Voters in Missouri recently approved a constitutional amendment aimed at reversing the state’s nearly complete abortion ban. Interestingly, this vote occurred simultaneously with the reelection of a Republican supermajority in the state Legislature, which includes several lawmakers who were responsible for instituting the ban in 2019.
Currently, GOP legislators are focused on potentially retracting some or all of the abortion rights safeguarded by the newly passed amendment. Democratic Representative Emily Weber of Missouri expressed concern, stating that the supermajority is misusing taxpayer funds to counteract the voters’ decision. Over the past four years, she has been advocating for legislation supporting abortion rights.
Some Republican lawmakers argue that implementing restrictions within the framework of the amendment aligns with the desires of the electorate. Republican House Speaker Jonathan Patterson noted that discussions about eliminating exemptions for rape and incest have not gained traction. He suggested that regulating abortion in accordance with the amendment is a reasonable step.
Patterson also clarified that any attempts to directly negate the voters’ amendment would require another ballot measure. According to experts, Republicans are unlikely to face significant opposition in upcoming elections for their stance on abortion and may even gain political advantage in conservative locales like Missouri.
Lawmakers from predominantly rural areas feel a strong mandate from their supporters to pursue such legislative agendas and face pressure to firmly oppose abortion to ensure their re-election during primaries. Mary Ziegler, a historian from the University of California, Davis, highlighted that legislators from conservative districts in Missouri are largely insulated from threats from Democratic challengers, while also feeling pressure to maintain a hardline position on abortion from more conservative factions within their own party.
This dynamic, where voters support certain abortion policies yet elect candidates who push back against those very policies, is not unique to Missouri. For instance, in Ohio, voters passed a right to abortion in November 2023, overriding an earlier ban that prohibited abortions once cardiac activity was detected—typically around six weeks into pregnancy. Subsequently, abortion rights groups challenged this ban, while the state’s Republican attorney general sought to maintain provisions from the prior 2019 law, such as parental notification and mandatory waiting periods for abortion procedures.
Arizona also experienced a similar scenario where voters backed a right to abortion in 2024. In that state, healthcare providers are contesting a previous regulation that restricted abortions after the first 15 weeks of pregnancy, with limited exceptions. The Democratic Attorney General of Arizona indicated that she would refrain from enforcing the old ban until the related lawsuit is settled.
In Missouri, proposed legislation could completely ban abortions or restrict them to cases of medical emergencies. There are also measures being considered that would outlaw the procedure once cardiac activity is detected or after fetal viability is established. Republicans assert that they can introduce these restrictions without violating the new abortion-rights amendment, which permits regulations post-viability, except when they are necessary to safeguard the health or life of the pregnant individual.
Representatives like Brian Seitz have acknowledged that while the “political reality” suggests that many Missouri voters might not support a measure aligning with his belief that life begins at conception, they may have backed the recent amendment primarily to ensure access to abortion in cases of rape, incest, or emergencies. He believes there is substantial public support for certain restrictions beyond those exceptions. Seitz even expressed that efforts could be made to “chip away at Amendment 3,” while suggesting a total repeal is unlikely in the short term since that would also require voter approval.
Political scientist Robynn Kuhlmann from the University of Central Missouri noted that the lack of competitive elections between parties shields legislators from electoral backlash. Her estimates suggest that about 95% of House seats were won by a margin of at least 5% in 2024. Kuhlmann added that for many voters, party affiliation often takes precedence over the specific actions undertaken by lawmakers in their state assemblies.
Missouri’s abortion-rights amendment passed with a narrow margin, receiving nearly 51% of the votes. The measure found most of its support in urban areas such as Kansas City, St. Louis, and Columbia, while opposition was stronger in rural counties across the state. Seitz, representing the southwestern Missouri area of Branson, voiced that his constituents, along with his personal convictions, compel him to advocate for policies that promote life.
