Support for the state House news bureau comes from medical mutual dedicated to the health and well-being of Ohioans offering health insurance plans, as well as dental vision and wellness programs to help people achieve their goals and remain healthy.

More at Med Mutual Rt.com.

The Law Offices of Porter Wright Morrison, Arthur LLP.

Porter Wright is dedicated to bringing inspired legal outcomes to the Ohio business community.

More at Porter right Rt.com Porter Wright inspired every day the Ohio Education Association, representing 120,000 educators who are united in their mission to create the excellent public schools Every child deserves.

More at OHEA.org.

With abortion access and reproductive rights and legal marijuana both approved by voters.

The process of putting in place new rules is starting.

What's next with issue one and issue to this week in the state of Ohio.

Welcome to the state of ohio.

I'm Karen Kasler.

Now that almost 57% of voters who cast ballots this election have approved issue one, the process of implementing that constitutional amendment on abortion, access and reproductive rights is beginning.

And Republicans and Democrats have different ideas on how that should go.

This week, House Speaker Jason Stephen shot down a draft bill from Republican Representative Jennifer GROSS.

It said state lawmakers, quote, shall have exclusive authority over implementing Ohio issue one and quote, All jurisdiction is hereby withdrawn from and denied to the courts of Common Pleas and all other courts of the State of Ohio on any and all claims attempting to enforce or implement issue one, end quote.

The draft also said it would order the immediate dismissal of lawsuits and violations by judges would be impeachable offenses.

No, I mean, we believe in the Constitution and the three branches of government.

I mean, this is, you know, whatever that was, I think is, you know, this is Schoolhouse Rock type stuff.

We need to make sure that we have the three branches of government and the Constitution is what we abide by.

The idea behind that draft bill was posted on the official government website Ohio House dot gov in the section for House Republicans two days after the election.

And it's its language that's almost identical to an email sent out from a conservative Christian group, Ohio Values Voters, which campaigned against issue one, often with disinformation.

Meanwhile, Senate President Matt Huffman quashed the idea of another ballot issue on abortion coming before voters soon.

I didn't say anything about putting something on the ballot in March, so everybody got that.

Okay.

But on the issue, I don't think there should be anything on the ballot, certainly in in 24.

And, you know, we'll have to see about that going forward.

Huffman had said on election night, quote, This isn't the end.

It really is just the beginning of a revolving door of ballot campaigns to repeal or replace issue one, end quote.

Huffman had also said after the August special election, when voters rejected a proposal to make it harder to amend the Constitution, there would be another abortion amendment to repeal it.

Stevens says there is not a package of proposals from Republicans to implement issue one now, and he expects the judicial system will handle that.

Well, issue one is, you know, a lot of that is going to be up to the courts.

You know, it really is.

I mean, it's a constitutional amendment.

The laws, are they constitutional or not?

That's where that's going to be.

I think we need to continue our focus on, you know, what are we doing for for babies, what are we doing for moms, prenatal, you know, the neonatal care for our children in Ohio, making sure that we are addressing the mortality rate of of newborn babies is extremely important.

It is crucial that we do that and I think was also is important is and I made this in my statement election night is that we have a conversation that is important, not a contest of yelling at one another, but we have a conversation about what are we doing.

27 Republican members of the Ohio House also put out a statement the day after the election saying, quote, We will do everything in our power to prevent our laws from being removed based upon perception of intent.

We were elected to protect the most vulnerable in our state, and we will continue that work and vote.

There was also much of this week on issue to the law that legalizes, regulates and taxes recreational marijuana for Ohioans over 21 that passed with just under 57%.

Huffman Stevens and Governor Mike DeWine met this week on that.

Hoffman said he wants the Senate to lead in making changes to that law.

He says he wants those changes to pass before the law takes effect December 7th.

As this ramps up, it would be better for people going forward to know what the law is than people begin spending money or taking actions.

And then the law changes six months from now or 90 days, you know, a year from now.

Things like that.

So, you know, the things that the governor talked about, I think we're talking about the rate, how the money is spent.

Public use.

If I have this right now that, you know, certain places should be allowed to use marijuana, but not tobacco under current state law, which, you know, there's obviously some conflicts.

