Voters in 2026 will have another chance to reshape America’s reproductive health landscape. Missouri and Nevada have approved abortion-related measures on their ballots in this fall’s elections, and a handful of other states may also have them. Although public support for reproductive rights and legal abortion remains high after the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2022 decision was overturned, Roe vs. Wadeseveral of the 2026 bills would rescind reproductive rights support policies or recognize the rights of unborn children, a reminder that a successful ballot measure does not end the state’s debate on abortion.
Measures to recognize rights
In four states that span the ideological spectrum, 2026 voters are likely to consider measures that establish or strengthen reproductive rights.
Ballot measures could have an especially significant impact in politically divided states that protect reproductive rights. This also applies to Nevada, where voters can only amend the state constitution with two affirmative votes in consecutive even-numbered years. In 2024, Nevadans overwhelmingly voted in favor of Question 6, which recognized a fundamental right to abortion. A second yes vote would ultimately result in approval of the amendment. Abortion is already legal in Nevada up to 24 weeks of pregnancy under a ballot measure passed in the 1990s.
Still, question 6 will be influential. Supporters argue the amendment would create more permanent protections and provide tools to challenge existing state regulations. For example, the court last year lifted an injunction that blocked enforcement of a state law requiring parents to be notified before a minor can secure an abortion. A new challenge to the law by Planned Parenthood is pending in the Nevada Supreme Court.
The state’s Republican governor has also threatened to veto reproductive rights measures, including recent legislation that would protect in vitro fertilization and require it to be covered by the state’s Medicaid program. Voter approval of Question 6 in November could put reproductive rights on a stronger footing in Nevada.
Similar is the case in Virginia, where voters this year will consider a constitutional amendment that would protect “the right to make and exercise one’s own decisions in all matters related to pregnancy.” Virginia’s constitutional amendment process requires the Legislature to approve a ballot measure twice (with one election in between) before it goes to voters. The measure first received legislative approval in early 2025. Lawmakers approved the measure for a second time this month, ensuring it will appear on the ballot.
Current Virginia law allows abortions up to 26 weeks of pregnancy. How Virginia is historically a swing state, with Republicans and Democrats gaining and losing control of the governor’s mansion and the Legislature, could still lead to major changes in how the state votes. The proposed amendment would strengthen reproductive rights against the wishes of a shifting legislative majority. Importantly, Virginia is a destination for out-of-state abortion seekers from across the South, and a successful amendment would maintain that access point for patients.
Other rights protection proposals could trigger even more dramatic changes on the ground. The most significant impact may be felt in Idaho, which has one of the strictest abortion bans in the nation. The Idaho Reproductive Freedom and Privacy Act Initiative would recognize the state’s statutory rights to reproductive freedom and privacy regarding “pregnancy, contraception, infertility treatment, prenatal and postnatal care, childbirth, continuing one’s pregnancy, miscarriage care, and abortion care.” The bill has already sparked a lawsuit, with the state Supreme Court requiring that the proposal’s short title be rewritten to clarify that the ballot measure would legalize abortion until viability.
Idaho law requires residents to collect the required number of signatures, representing 6% of the total population, in 18 of the state’s 35 legislative districts before a ballot measure can go to voters. In November 2025, Idahoans United for Women and Families announced that it had already collected more than 50,000 of the 71,000 signatures needed to put the measure on the ballot. The deadline for submitting signatures is May 1st. It’s difficult to gauge how much support the bill would garner if passed, but a 2024 poll commissioned by Idahoans United showed that 63 percent of those surveyed oppose the felony charges against abortion providers currently required by law.
In Oregon, a petition is underway to support a constitutional amendment that would specify that the state constitution’s equality language prohibits discrimination based on gender identity, pregnancy, and sexual orientation, and protects contraception, abortion, same-sex marriage, and gender-affirming care. Oregon’s action would also make clear that restrictions affecting these protections are subject to strict judicial review, a strict standard that is very difficult to meet in practice. Oregon already has some of the strongest protections in the nation for abortion and LGBTQ+ rights, and this amendment would reassure voters that those protections will not change, sending a strong message by removing the currently unenforced portion of the state constitution that bans same-sex marriage (a federal judge struck down that provision in 2014, and the U.S. Supreme Court ruled the following year).
