| Amendment 1 | |
| Country: | Tennessee |
| Question: | Shall Article I, of the Constitution of Tennessee be amended by adding the following language as a new, appropriately designated section: Nothing in this Constitution secures or protects a right to abortion or requires the funding of an abortion. The people retain the right through their elected state representatives and state senators to enact, amend, or repeal statutes regarding abortion, including, but not limited to, circumstances of pregnancy resulting from rape or incest or when necessary to save the life of the mother. |
| Yes: | 729,163 |
| No: | 657,192 |
| Total: | 1,386,355 |
| Mapcaption: | Yes No |
| Notes: | Source: Tennessee Secretary of State[1] |
The Tennessee Constitutional Amendment: 1, commonly known as Amendment 1 or the No State Constitutional Right to Abortion and Legislative Power to Regulate Abortion Amendment, is an approved legislatively referred constitutional amendment to the Constitution of Tennessee that appeared on the ballot on November 4, 2014.[2] The amendment would ensure that Constitution of Tennessee, would not support, fund, or protect the right to an abortion.
The amendment added the following to Article I of the Constitution of Tennessee:
"Nothing in this Constitution secures or protects a right to abortion or requires the funding of an abortion. The people retain the right through their elected state representatives and state senators to enact, amend, or repeal statutes regarding abortion, including, but not limited to, circumstances of pregnancy resulting from rape or incest or when necessary to save the life of the mother."[3]
The following is the official text from the Tennessee Secretary of State, that appeared on the ballot:
"Shall Article I, of the Constitution of Tennessee be amended by adding the following language as a new, appropriately designated section?
Nothing in this Constitution secures or protects a right to abortion or requires the funding of an abortion. The people retain the right through their elected state representatives and state senators to enact, amend, or repeal statutes regarding abortion, including, but not limited to, circumstances of pregnancy resulting from rape or incest or when necessary to save the life of the mother."
A vote for Amendment 1 supports ensuring the Constitution of Tennessee does not uphold most abortions and supporting the General Assembly having power to pass laws regarding the regulation of abortion.
A vote against Amendment 1 opposes this amendment and restricts the General Assembly from creating legislation or passing laws that regulate abortion.
Officials and politicians, mainly Republicans, voiced their opposition for the amendment, both during the vote on it in the General Assembly and when it appeared on the ballot. Pro-life organizations, such as Tennessee Right to Life and Americans United for Life, also voiced strong support for the amendment. Leslie Hunse, the education director for Tennessee Right to Life, said, "We want our constitution to go back to neutral on the issue of abortion, so we can pass some common sense regulations to protect mothers and children."[4]
"Yes on 1" was the main organization supporting the campaign, with signs and television advertisements.
Vote NO on One Tennessee led the campaign in opposition to the ballot measure. Representatives, senators, and some faith leaders opposed the amendment. The ACLU and Planned Parenthood, among other large organizations, also opposed the amendment, and contributed large campaign contributions up to the election. Planned Parenthood organizations nationwide, spent a total of nearly $2 million, in campaign contributions opposing Amendment 1, while the ACLU donated $135,000 in opposition.
State Senator Roy Herron said, "Their pitch is that this would make the constitution neutral on abortion. How would they like the Constitution neutral on the Second Amendment so legislators could outlaw the right to bear arms? How about making the First Amendment neutral?"
Nashville-based, statewide newspaper, The Tennessean, also opposed this amendment, stating, "Making any type of law immune from a court challenge is shortsighted, prejudicial — and in the case of what should be a woman's own decision about her health — downright dangerous. For those reasons, The Tennessean recommends a vote of no on Amendment 1."
| Poll source | Date(s)administered | Samplesize | Marginof error | ForAmendment 1 | AgainstAmendment 1 | Undecided | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Middle Tennessee State University[5] | October 22–26, 2014 | 600 | ± 4.0% | 39% | 32% | 29% | |
| Remington Research[6] | September 24–25, 2014 | 600 | ± 4.0% | 50% | 22% | 28% | |
| Vanderbilt University[7] | April 28-May 18, 2014 | 1,505 | ± 3.4% | 23% | 71% | 6% |
In 2014, Tracey E. George, along with 4 others, filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for Middle Tennessee, alleging that the state's method of counting votes for the amendment was unconstitutional. They argued that the state violated the Tennessee Constitution by not ensuring that voters who supported the amendment also voted in the gubernatorial race. The state's defense claimed their approach was based on constitutional interpretation and historical practice. The court denied the state's request to dismiss the case. In response, state attorneys filed a counter-suit in a Williamson County court, asserting that their vote-counting method aligned with the state constitution.[8] [9] On April 21, 2016, Williamson County Judge Michael Binkley sided with the state, allowing votes from individuals who didn't participate in the gubernatorial race to be counted for the amendment. However, the next day, federal judge Kevin H. Sharp ruled against the state in the original federal lawsuit. He stated that only votes from individuals who also voted for gubernatorial candidates should be considered valid for the amendment. Judge Sharp emphasized the inequality in weighing votes, where those who voted against Amendment 1 and for governor were not given the same significance as those who voted in favor of the amendment but did not participate in the governor's race. Consequently, Sharp ordered the state to recount the 2014 election results.[10] [11]
On April 26, 2016, Tennessee Attorney General Herbert Slatery appealed Sharp's ruling to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, asserting that the matter of determining the required vote to amend the Tennessee Constitution should be decided by state law and Tennessee courts. State attorneys requested a postponement of the recount until the appeal was resolved, citing the need to avoid additional strain on election officials preparing for upcoming elections. On January 9, 2018, the Sixth Circuit, in a unanimous decision, stated that the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate how the state had diluted their votes, emphasizing that federal intervention in a lawful state election process was unwarranted. The court concluded that the controversy surrounding the 2014 approval of Amendment 1 needed resolution. The plaintiffs then appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which declined to hear the case on October 1, 2018.[12] [13]