates.  Michel & Associates's attorneys are licensed to practice in California, Texas, and the District of Columbia.