Rights restriction measures
In 2024, anti-abortion opponents gained some support. Protective ballot measures have failed in South Dakota and Florida, and Nebraska passed a bill banning abortions after 12 weeks. Now, a ballot measure that would restrict reproductive choices could be before voters. It has been defeated for now, but there is a possibility that it will come back in the future.
In Missouri, reproductive rights advocates scored perhaps the most impressive victory of 2024. Even though Missouri had one of the strictest anti-abortion laws in the nation, voters there approved a reproductive rights ballot measure. Since then, Missouri has become something of a cautionary tale for reproductive rights advocates. Despite the ballot measure, medical abortion remains not widely available in Missouri, with only a handful of clinics offering the surgical procedure. The state’s Republican attorney general has fought to keep some abortion regulations in place, including the abortion provider targeting regulation known as TRAP. The regulations include requirements that clinics have admitting privileges to nearby hospitals and that patients wait 72 hours before receiving an abortion.
Additionally, there is the 2026 version of Missouri Amendment 3, which repeals the 2024 Amendment, revokes the state’s reproductive rights, and prohibits abortion from the moment of conception, except in cases of fetal abnormality, certain medical emergencies, rape and incest (the latter only applies to the first 12 weeks of pregnancy).
The authors of the 2026 Amendment framed the bill in a way that both confused voters and increased its chances of passing. State lawmakers initially showed no intention of repealing the 2024 amendment. Instead, they proposed an amendment as follows: allow Abortion in cases of fetal abnormality, medical emergencies, rape, and incest, even though abortion is already legal in the state under those circumstances. They also suggested voters wanted a ballot provision banning gender-affirming care for minors, which is already prohibited by state law. Reproductive rights advocates challenged the appropriateness of the ballot language, and appeals courts across the state requested that the ballot language be rewritten to make clear that a “yes” vote would invalidate the 2024 amendment.
There is an outside chance that Montana voters will consider amendments proposed in the law. people Under the state constitution, it begins the moment the egg is fertilized. Montana voters approved the Reproductive Freedom Amendment in 2024, but the state’s Republican Party argues that voters didn’t understand what choice they were making, arguing that fetal sexuality is a morally paramount issue that even requires ignoring voters’ wishes.
When the Legislature refers an amendment in Montana, two-thirds of lawmakers must agree to move forward before the ballot measure goes to voters. Montana’s character rating fell nine votes short of the ballot. But the narrow margin suggests the state’s problems are not resolved.
continuing battle
With these measures, ballots are likely to tell a complex story about the impact of voter-driven constitutional changes. Reproductive rights advocates see the voting system as a way to strengthen states’ rights that already protect reproductive rights. Moreover, for these supporters, a ballot measure could be the only way forward in states like Idaho and Missouri, where Republicans aligned with anti-abortion movements are likely to control all three branches of government for the foreseeable future.
But not all states with bans allow citizens to put amendments on the ballot. And of course, there is no guarantee that reproductive rights legislation will pass in deeply conservative states, even where it has passed. Even when it comes to voting measures. do Anti-abortion lawmakers in politically uncompetitive states have shown a willingness to roll back, reinvent or eliminate protections established by voters.
Ballot measures will continue to be an important element in reproductive disputes, but they are by no means a silver bullet for reproductive rights advocates.
Mary Ziegler is the Martin Luther King Jr. Professor of Law at the University of California, Davis School of Law.
Recommended Citation: Mary Ziegler, Abortion Ballot Measures in 2026Sᴛᴀᴛᴇ Cᴏᴜʀᴛ Rᴇᴘᴏʀᴛ (January 20, 2026), https://statecourtreport.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/2026-abortion-popular-ballot-measures
