On Nov. 5, New York voters will weigh in on the proposed Equal Rights Amendment, known as Proposition 1. The proposal seeks to add language to the New York Constitution that prohibits denying rights based on “ethnicity, national origin, age, disability, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, pregnancy, pregnancy outcomes, and reproductive healthcare and autonomy.”
Democrats have advocated for its inclusion on the November ballot, linking it to reproductive rights and the protection of abortion access.
While the amendment does not explicitly guarantee abortion rights, it could serve as a legal shield against future restrictions by framing such laws as unconstitutional discrimination against pregnant women.
Republicans interpret Proposition 1 as potentially impacting other issues, such as protecting transgender athletes’ participation in women’s sports, stripping parental rights regarding medical decisions for children or allowing noncitizens to vote in elections.
The New York measure has attracted significant media attention, highlighting its divisiveness with headlines like, “How a N.Y. ballot measure became a battleground in the culture wars,” from NBC News, and “In New York, a constitutional amendment provides election fodder for the left and the right,” from The Associated Press.
Supporters see more protections, while opponents view it as a Trojan horse.
Supporters argue that the intent behind the proposal is clear in the wording, aiming to further civil rights protections for vulnerable groups.
Opponents contend that the proposal’s wording could lead to unintended consequences, potentially being used in future lawsuits to advance specific agendas.
Advertisements from both the “Vote Yes” and “Vote No” campaigns convey contrasting messages. One Vote Yes ad states, “Politicians are coming to take away our freedoms. And we have one chance to permanently protect our rights in the New York State Constitution: the right to an abortion and to control your own body.”
A Vote No ad counters, “Equal rights are already guaranteed in our state constitution. So why new, confusing language? Who gets to decide unequal treatment? That sneaky language could give biological boys the right to play in girls’ sports and children the right to make life-changing decisions without parental consent.”
New Yorkers for Equal Rights, a committee backing Proposition 1, has raised millions of dollars, with nearly $2 million cash on hand, significantly outpacing fundraising efforts from opponents, the Coalition to Protect Kids, which has $46,000 cash on hand.
The funding heavily favors the “Yes on Prop 1” campaign. Ultimately, whether the language will be updated in the state constitution will be decided by voters on Election Day.
