Protect Women Ohio Launches Ad Highlighting Bipartisan Opposition to Issue 1’s Inclusion of Late-Term Abortion

“Issue 1 poses risks to Ohioans of all ages. It removes all protections for the unborn, allowing for late-term abortion when the unborn child is capable of feeling pain, and puts teenagers at risk — Democrats cannot support these radical measures … Even those who favor expanded abortion laws ought to
vote ‘NO’ on Issue 1.”
-Barb Driehaus, Vice-President of Communications for Democrats for Life, Ohio Chapter

COLUMBUS, OH — Protect Women Ohio (PWO), the coalition opposing Issue 1, is launching a new ad during Saturday’s Ohio State-Notre Dame game highlighting the bipartisan opposition to Issue 1’s inclusion of abortion-on-demand up until birth, including when an unborn child is capable of feeling pain. The 30-second spot, titled “Join Them,” features Presidents Joe Biden and Donald Trump speaking out against the radical practice of late-term abortion and urges Ohioans to vote “NO” on Issue 1, which will legalize abortion-on-demand in Ohio if passed. The ad is part of a six-figure buy and will run statewide on broadcast television and digital platforms.

“The practice of late-term abortion is so barbaric that Republicans and Democrats agree it should be banned,” said Molly Smith, Protect Women Ohio board member. “The groups behind Issue 1, including the ACLU, clearly missed the memo: abortion-on-demand up until birth is too extreme for Ohioans. Period.”

“Issue 1 poses risks to Ohioans of all ages. It removes all protections for the unborn, allowing for late-term abortion when the unborn child is capable of feeling pain, and puts teenagers at risk — Democrats cannot support these radical measures,” said Barb Driehaus, Vice-President of Communications for Democrats for Life, Ohio Chapter. “By repeatedly using the word ‘individual,’ never ‘adult,’ ‘woman’ or ‘person over 18,’ Issue 1 allows minors to legally obtain abortions without parental consent or even parental notification. An abuser could coerce the minor victim and Issue 1 will make it easier to cover up the crime. Even those who favor expanded abortion laws ought to vote ‘NO’ on Issue 1.”

Recent public polling shows Americans of all political affiliations oppose the extreme practice of late-term abortion. Additional background information on Democratic opposition to the late-term abortions allowed under Issue 1 is available HERE.

• An AP-NORC poll found the majority of Americans believe abortion should be illegal after the first trimester, including 65% in the second trimester and 80% in the third trimester.
• Following the leak of the draft Dobbs decision last year, a Gallup poll found 65% of Americans believe there should be limits on abortion.
• A Harvard-Harris national poll found 72% of voters would limit abortion to no later than 15 weeks, including 75% of women, 70% of Independents and 60% of rank-and-file Democrats
  o Only 10% of voters believe there should be no limits on abortion.

“Issue 1 is not about preserving ‘choice’ or ‘reproductive freedom,'” said Kristen Day, Executive Director of Democrats for Life. “It would open the door to painful, late-term abortion and remove reasonable health and safety protections for women — something Democrats and Republicans are against. As Democrats, we need to refocus on protecting people and providing alternatives to abortion instead of using abortion to drive people to the polls. We need to send a message that protecting the vulnerable is more important than profit and power. Democrats should vote ‘NO!'”

Watch “Join Them” HERE.

Ad Text:

[Russert] Let me turn to abortion. The ban on partial birth abortions, or late-term abortions, you supported that ban.

[Biden] I did, and I do.

[Voiceover] Late-term abortions were too much for Biden.

But If Issue 1 passes …

[Trump] In the ninth month, you can take the baby and rip the baby out of the womb of the mother.

That’s not okay with me.

[Voiceover] Republicans and Democrats oppose the late-term abortions allowed under Issue 1.

Join them.

Vote NO on Issue 1.

By failing to explicitly define viability, and by giving abortionists the final word in determining when a child is viable on a case-by-case basis, Issue 1 leaves the door open for painful, late-term abortions. Issue 1 also contains a major loophole: the amendment allows for late-term abortions to protect the “health” of the mother; however, “health” is not defined in the amendment. When left undefined, courts across the country have interpreted “health” to include not just a mother’s physical health, but also her mental, financial, emotional and social health, guaranteeing late-term abortions will be permitted under Issue 1 for any reason.

“The initiative’s broad language would impose no-limits abortion on Ohio,” said Megan M. Wold, former Deputy Solicitor General in the Ohio Attorney General’s Office and former law clerk to Justice Samuel A. Alito of the U.S. Supreme Court and to Judge Jeffrey Sutton of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. “The initiative demands a capacious exception for post-viability abortions: in no case may abortion be prohibited (even where a baby is viable) if a physician determines that an abortion is necessary to protect a ‘pregnant patient’s’ life or health. As a legal matter, that phrasing is extremely broad – so broad, that it amounts to permitting abortion on demand even if there is a post-viability ban in place. A court would likely decide that the word ‘health’ should mean what it meant under the Supreme Court’s Roe precedents, which includes Doe v. Bolton’s requirement that ‘health’ include a woman’s ‘emotional’ and ‘familial’ health. Whether a woman’s ‘emotional’ and ‘familial’ health is at risk is to be determined in the physician’s judgment, which also puts these decisions outside the reach of any post-viability ban. In other words, the legal effect of the initiative’s language would be to require abortion on-demand until birth.” 

Background on Issue 1
This extreme anti-parent amendment is just the latest example of the ACLU’s war on parental rights. Background on the ACLU’s war on parents is available HERE. The ACLU has a long and well-documented history of fighting against parental rights, including in Alaska and Indiana. The ACLU specifically calls out parental involvement on its website, saying it would restrict “teenagers’ access to abortion.” Heritage Action recently released a report and video about the ACLU’s attacks on parental rights in Ohio. In recent weeks, the ACLU has denounced parental notification requirements in schools, and the ACLU of Ohio’s chief lobbyist confirmed that stance on Twitter.

A legal analysis of the extreme anti-parent amendment is available HERE from constitutional scholars Carrie Campbell Severino, President of Judicial Crisis Network, and Frank J. Scaturro, a former special counsel to the House Select Investigative Panel on Infant Lives.