(protesters cheer) >>[Left-hand announcer] We will stand for the unborn.

>>[Right-hand protesters] Repro rights!

JAHD KHALIL: This fall, Virginians are voting on changes to the state constitution.

I'm Jahd Khalil, VPM's state politics reporter and I've been talking to people who are for and against the proposed amendments.

In this episode, we're talking about reproductive rights.

In a 2022 landmark ruling, the US Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, upending decades of federal protections for abortion access.

That means it's now up to the states to decide what to do about reproductive care.

Proponents say the Right to Reproductive Freedom Amendment is about securing not just abortion rights but access to healthcare broadly.

SARA SANATKAR: When this fight started, it didn't just start and end with abortion.

JAHD KHALIL: Opponents argue it goes too far.

AMY McINERNY: Virginians need to be aware that this is much more extreme than Roe v. Wade.

JAHD KHALIL: Soon, Virginia voters will have their say.

This is "Amending Virginia."

(soft tense music) Virginia is the only state in the American South that hasn't banned abortion or restricted access to the procedure since the fall of Roe v. Wade.

It's made the commonwealth a destination for people who wish to terminate their pregnancies.

Virginia law permits abortion in the first and second trimesters.

Third-trimester abortions are prohibited, barring some rare exceptions.

Democrats proposed an amendment to the state constitution that they say keeps decisions about reproductive care between a patient and their doctor.

This amendment isn't just about abortion.

It includes protections for prenatal and postpartum care, contraception, miscarriage management and fertility care.

It also reduces barriers to third-trimester abortions and shields medical care providers from criminal liability.

I wanted to get a better understanding of why voters are being asked to decide on this now so I met up with Caroline Legros at the Virginia Museum of History and Culture.

CAROLINE LEGROS: What we see in the 20th century is a path that sort of mirrors other Southern conservative, more conservative-leaning states where the state does have restrictions on the right to an abortion.

But with Roe v. Wade in 1973, the right to an abortion is enshrined in federal law.

So there are these protections that trickle down to the state level in Virginia that permit abortion up to a certain period.

JAHD KHALIL: Can you talk about what's been going on recently with this?

CAROLINE LEGROS: Sure.

So in 2022, we have the Dobbs decision that came down from the Supreme Court of the United States.

That decision essentially repealed that national right to abortion access, and it returned this question of "Should abortion be legal?"

to the states and their legislatures to decide.

So it just sort of opens up the debate in a way that, before Dobbs was decided, wasn't really possible.

JAHD KHALIL: That's why we're considering >>That's right.

JAHD KHALIL: this amendment now.

>>Yep.

JAHD KHALIL: It's because that decision has gone to the states, so it's up to Virginians.

>>Exactly.

JAHD KHALIL: to legislate on this in a certain way.

CAROLINE LEGROS: Exactly, and Virginia is not the only state that is discussing this issue in a sort of more focused and heated way.

Some of those states, you would see abortion bans as early as six weeks go into effect immediately following Dobbs.

Virginia wasn't in that particular situation, so Virginia actually hasn't enacted any legislative change to the access to abortion since Dobbs.

This constitutional amendment that's being proposed represents the most sort of legislative progress from either side of the aisle on this issue.

JAHD KHALIL: After getting that background, it was time to talk with advocates who support and oppose the amendment.

First, I met Sara Sanatkar at her grandparents' house in Virginia Beach.

She lived here after immigrating from Iran a decade ago.

(light music) SARA SANATKAR: This is the first home that we moved into as a family with my mom and my brother.

It's very symbolic to, like, the first safe space that I was able to step into.

JAHD KHALIL: So when you said safe space, can you tell me what you meant by that?

SARA SANATKAR: In a country like Iran, it is beautiful, it is my home, but you also don't have freedoms, especially as a woman.

You're a second-class citizen.

You don't have access to bodily autonomy.

JAHD KHALIL: So you moved here 10 years ago.

How has the conversation about abortion and reproductive rights changed since then?

SARA SANATKAR: I think it has changed drastically, right?

Like, you talk about the overturn of Dobbs and the lack of protections around reproductive rights, and what I am witnessing happen in Southern states, I've made sure that no matter what I've done, it has centered around protecting these very fundamental freedoms for people.

I think when the Dobbs decision happened, it was one of those things that made me feel very deeply sad.

I was mostly very quiet that day, almost didn't want to talk to anybody 'cause it just was... Like, we knew that it was somewhat coming, but for it to finally happen, it was jarring.

But it also was a moment where I couldn't just sit there and be sad.

It was like, "OK, now we have to prepare for the fight ahead."

JAHD KHALIL: Why are you in support of Virginians passing this?

SARA SANATKAR: Passing this constitutional amendment would provide this sense of calmness for voters in Virginia where every November, they don't have to be anxious about whether next session they're going to lose these rights or not, these rights are going to be under attack or not.

