Nevada Judge Rules Dangerous Personhood Ballot Initiative is Misleading

Court Finds That Initiative Seeks to Ban All Abortions, Common Forms of Birth Control, Treatment for Complicated Pregnancies and Some Infertility Treatments FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: (212) 549-2666; media@aclu.org LAS VEGAS – A Nevada state judge today rewrote a misleading ballot initiative to make clear it is 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 was originally worded in such vague and misleading terms that it failed to make clear the far-reaching the effects the initiative would have on Nevada law. The initiative was proposed by the Nevada Prolife Coalition. 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. “This misleading initiative could have tricked voters into supporting a measure that would have banned a range of vital health services,” said Dane S. Claussen, executive director of the ACLU of Nevada. “We’re relieved that the court refused to allow proponents to deceive voters in this manner.” Similar initiatives have twice been rejected by voters in Colorado (in 2008 and 2010) and most recently this past November in Mississippi. “Nevadans deserve to know that this initiative seeks to outlaw women’s health services like abortion, the birth control pill and treatment for complicated pregnancies, just to name a few,” said Elisa Cafferata, president & CEO of Nevada Advocates for Planned Parenthood Affiliates. “Nearly 20 years ago Nevada voters affirmed the tenets of Roe vs. Wade and a woman’s right to privacy. Nevadans do not support interfering in women’s personal and private decision making.” Nevada District Court Judge James E. Wilson stated in his decision: “The court has found the petitioners have established that if the initiative passes it will affect various areas including common birth control methods, the treatment of ectopic pregnancy, in vitro fertilization treatment and stem cell research.” “The proponents of this initiative were trying to hide the ball,” said Alexa Kolbi-Molinas, staff attorney with the ACLU Reproductive Freedom Project. “They know that, across the country, voters have repeatedly rejected measures that would interfere with a woman’s ability to make her own health care decisions.” Wilson’s decision, including the rewritten ballot initiative, can be found at: www.aclu.org/reproductive-freedom/chen-v-nevada-prolife-coalition-judgment 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.