“A yes vote is not a vote to overturn anything. This is a vote to ensure that the courts will have to fight for a long time,” said Republican Senator Mary Elizabeth Coleman.

Coleman, who is also a conservative constitutional lawyer, said the Legislature, dominated by Republicans, could also ask voters to overturn the amendment if it passes.

Still, the move would mean “the wind will be at our backs” in court battles to overturn the restrictions, said Emily Wales, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood Great Plains, which operates in four states and is the only group in recent years. to provide abortions in Missouri. They stopped completely just before Roe was overthrown.

“It will seem extremely different to us to say, ‘Missouri people have a constitutional right.’ If you want to interfere with that, you have to have a very good cause,” she said.

There is precedent for an amendment that does not fix everything right away. An Ohio measure passed last year virtually overturned a law banning abortion once heart activity can be detected, at about six weeks and before women often realize they are pregnant . The execution had already been blocked by a court. Ohio advocates have won preliminary cases against other regulations, but those battles aren’t over yet and they fear lawmakers will block the use of taxpayer funds to support access.

“Having fewer legal restrictions doesn’t necessarily make sense for someone if they can’t afford the financial cost,” said Lexis Dotson-Dufault, executive director of the Abortion Fund of Ohio .

The most populous state with an abortion ballot measure in place this year is Florida. It would take the approval of 60 percent of voters to win. And Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis’ administration has alleged fraud in the signature-gathering process that put the vote on the ballot. This could serve as the basis for a legal challenge over whether the amendment would take effect on January 7. Meanwhile, supporters of the measure are suing current and former state Department of Health officials over their efforts to convince television stations to stop airing an ad in favor of the amendment. .

The office of state Attorney General Ashley Moody, a Republican who sought to keep the measure off the ballot, did not respond to an interview request.

A Nevada measure wouldn’t make an immediate splash because the law would require it to pass not only in November, but also in 2026.

In Colorado, Maryland and New York – where the measure does not specifically mention “abortion” but prohibits discrimination based on “pregnancy outcome” – abortion is already permitted at least until viability – generally considered after 20 weeks, with some exceptions.

The Colorado measure would also repeal the ban on using taxpayer dollars for abortion. A new law would be needed to add abortion to health insurance for government employees and people with Medicaid coverage.

The Arizona amendment would take effect with the governor’s proclamation if voters approve it. The state bans abortion after 15 weeks – and most take place before then. Earlier this year, some Republican lawmakers in this political battleground state joined Democrats in repealing a much more restrictive 1864 ban before it could be enforced.

In Nebraska, the ballot includes competing measures: One would ban abortion after 12 weeks of pregnancy, with some exceptions, echoing the current ban but leaving open the possibility of tighter restrictions. The other would allow abortion until viability.

To take effect, an amendment would require not only majority support, but also more votes than the other measure.

In South Dakota, where abortion is banned throughout pregnancy, opponents and advocates are fighting for a measure that would prohibit the state from regulating abortion in the first trimester and only allow regulation for the second and third trimesters only in certain health circumstances.

If the measure passes and survives the challenge, it would come into force on July 1, 2025.

The Life Defense Fund is focused on its campaign to defeat the measure at the ballot box rather than on what might come next, said the group’s spokeswoman, Caroline Woods.

Dakotans for Health sponsored the amendment and expects the Republican-dominated Legislature to try to “thread this needle” and impose restrictions in the second quarter if the amendment passes, the co-founder of the group, Rick Weiland.

And that would likely mean more prosecutions.

“This is a problem that will never go away,” Weiland said.