Nevada Court makes correct ruling!

iVillage Member
Registered: 11-29-2005
Nevada Court makes correct ruling!
Sun, 01-17-2010 - 10:22am

Nevada Court Halts Flawed Proposed Ballot Initiative Aimed At Interfering With Women's Private Health Care Decisions
January 8, 2010

CONTACT: (212) 549-2666;

CARSON CITY, NV - In a legal challenge seeking to block the "Personhood Nevada" petition, an initiative that could potentially ban a range of reproductive health care in the state, Judge Russell of the First Judicial District today declared the initiative invalid.

An individual woman, a pharmacist and an obstetrician-gynecologist filed a legal challenge against the petition on November 12, 2009, arguing that the initiative proposes far reaching changes to the Nevada Constitution and laws, is misleading and fails to give voters a clear understanding of the changes it proposes and its purpose and effect.

"I am pleased that the court recognized that the initiative was confusing and failed to tell voters that it would affect access to reproductive health services," said Emmily Bristol, one of the plaintiffs.

The initiative attempted to re-define the term "person" to include a fertilized egg and all subsequent stages of prenatal development. According to the initiative's proponents, the newly defined "persons" would have full constitutional rights under the Nevada Constitution. The initiative could have banned all abortions and commonly used forms of birth control. In addition, it could have interfered with doctors' ability to treat life-threatening pregnancies, miscarriages, and infertility, as well as banned some stem cell research and other life-saving therapies and cures.

"Today's decision rightfully prevents this sweeping and misleading initiative from being placed on the 2010 ballot," said Lee Rowland, one of the attorneys for plaintiffs. "This initiative could have impacted literally thousands of laws, inviting lawyers and the courts to reinterpret every Nevada law and regulation that contains the word 'person' all at the expense of Nevada taxpayers. The key problem is that it covered too many issues, and failed to explain to voters its intent and impact on Nevada law."

Plaintiffs in today's legal challenge, Bristol v. Personhood Nevada, include Emmily Bristol, Dr. Mindy Hsu, and Dr. William Ramos. Lawyers on the case include John Griffin and Jason Woodbury, Kaempfer Crowell Renshaw Gronauer & Fiorentino in Carson City, Rowland and Maggie McLetchie of the ACLU of Nevada, Mimi Liu, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, and Diana Kasdan, ACLU Reproductive Freedom Project.


Powered by
iVillage Member
Registered: 10-11-2005
Sun, 01-17-2010 - 2:59pm

I really hate sneaky sneaky initiative (we have one those guys up here in Washington state that is just destroying our state and he really doesn't care who he hurts as long as he gets what he wants) I'm glad someone was watching what this group was up to and was able to put stop to it.


~~Sam stitches well with others, runs with scissors in her pocket. Cheerful and stupid.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-06-2008
Mon, 01-18-2010 - 7:39am
I really hope more comes out on this and sheds some light on the truth of the 'fetal rights/personhood' movement. I do not think people really realize what this has the potential to do to all pregnant women and according to this apparently all women of childbearing age.
This will go way beyond just abortion and is the reason why I am pro choice. We cannot turn pregnant women into second class incubators with no rights because that is what will happen.
Either you believe the rights of the woman (and by this I mean all pregnant women, the overwhelming majority of which intend on giving birth) take precedence or the rights of the fetus take precedence, which potentially turns women into merely incubators and any and all pregnancy decisions are made my courts not families. I really do not see any other way since two people cannot have equal rights over the same body.

Lilypie Fifth Birthday tickers

Lilypie Fourth Birthday tickers
iVillage Member
Registered: 05-02-2006
Mon, 01-18-2010 - 12:35pm

I'll just park my 'ditto' behind everything you said.

2010 Siggy
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-07-2008
Mon, 01-18-2010 - 2:18pm
There are people that really *do* believe that human life is so sacred that a woman becomes an incubator who must do everything in their power to protect the life they've been entrusted. Those people see nothing wrong with granting a fetus personhood and every protection possible. While I think they're unrealistic I admire those who really do live out there beliefs. I don't, however, appreciate them trying to legislate me to live *my* life according to their beliefs.