The abortion fix was in, in Arkansas

In a scene reminiscent of third-party and independent presidential candidates trying to get ballot access, by a 4-3 margin, the Arkansas Supreme Court yesterday barred a petition to put a pro-choice referendum on the ballot.

Details:

Election officials said Arkansans for Limited Government failed to comply with state law primarily because it submitted documentation regarding paid signature gatherers separately and not in a single bundle. The group argued that it should have been given more time to provide any additional documents needed.

“We find that the Secretary correctly refused to count the signatures collected by paid canvassers because the sponsor failed to file the paid canvasser training certification” in the way the law requires, Justice Rhonda Wood wrote for the 4-3 majority.

A dissenting justice wrote that the decision strips Arkansans’ of their rights and effectively changes the state’s initiative law.

States generally show some flexibility on such requirements — unless "the fix" is in. And, per the story, it clearly had more than enough signatures.

The fix was in, organizers say:

Supporters of the measure said they followed the law with their documentation, including identifying each paid gatherer. They have also argued the abortion petitions are being handled differently than other initiative campaigns this year, pointing to similar filings by two other groups.

State records show that the abortion campaign did submit, on June 27, a signed affidavit including a list of paid canvassers and a statement saying the petition rules had been explained to them. Then, the July 5 submission included affidavits from each paid worker acknowledging that the group provided them with all the rules and regulations required by law.

And, that's that.

Sidebar: One of the three-justice minority, per the story, is challenging Wood for the chief justice spot. 

Sidebar two:

The proposed amendment would have prohibited laws banning abortion in the first 20 weeks of gestation and allowed the procedure later on in cases of rape, incest, threats to the woman’s health or life, or if the fetus would be unlikely to survive birth. It would not have created a constitutional right to abortion.

The ballot proposal lacked support from national abortion rights groups such as Planned Parenthood because it would still have allowed abortion to be banned after 20 weeks, which is earlier than other states where it remains legal.

Will Planned Parenthood ever make itself more flexible on this issue? The story doesn't say it opposed it, but it does say it didn't support it. That said, did petition drive organizers want its support anyway?

That said, that's a lie by PP anyway. I mean, the story says that post-20-weeks exceptions would have been part of law.

I personally don't believe that post-20-week abortion should be allowed without restriction. I think Roe's trimester system has collapsed. But, I think viability will never be pushed back before the 20-week mark, so the proposed amendment is actually right up my alley.

In other words, I'm part of the great muddled middle on abortion and long have been. This is why I don't write about it often here, have never written about it for pay, and have never given money to an organization like Planned Parenthood.