This would, on a constitutional level, make sure that no matter who is in the legislative body, they cannot just come in and interfere in your personal healthcare decisions.

JAHD KHALIL: A lot of the conversation about this issue tends to focus on abortion, but there's more to it than that.

Can you describe, you know, why you used the term reproductive rights or reproductive freedom?

SARA SANATKAR: When this fight started, it didn't just start and end with abortion.

We have felt the need to expand our fight and our defense and our protections.

So when we talk about reproductive care, we are not just talking about abortion.

We're talking about a broad spectrum of care that has been impacted and directly attacked in Southern states where abortion has been banned.

JAHD KHALIL: What do you make of the argument that this is constitutional language that's too broad?

SARA SANATKAR: Is it too broad for people to want to be able to access the fertility care that they need?

Is it too broad for Virginians to want to have access to birth control?

Is it too broad for them to want to have access to abortion rights if they need one?

Is it too broad?

I would say “No.” This constitutional amendment not only would protect those rights, it also would protect patients, doctors and nurses who are either providing the care that people need or receiving the care that they need to make sure that they're not being prosecuted.

I think the reality is that if we don't pass this constitutional amendment, we'll all find ourselves having to flee states like other families have in the Southern states, having to flee countries like I have had to flee Iran to access the freedoms that I did not have.

JAHD KHALIL: After speaking with Sara, I wanted to hear from an opponent.

I met Amy McInerny in Alexandria at a cafe connected to the Catholic Diocese of Arlington.

I asked her about her career in the movement opposing abortion.

AMY McINERNY: I work for the Catholic Diocese of Arlington, and it's a privilege to serve in the Office for Marriage, Family and Respect Life, where we deal with all the issues that the modern family deals with and try to support and form families.

JAHD KHALIL: How does that work inform the way that you're, you know, looking at this proposed constitutional amendment?

AMY McINERNY: Right now in Virginia, abortion is legal through all nine months.

And through 27 weeks, a woman can have an abortion for any reason.

And after that, for later-term abortions, there are some protections built in to the Code of Virginia in the form of the requirement that three physicians sign off to certify that a late-term abortion is in the woman's best interest.

As a medical consumer, I want to make sure that I have a trained, licensed provider for any medical procedure in a facility that is clean and has met the healthcare regulations.

This opens the door to all of that going away, because it impacts the General Assembly's ability to regulate, and I don't think most Virginians will be comfortable with that.

JAHD KHALIL: It sounds like you're feeling like this constitutional amendment would supersede a lot of the regulations that are out there.

AMY McINERNY: Well, the first two words of the statute, "Every individual has the right..." It doesn't say every adult.

“Every individual,” so your 14-year-old, your 15-year-old.

And then as you read the resolution, it goes on to say that this is a fundamental right that requires strict scrutiny, which includes language around not interfering with any individual's “autonomous decision-making.” I'm in favor of autonomous decision-making, but what does it mean in the law?

We don't know.

There are so many vague, undefined terms in this resolution that I think Virginians should pause and look at it because there, I believe, will be unintended negative consequences flowing from enactment.

JAHD KHALIL: The authors of this amendment have cited Roe v. Wade and wanting to codify Roe v. Wade.

How do you see the comparison between, sort of the constitutional precedent as it was because of the Roe decision versus the way that this proposed amendment is written?

AMY McINERNY: Virginians need to be aware that this is much more extreme than Roe v. Wade, that the status quo of the Code of Virginia aligns more closely with the Roe decision.

So what we have on the books right now and what we will have on the books on Nov.

4, if this amendment fails, is closer to the goals of Roe v. Wade than this amendment.

JAHD KHALIL: What do you think would be a more appropriate way to legislate or put something in the constitution on this issue?

AMY McINERNY: I don't agree that the best outcome is amending the constitution.

That limits the will of the people - procedurally.

I mean, you can take an amendment out of the constitution, as we're seeing, you know, this election cycle, and redo it.

But that's a very long and tedious process, whereas the legislative process of a bill becoming a law is much more reflective.

That's a better way to have your finger on the pulse of the people.

There has been rhetorical frenzy around these issues, and I think this is a moment to stop and for Virginians to take a breath and say, "Let's look past the rhetorical and look and see what the law will really be, and how it will shape the future of our commonwealth."

JAHD KHALIL: I thought what I heard from these two women boiled down to the role of the General Assembly.

Do Virginians want to leave power over abortion access and other reproductive care in the hands of the state's elected officials?

Or is the possibility of facing new abortion restrictions every time the statehouse changes political hands not worth the risk?

Voters will decide whether, or not, to adopt the Right to Reproductive Freedom Amendment.

Look for our next episode of "Amending Virginia," where we'll discuss another amendment on marriage equality.

Until then, visit VPM.org for all of our coverage related to the 2026 election.

(soft tense music) (bright music)