I think there's a problem that a portion of the tax that pays consumers goes back to the people who sold them the marijuana.

I think we can find better uses for that.

Huffman and Senate Minority Leader Nikki Antonio also met this week, and she says there are areas where they agree on issue two.

We talked a little bit about the tax, where that goes.

Some of my members of the caucus would like to see it go to education.

I think we should also have the discussion about the PTSD fund for law enforcement.

They've been trying to find ways to fund that for years.

And this could be perhaps the vehicle.

We don't know, along with what was voted on, which was that it would go back to the communities where the licenses are.

I think there's a way for us to follow the will of the people on this one, but also get some clarification.

And I'm hoping we can have some agreement.

DeWine has mentioned regulating the packaging on edible products, limiting marijuana smoke in public places and reducing driving under the influence as changes he'd like to see on issue two.

Back now to ISSUE one.

This week I talked with two lawyers with a lot of interest in that amendment, but from different perspectives.

Mike Goddard Arcus is the president of Ohio Right to Life and is on the state medical board.

He's also a former senior deputy attorney general and is a Republican consultant.

So Ohio has been a solidly red state in elections, going back almost a decade.

Republicans have swept the statewide offices since 2010.

Their Republican supermajorities in the Ohio House and Senate, they passed legislation on abortion that were signed by Republican governors John Kasich and Mike DeWine.

DeWine won all but three counties in his reelection last year.

You were heavily involved in both Issue one in August and issue one in November.

Neither of them went your way with all of that factored in.

Why not?

Well, you know, I look at the voters spoke and the voters always get it right, whether I agree with them or not.

But at the end of the day, 1.6 million voters did believe issue one should not be put in the Constitution.

That's a good, good number.

Wasn't enough.

We obviously weren't successful.

But at the end of the day, I think the issue of abortion is still divided in our state.

You know, we have, what, 3.8 million people show up to vote for the November election.

That is less for August.

So we didn't you know, it wasn't that all 12 million people showed up to weigh in on the issue of abortion.

So at the end of the day, neither win our way.

But what I do know is Ohio is still a red state when we elect individuals, whether it be Governor DeWine, Donald Trump, J.D.

Vance, and all of them happen to be pro-life.

So what we need to do is figure out where we can meet a majority of Ohioans on the issue of life and other social conservative issues, as well as our officeholders.

And that's and that's what we've got to work on.

So looking at issue one in November, was it messaging?

Was there not enough money?

What was it?

Well, we were outspent 4 to 1.

You know, at the end of the day.

And money does a lot in an election.

And, you know, we were we're proud of what we raised.

But at the end of the day, the ads that were run by the other side, we just couldn't overcome.

As it relates to dollars, it's expensive to run a statewide campaign in Ohio.

It just is regardless of where you stand on what issue.

And they were able to flood the airwaves with the message we believe was less than accurate or honest.

There are people who say that your message was less than honest.

And the actual disinformation, though.

So what we have now is we're going to have to live with what we have in the Constitution, and that's going to play out.

And, you know, we never want to be in this position.

But someday soon, we believe we're going to say, hey, we warned you, Ohio, that this is what would happen.

God forbid it does, but we think it's coming.

So one of the things that we know is that a draft proposal from Representative Jennifer GROSS will not go forward, according to Speaker Jason Stevens.

It said the state lawmakers would have exclusive authority over implementing issue one, with all jurisdiction withdrawn from local and state courts.

It would also order the immediate dismissal of lawsuits and violations by judges would be impeachable offenses.

Again, that was just a draft bill.

There are those who opposed issue one, though, that wanted to see some of those things go forward.

I mean, Ohio values voters and that that was part of the an email that went out from that group.

So as a former senior deputy attorney general, a lawyer, but somebody who cares about this, what do you think of that proposal?

Well, I respect and appreciate the passion of Representative GROSS and her colleagues who put that forward.

But it's misguided.

It's unconstitutional.

It doesn't work.

Look, the day after an election, everyone's emotional.

There's knee jerk reactions, not just from you and me and other people, but from our elected officials, too.

And I think that was a knee jerk reaction from people that are very passionate on this issue.

