Group plans new anti-abortion petition in Nevada

CARSON CITY -- The Nevada Pro-Life Coalition has withdrawn an anti-abortion petition heavily amended by a district judge and now plans to circulate a new petition, said Michael Peters, the coalition secretary and lawyer.

"It will be a pro-life petition," Peters said Friday. "We feel it is the right thing to do."

Planned Parenthood and the American Civil Liberties Union challenged the coalition's original petition. District Judge James Wilson decided Dec. 18 that the petition could be circulated, but he edited the petition's 200-word description.

Wilson inserted language that states passage of the petition would affect women's right to use the pill for birth control and would prevent abortions in cases of rape, incest or even when a woman's health is jeopardized by a pregnancy.

To win a place on the November ballot, organizations that circulate petitions must secure 72,352 signatures of valid voters by June 19. Voters then would have to approve them both during the general election in November and again in 2014.

Even then, abortions would continue unless the U.S. Supreme Court reverses its 1973 Roe v. Wade decision allowing abortion.

Elisa Cafferata, chief executive officer of Nevada Advocates for Planned Parenthood Affiliates, said her organization and the ACLU would examine the new petition and decide whether it clearly tells voters of its intentions. If it doesn't, then they will challenge its language in court.

"We are concerned that if they get on the ballot that they make sure people know the real ramifications," she said.

The Pro-Life Coalition itself "essentially conceded" in its withdrawn petition that passage would affect women's right to use birth control, said Cafferata, noting it did not respond to an affidavit from a doctor saying that passage would lead to a prohibition on birth control.

"I am not sure how they can write a petition that says it doesn't," she said.

With the withdrawal of the Pro-Life Coalition petition, no anti-abortion petitions now are being circulated in Nevada.

In December Wilson also decided that another anti-abortion petition, this one from the Personhood Nevada group, was so vague and misleading that voters would not understand its intentions if they were asked to sign the petition. He refused to allow the group to circulate the petition among voters.

To this point, Personhood has not appealed Wilson's decision to the Supreme Court. Its leaders failed to return calls Friday.

An appeal, however, could be futile since several months would pass before the Supreme Court could hear the case. Even if the court ruled for Personhood, it would have little time to gather signatures before the June 19 deadline.

The Pro-Life Coalition also will not have much time to collect signatures if it submits a new anti-abortion petition.

Under state law, critics like Planned Parenthood once again could go to District Court to challenge the description of effect. If they do not prevail in that court, then they could appeal to the state Supreme Court.

"The time frame is pretty tight," Cafferata said.

In part because of legal challenges to the wording of petitions, no citizens group has been able to collect enough signatures to place a petition before voters since the 2006 election. That year voters approved petitions that outlawed the use of tobacco in most bars, raised the minimum wage and defeated a move to legalize marijuana.

Personhood Nevada is part of a national religious-based organization that has been trying for the last two years to secure support for anti-abortion petitions. Its efforts have failed in Colorado and Mississippi.

Contact Capital Bureau Chief Ed Vogel at evogel@reviewjournal.com or 775-687-3900.