Michigan "Dismemberment Abortion Ban Act" Initiative (2020)

Michigan "Dismemberment Abortion Ban Act" Initiative
Election date November 3, 2020
Topic Abortion
Status Not on the ballot
Type State statute	Origin Citizens
List of Michigan ballot measuresMichigan Proposal 1Michigan Proposal 2Submit

The Michigan "Dismemberment Abortion Ban Act" Initiative was not on the ballot in Michigan as an indirect initiated state statute on November 3, 2020.

The ballot initiative would have banned dismemberment abortion, which is also known as dilation and evacuation abortion.

The ballot initiative would have defined dismemberment abortion as an abortion which uses an instrument, device, or object to "dismember a living fetus by disarticulating limbs or decapitating the head from the fetal torso or removing the dismembered fetal body parts from the uterus regardless of whether the fetal body parts are removed by the same instrument, device, or object or by suction or other means."

Text of measure

Full text

The following underlined text would have been added to state law and struck-through text would have been deleted from state law:

Sec. 90h. (1) This section shall be known and may be cited as the “partial-birth abortion and dismemberment abortion ban act”. (2) Except as provided in subsection (3), a physician, an individual performing an act, task, or function under the delegatory authority of a physician, or any other individual who is not a physician or not otherwise legally authorized to perform an abortion who knowingly performs a partial-birth abortion or dismemberment abortion and kills a human fetus is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than 2 years or a fine of not more than $50,000.00, or both. (3) It is not a violation of subsection (2) if in the physician’s reasonable medical judgment a partial-birth abortion or dismemberment abortion is necessary to save the life of a mother whose life is endangered by a physical disorder, physical illness, or physical injury. (4) The spouse of the mother at the time of the partial-birth abortion or dismemberment abortion or either parent of the mother if the mother had not attained the age of 18 at the time of the partial-birth abortion or dismemberment abortion may file a civil action against the physician or individual described in subsection (2) for a violation of this section unless the pregnancy is a result of the plaintiff’s criminal conduct or the plaintiff consented to the partial-birth abortion or dismemberment abortion. A plaintiff who prevails in a civil action brought under this section may recover both of the following: (a) Actual damages, including damages for emotional distress. (b) Treble damages for the cost of the partial-birth abortion or dismemberment abortion. (5) A woman who obtains or seeks to obtain a partial-birth abortion or dismemberment abortion is not a conspirator to commit a violation of this section. (6) This section does not create a right to abortion. (7) Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, a person shall not perform an abortion that is prohibited by law. (8) Nothing in this section shall be construed to repeal or amend, explicitly or by implication, any provision of law prohibiting or regulating abortion, including, but not limited to, section 14, 15, 322, or 323. (9) The legislature, each house of the legislature and a legislator, may intervene in an action commenced in a court of this state if the legislature or a house of the legislature or a legislator considers the intervention necessary to protect a right or interest of that body or individual because a party to the action challenges the constitutionality or validity of this section. The right to intervene under this subsection exists at any stage of the proceeding, and the legislature, each house of the legislature, and a legislator has the same right to prosecute an appeal, apply for rehearing, or take any other action or step that is had or possessed by a party to the litigation. The right to intervene under this subsection applies to a court proceeding occurring in this state on the effective date of the amendatory act that added this subsection or that is later filed in a court in this state. This subsection is self-executing, but each house of the legislature may adopt rules or policies to facilitate the operation of this subsection. This subsection does not limit a right or duty of the attorney general as provided by law and intervention under this subsection is not a waiver of legislative immunity. (9) (10) As used in this section: (a) “Dismemberment abortion” means an abortion in which the physician, an individual acting under the delegatory authority of the physician, or any other individual performing the abortion deliberately and intentionally uses any instrument, device, or object to dismember a living fetus by disarticulating limbs or decapitating the head from the fetal torso and removing the dismembered fetal body parts from the uterus regardless of whether the fetal body parts are removed by the same instrument, device, or object or by suction or other means. Dismemberment abortion does not include an abortion that uses suction to dismember and remove a body of a fetus from the uterus. (a) (b) “Partial-birth abortion” means an abortion in which the physician, an individual acting under the delegatory authority of the physician, or any other individual performing the abortion deliberately and intentionally vaginally delivers a living fetus until, in the case of a headfirst presentation, the entire fetal head is outside the body of the mother, or in the case of breech presentation, any part of the fetal trunk past the naval Navel is outside the body of the mother, for the purpose of performing an overt act that the person knows will kill the partially delivered living fetus, and performs the overt act, other than completion of delivery, that kills the partially delivered living fetus. (b) (c) “Physician” means an individual licensed by this state to engage in the practice of medicine or the practice of osteopathic medicine and surgery under article 15 of the public health code, 1978 PA 368, MCL 333.16101 to 333.18838.

Sponsors

Michigan Values Life led the campaign in support of the ballot initiative.