So I think the speaker and the Senate president got it right that this doesn't work.

You can't take away authority via legislation that's in the Constitution.

If we want to change the Constitution, we go back to ballot again.

I think people are tired of it, though.

But you can't pass a law changing the way our judicial branch works, for lack of a better term.

So it was a nonstarter to begin with.

The Ohio Supreme Court has now asked the plaintiffs in the case involving the six week ban to file written arguments on the effect they think issue one has on that case, which was heard before the court in September.

You said during the campaign that Ohio has a ban at viability.

It was called the PEN Capable Act.

You helped write it in 2016 and Governor John Kasich signed it.

So should that now be the the standard, the law in Ohio?

I would argue at the end of the day that, you know, our mission statement from conception until natural death, that's not where the voters see it.

So with that in mind, I believe our paying capable of would withstand court scrutiny even with a new constitutional amendment.

And that's where I believe voters would support right now, whether it's it's 20 weeks, give or take, maybe 22 justices gestational age, of course.

But whether it be a 15 week or 20 week ban, I think that's where a majority of Ohioans are and their position on abortion.

So let's start there.

Let's find that common ground and then work from there and find ways to help women with diapers, car seats, formula, cribs, adoption care, whatever it may be.

But I think we can find some common ground, and I believe it would be pain capable, our 20 to 20 week ban.

And you're okay with that?

Well, again, our mission is to protect life from conception to natural death.

But if that's what we can live with presently, and we'll have to continue to change hearts and minds.

On the six week ban that's before the court.

Does issue one have an impact, Do you think that issue one is going to have an impact on that case?

Yeah, You know, as a 25 year practicing attorney, I believe, yes, it will, because the Constitution trumps state law.

And that's the role of our seven Supreme Court justices to look at the Constitution and what the legislature passes and is it constitutional?

Look, some of these are matters of first impression because the ink's not even dry yet on issue one last week.

So there's going to be some court arguments, there's going to be some things.

But, you know, just on its face, without getting the legal weeds here, you know, you it would appear that the heartbeat law would violate the new constitutional standard.

And when it comes to those court challenges, everybody's predicting court challenges on various laws that some people want to see overturned, some people say are still possible constitutional.

Will Ohio right to Life be involved in some of those court challenges?

And challenging some of the challenges?

We certainly Well, look, the AG represents the state of Ohio, so we wouldn't be the lawyer of record, but we could file an amicus brief and then we will.

And look at the end of the day, if the other side overreaches and tries to strike down our parental consent laws or parental notification laws, there will be a blowback from the voters of the state of Ohio.

You know, I think you're going to be able to find a judge somewhere in Cleveland, Cincinnati or Columbus that will agree with you as well as they'll find a judge in me in West for me in western Ohio.

Okay, look, people form shop.

But at the end of day, if you overreach, if they try to strike down those laws that the average Ohioans think make common sense, it's going to come back and bite them.

Speaking of finding different forms for things, you were part of a lawsuit that moved the impasse over legislative redistricting in Ohio to federal court, which made the decision on the House and Senate maps before last year's election.

Is there a chance that the federal courts could get involved in this in deciding whether certain abortion laws are constitutional or not?

Again, that's a great, fascinating legal discussion to have with lawyers way smarter than me.

But it's a states issue.

It's a state constitutional issue.

So I believe the I believe these issues remain in state court, ultimately with the arbiter being the Ohio Supreme Court, because it's a state constitutional issue, not the United States Constitution, which would take you straight to federal court.

So I would argue as a lawyer that this all should remain here in Ohio regardless of the jurisdiction.

Cleveland, Columbus, Cincinnati makes counting.

Yeah, a lot of the strategy of pro-life groups has been about changing laws and chipping away at abortion.

Now this amendment is in place and it really kind of puts a potentially hard stop on what laws can be passed and what can't be.

So with that in mind, what is your path forward with right to life?

I mean, what do you tell your supporters and your donors?

Of course, we're deeply disappointed what happened last week, Karen, and we're not naive to the impacts of what it has, but what we have done since last Tuesday is we brought the best and brightest legal minds on our board and in our community in Ohio and outside of Ohio, to come together to create a legislative strategy, a legal strategy, and some additional things we can do to help change the hearts and minds.

