"Choose Life Now" Constitutional Amendment
"To Sign or Not to Sign" series
To Sign or not to Sign:
Choose Life Now Constitutional Amendment
In 2024, Nebraska voters were presented with three abortion-related petitions “to sign or not to sign.” One aimed to protect and expand the right to abortion; it received enough signatures to go on the ballot, but did not pass. The second, which made it onto the ballot and was passed by Nebraska voters, prohibits abortion in the second and third trimesters, with exceptions for sexual assault, incest, and medical emergency. The third, Now Choose Life, would have completely banned abortion. Now Choose Life did not make it onto the ballot, possibly because it was filed later and did not have as much time in the public eye as the two other initiatives.
Its sponsors aim to change that—this time, they filed early, renaming the amendment “Choose Life Now.” Their proposed amendment’s wording was received by the Nebraska Secretary of State on February 3 of last year. Its object is to “amend the Nebraska Constitution to recognize the personhood of preborn children.” Its language, slightly changed from the 2024 wording, states the following:
“Article 1, section 31, of the Constitution of Nebraska shall be amended as shown:
I-31
A preborn child at every stage of development, beginning at fertilization, is a person. Wherever under Nebraska law the term “person” is used or implied, it shall include such a child.”
If passed, this amendment would replace the abortion amendment passed by Nebraskans in 2024, which states “Except when a woman seeks an abortion necessitated by a medical emergency or when the pregnancy results from sexual assault or incest, unborn children shall be protected from abortion in the second and third trimesters.”
Why would defining a preborn child as a person outlaw abortion? The Nebraska Constitution begins by laying out the rights of persons: “All persons are by nature free and independent, and have certain inherent and inalienable rights; among these are life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness...”
If preborn children are recognized as persons, they have a right to life and may not have their lives taken by abortion.
The following is taken from a conversation VIP had with Rose Kohl about the 2024 version of the amendment (then titled Now Choose Life).
-
How does the petition view the rights of women, particularly regarding health challenges? How would you address the fear that women’s health is being threatened by not being able to access abortion?
-
Women are persons. Under this amendment, both women and preborn children have the right to life. If a pregnant woman has a health problem that threatens her life before the preborn child is viable, her condition would be treated even if the treatment means that the preborn child will not survive. Treating a mother’s condition is not the same thing as performing an abortion to intentionally kill the child. After viability, if a woman’s health is at risk, doctors would try to save both lives by delivering the child and treating both the mother and child. In either case, the mother’s health is safeguarded without the need for abortion.
-
Could women be legally punished for having an abortion?
-
Many people could be seen as having responsibility for an abortion: the mother, anyone who supported or coerced the mother, the abortionist, and anyone helping the abortionist. If this amendment passes, the legislature will have to determine the punishment for the taking of a preborn child’s life. Kohl projects that the legislature might reduce or eliminate a woman’s culpability, especially if they were coerced, or did not understand that the preborn child was a person. However, she acknowledged the possibility that the legislature might not allow for such distinctions. If they do not, anyone involved with the abortion, including the woman, could be held legally responsible for taking a life.
Kohl also addressed the issue of why, for the sponsors of Choose Life Now, legal restrictions on abortion are not enough. In her eyes, legal restrictions on abortion take away rights from some pre-born children. Those believing in the personhood of the preborn child ask questions like these:
-
Why does a preborn child conceived in rape or incest have fewer rights than a preborn child who is not?
-
Why does a preborn child at 12 weeks’ gestation have fewer rights than a preborn child at 13 weeks (or whichever time frame a law gives)?
-
Ultimately—what reason can justify the intentional killing of an innocent person?
For voters who do not see the preborn child as a person, or who believe that the preborn child attains personhood at a certain stage (for example, when they can feel pain or when they are viable), these questions are less relevant. Voters who see abortion as part of women’s health also might be concerned about this amendment.
Other voters may agree that the preborn child is a person, but may not believe it is possible or advisable to ban abortion immediately. They believe it is more feasible to use abortion restrictions as steps toward eliminating, or greatly reducing, abortion in the future. Such voters may prefer to retain Nebraska’s current law.
In contrast, Choose Life Now could be an appealing option for those who seek an immediate end to abortion. Such voters may have opted for Nebraska’s current law because this one was not on the ballot in 2024. It remains to be seen whether Choose Life Now can attract such voters in 2026.
For more information, voters can visit the petition’s web page: http://chooselifenow.net/ .
Note: Much of this post has been taken from our presentation of the 2024 petition. The original post can be seen here. Many thanks to Rose Kohl for her assistance with the original post, and to Dr. Jeanne Griesen, another of this year’s sponsors, for her review.
Research and writing by Vickie Hecker. Vickie is a state employee, but her postings on this site do not speak for the views of the state, its customers, clients, suppliers, or employees. Any links to state sites are provided for informational purposes only.