Path to the ballot

See also: Laws governing the initiative process in Michigan

In Michigan, the number of signatures required to qualify an indirect initiated state statute for the ballot is equal to 8 percent of votes cast for governor in the last gubernatorial election. Signatures older than 180 days are invalid, which means all signatures must be collected within a 180-day window. Petitions for initiated statutes must be filed 160 days prior to the election. Successful initiative petitions are sent to the legislature, which then has 40 days to pass the proposed law. If the legislature does not approve the initiative, it goes on the ballot. If the legislature approves the initiative, it becomes law without needing the signature of the governor.

The requirements to get an initiated state statute certified for the 2020 ballot:

• Signatures: 340,047 valid signatures were required.
• Deadline: The deadline to submit signatures was May 27, 2020.

Signature petitions are filed with the secretary of state and verified by the board of state canvassers using a random sample method of verification.

Stages of this initiative

The campaign Michigan Values Life filed the ballot initiative on May 30, 2019. The Michigan Board of State Canvassers approved the petition for circulation on June 19, 2019.

Michigan Values Life filed 379,418 signatures on December 23, 2019. Barbara Listing, president of Right to Life of Michigan, said, "Our committed all-volunteer force persevered through significant obstacles that kept being put in their path this year. We’ve received more than 400,000 signatures, but after thorough checking, we’ve whittled it down to our final total of valid signatures."

The Bureau of Elections rejected 6,356 signatures due to damages to petitions, such as tears, smears, stains, and stickers, which brought the total from which a random sample was pulled to 373,062. The Board of State Canvassers delayed the signature verification process due to the coronavirus pandemic. On May 15, 2020, the signature verification process was resumed, with the board setting a deadline of June 1, 2020, for a random sample of 500 signatures to be challenged.

On June 1, the Coalition to Protect Access to Care (CPAC), which was opposed to the ballot initiative, challenged at least 65 signatures from the 500-signature sample as defective. Staff concluded that 22 of the 65 challenged signatures were invalid. Michigan Values Life filed a counter-challenge to revive nine signatures. Staff concluded that two of the nine counter-challenged signatures would be accepted. On June 15, a Bureau of Elections staff report determined that 446 signatures (out of 500 samples signatures) were valid. Since 449 signatures needed to be deemed valid, the staff report recommended that the Board of State Canvassers reject certification.

On June 18, 2020, the Board of State Canvassers directed the Bureau of Elections to check a new, larger sample of 1,600 signatures before July 24, 2020. On July 11, CPAC challenged some of the signatures in the sample, stating that there were "multiple instances of sloppy signature gathering." Mark Brewer, a lawyer for CPAC, stated, "Today I called to the attention of the Bureau of Elections staff a pair of signatures which appear to be signed by the same person, a clear violation of the We are asking that the BOE conduct an investigation, including an interview of the petition circulator who should have witnessed those signatures. It is unacceptable to attempt to enact legislation by breaking the basic rules of signature gathering." Genevieve Marnon, legislative director for the Right to Life of Michigan, responded to the challenge, saying, "All of our circulators are volunteers. We do our very best to train them. We had over 8,000 individual circulators and as much as we try to train them, mistakes do happen. Every petition initiative has mistakes that are made."

OnJuly 21, 2020, Right to Life of Michigan announced that the campaign would not counter-challenge CPAC's findings. Barbara Listing, president of Right to Life of Michigan, said, "Instead of focusing on court challenges regarding the counting process, we will be focusing on the critical 2020 elections moving forward. ... Our volunteers did an excellent job, but the bulk of the errors were things beyond our control, specifically people not knowing their voter registration status or forgetting they already signed the petition. Because we were about 20,000 signatures short of our goal of 400,000, we left room for Planned Parenthood to pick us apart." Lori Carpentier, president Planned Parenthood Advocates of Michigan, responded, "Today is a victory for every doctor and every patient in Michigan, and for every person who’s been forced to endure traumatic procedures because bad laws enacted by Right to Life-backed politicians demanded it."

If the Board of State Canvassers had found that at least 340,047 signatures were valid, the indirect initiative would have been submitted to the Michigan State Legislature, which would have had 40 days to pass the initiative. If it was approved by the legislature, the initiative would have become law. The governor's signature is not needed for a legislatively approved indirect initiative to become law. House Speaker Lee Chatfield (R-107) stated, "I fully anticipate if they present the proposal to us with the proper amount of signatures that it will be passed."

If it would have been rejected or no action was taken, the initiative would have appeared on the ballot for November 3, 2020. Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (D) said that if the initiative appeared on the ballot, "I will actively campaign against adoption."

See also

2020 measures

• 2020 ballot measures
• Abortion on the ballot

Michigan

• Michigan ballot measures
• Michigan ballot measure laws

News and analysis

• Ballot measure lawsuits
• Ballot measure readability
• Ballot measure polls