We're not going away.

We are not folding tide.

We are doubling down our efforts to continue to work within this new framework.

We have you know, there's been some trial and error along the way, but we are excited to get to get moving in 2024 with a robust agenda both here at the state House and the court of public opinion.

And maybe in a courtroom.

You some might be some people might look at that 57% of voters who approve this and say Ohio Right to Life, Ohio Values Voters Center for Christian Virtue.

They have an outsize influence on state politics in Ohio.

Well, I'll tell you, for the past 15 and a half years, I've been in Ohio right to life.

And I can't speak for CVS or the other groups you mentioned.

We always believed in the incremental approach one step at a time.

You know, I led the effort on adoption reform.

We led the effort to get more funding.

We led the effort on Medicaid expansion.

Ohio Right to Life was the only organization to do that.

I'm still tarred and feathered for that today.

But I will tell you, you know, regardless of what those other organizations want to do, we're going to get back to that common sense approach of finding ways to help women who find themselves in unintended pregnancies, because that's our sweet spot.

When the Heartbeat bill was first proposed, the six week ban was first proposed.

Ohio Right to Life opposed it.

Then it went forward.

You supported it once it was signed into law.

Did it go too far?

There was no exception for rape or incest in it.

Did it go too far?

Have for seven years myself in Ohio, Right to Life advocated against the heartbeat law for numerous reasons.

And and here we are today with the issue one in our Constitution.

I think the voters would argue that it goes too far.

The voters of Ohio, both Republican and Democrat, conservative liberals, say the heartbeat bill went too far.

I firmly believe if we would have stopped at the pain capable law, we would we would have been successful last week.

That's not the only reason I'm not trying to play Monday morning quarterback here.

But if we would have stopped at 20 weeks, the average voter would have said that's a good spot for Ohio and we should then continue to change hearts and minds and work for the next ten, 20, 30 or however many years.

What about a 15 week ban?

Would that violate Ohio's new law?

Maybe, You know, that's for the courts to decide.

You know, ultimately, you know, what's that magic number?

How far can you go back or not go back?

And will someone challenge it?

No.

Look, Planned Parenthood's got to ask themselves, you know, at what point do we start losing supporters if we challenge a 20 week ban or a late term abortion ban or so they're going to have to make that decision because they would have to file the lawsuit.

I also spoke with Representative Tovia Galinsky, assistant minority whip in the House.

PIO has been a solidly red state in elections, going back over almost a decade.

Republicans have swept the statewide offices since 2010.

Their Republican supermajorities in the Ohio House, as you know, and in the Senate, they passed legislation on abortion that was signed by Republican governors.

And DeWine won all but three counties when he was reelected last year.

So how did Issue one pass?

Well, it's pretty simple.

The voters, as they've been watching the lawlessness, they've been watching the direction our state is taking, and they don't like it.

And specifically, let's remember, all those elections were won in basically very gerrymandered areas where people have had their representatives pick them versus the other way around.

So, you know, I think Ohio on a certain level is red.

I know it's red, but red to to red gone too far is really what I think the voters said related to issue one is that, you know, we want our freedoms and we want our liberties.

And, you know, you really gone too far.

As soon as Dobbs was was, you know, it came into effect.

There was an awakening that happened across the land.

I watched it in my own district.

People that who said to me, you know, I've always voted Republican and I'm a your either I'm an independent, but this is too much.

And I don't I don't want this for our state.

And so, you know, they got a preliminary view of all of this in August with that, you know, that extremist power grab.

And so they were primed and ready to vote as they did in November.

You are in Democratic leadership, but you are also a lawyer.

So I want to ask you about a draft proposal from Republican Representative Jennifer GROSS that will not go forward, according to Speaker Jason Stevens.

It said that state lawmakers would have had exclusive authority over implementing issue one, with all jurisdiction withdrawn from local and state courts and would order the immediate dismissal of lawsuits and violations by judges would be impeachable offenses.

There are those who opposed issue one who wanted to see this happen.

