Government

New York City Bar Association Combats Misinformation This Election Season

Bar association is helping to keep folks informed this election.

By  
on
voting election gerrymander

(Image via Getty)

If you live in the Empire State, you’ve likely seen some electioneering materials about Prop 1. …And the related misinformation about it. Prop 1 is a proposed amendment to section 11 of article 1 of the state constitution, to provide equal rights — basically a New York ERA. And as much as you might hope that something as basic as equal rights would be uncontroversial, particularly in a reliably blue state like NY, of course, you’d be wrong.

First, the text of the proposal:

Section 1. Resolved (if the Assembly concur), That section 11 of article 1 of the constitution be amended to read as follows:

§ 11. a. No person shall be denied the equal protection of the laws of this state or any subdivision thereof. No person shall, because of race, color, ethnicity, national origin, age, disability, creed [or], religion, or sex, including sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, pregnancy, pregnancy outcomes, and reproductive healthcare and autonomy, be subjected to any discrimination in [his or her] their civil rights by any other person or by any firm, corporation, or institution, or by the state or any agency or subdivision of the state, pursuant to law.

b. Nothing in this section shall invalidate or prevent the adoption of any law, regulation, program, or practice that is designed to prevent or dismantle discrimination on the basis of a characteristic listed in this section, nor shall any characteristic listed in this section be interpreted to interfere with, limit, or deny the civil rights of any person based upon any other characteristic identified in this section.

§  2. Resolved (if the Assembly concur), That the foregoing amendment be submitted to the people for approval at the general election to be held in the year 2024 in accordance with the provisions of the election law.

Explanation – Matter in underscored is new; matter in brackets [ ] is old law to be omitted.

So, what’s the complaint with that? Well, Dems in the state are promoting the measure as protecting abortion rights. And one of the most common refrains from conservatives is “it DoEsN’T EvEn MeNtIoN aB0RtIoN.” Kudos for staying on messaging, but you have a synonym problem. As you can read above, the prop protects reproductive healthcare. Which, admittedly, is more expansive than just abortion care. But with the GOP coming for IVF and contraception, that just seems like good planning.

Another claim seen on lawn signs around the state, “Protect Parental Rights, Vote No Prop 1,” is that parental rights will be impacted by the ERA. Initially that confused me, because why would you think that based on an equal rights amendment? But what’s behind it is a bunch of trans fear-mongering that children might be able to seek gender affirming care without parental consent. Which is all bullshit. The NYC Bar makes it clear that the proposal “does not address parental rights, which are governed by other developed areas of State and federal law. Prop 1 does not change existing law with respect to parental consent.” (There’s other trans-panic baiting in opposition to the prop, none of which hold water to actual interrogation.)

And Columbia Law School’s ERA Project goes on to clarify:

Sponsored

The New York ERA will not change the existing fundamental rights that parents have to make decisions about the care and upbringing of children. Rather, the New York ERA could bolster existing parental rights by prohibiting discriminatory interference with families and parental decision-making. The potential of the New York ERA to address intersectional forms of discrimination is particularly significant for parents whose rights are threatened on the basis of one or more protected characteristics, including race, disability, and sex. Finally, the New York ERA’s comprehensive protection of abortion and reproductive rights can and should be understood to include the rights to decide if, when, and how to parent.

The NY Libertarian Party fears (yes, the Libertarian Party wants fewer protections from government interference in fundamental freedoms because we are truly through the looking glass) that the amendment’s inclusion of national origin opens up the door to noncitizen voting. One teeny, tiny problem with that — as NYC Bar notes, NY wouldn’t be the only state (and the federal government already provides that protection) that protects national origin (“Other states that already have “national origin” in the equal protection clauses of their respective constitutions include Alaska, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Massachusetts, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, Texas and Virginia.”), all without sparking a craze of a noncitizen voting.

There’s a bunch more, and you can take a look at the nonpartisan fact sheet from the bar association for yourself below.

20221367-Prop1ERAEducationalDocument

Sponsored

Kathryn Rubino HeadshotKathryn Rubino is a Senior Editor at Above the Law, host of The Jabot podcast, and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer. AtL tipsters are the best, so please connect with her. Feel free to email her with any tips, questions, or comments and follow her on Twitter @Kathryn1 or Mastodon @[email protected].

Topics

, , ,