What are your thoughts as both a lawyer and a Democrat, somebody who campaigned on abortion and reproductive rights and access?

Well, I'm not surprised.

I believe that the extremists are in charge here in Ohio as far as the legislature.

So I believe them when they tell us what they're going to do.

Now, I know that, you know, the speaker has said that's not going anywhere.

You know, I'm president.

Matt Huffman suggests that, you know, none of this will be done, but I don't believe it.

We've still you know, there's plenty of time for them to do it to try to pass extremist measures.

The problem with the legislation, there are so many problems with the proposal.

But the biggest problem is it seems to have a serious lack of understanding of how any of this works.

Frankly, a constitutional amendment and, you know, a self-executing statute like issue one excuse me, like an amendment like Section A section Article one, Section 22 for reproductive freedom can only be overturned by another ballot measure that does the same thing.

So the attempt to grab at the judiciary and attempt to actually silence the judiciary and try to make this just the purview of the legislature, really you're just begging for more lawsuits and more insanity.

It isn't how this works.

Would this have stood up to any sort of legal challenges if it had been proposed and passed?

No, because we don't have a tyrannical government.

We we simply the legislature cannot do this.

You know, Lucy is on solid footing when they talk about the only way to change what's happened to a constitution which has just been enacted by the voters effective December 7th is through a constitutional amendment.

And, you know, I think that might be attempted another ballot initiative, something something like that.

But, you know, I think it's going nowhere because, you know, Ohio families as voters are tired of these power grabs.

They're really tired of the extremism.

Democrats have said they're proposing a package of bills that they say are unconstitutional to address laws that they say are unconstitutional, such as the 24 hour waiting period, the targeted regulation of abortion providers or trap laws.

An example of one of those would be the requirement of a transfer agreement between an abortion provider and a hospital and measures to protect patients and provider prior privacy.

There's nothing in this package that would deal with parental consent.

I'm wondering, though, it's been a little while, a week and a half or so.

Where is this legislation?

Why is it not been proposed?

And if once it is, do you think it has a realistic chance of passing?

Second question.

No, because again, you know who's running the show instead of listening to voters and implementing good laws, which I think that package would be an excellent set of laws.

Instead of doing that, my Republican colleagues are worried about other things that I don't think matters.

So I don't think it has an opportunity.

But what it says to the voters, a package like that that I know is in the works and that I've actually asked to sign on to, is that we hear you.

We heard you when you you know, when you passed ISSUE one in November, we heard you in August.

And we know that we need to clean up our statutes to make, you know, reproductive freedom a real thing.

And so that's what we would be doing.

We work for the people and we would be we're showing that by by offering this legislation, which would be what people would want.

They want clarity in the law.

And this set of this package would bring clarity to, you know, to what's current to current law.

And if in the absence of a package like this, what happens then?

What's the practical application of issue one on Ohioans?

I mean, will there have to be lawsuits to decide on the constitutionality of some of these piece of legislation?

Well, practically so a person wants to actually exercise their reproductive freedom.

December 7th forward in Ohio.

They can feel free to do that in the decisions between themselves and their providers and their family.

Decisions are brought back to women and people who could become pregnant, and that's what it should be.

Now, do I anticipate there will be lawsuits?

Yes, because there will be extremist who try to restrict that freedom.

But how do you get around it?

You don't really get around it.

What I get concerned about is we've already seen that my Republican colleagues don't really care about the Constitution of Ohio, meaning all the times they ignored the the unconstitutional decisions handed down from the Supreme Court.

To me, that's disappointing.

I believe voters should be paying close attention to what might be done.

We have to remain vigilant and they need to remain on the balls of their feet from a basketball analogy and ready for anything that comes at them.

So there could be extremist things that come, you know, to follow.

And I think our voters need to remain, you know, remain vigilant going forward in the legislature.

Obviously, on election night, we heard from Matt Huffman, the Senate president and speaker Jason Stephen, saying that they were opposed to the passage of issue one.

There were 27 members of the Ohio House Republican Caucus who call themselves the pro-life caucus, who said they're going to oppose any sort of implementation of issue one that goes beyond what they think is appropriate.

So why does issue one change anything when it comes to legislation that will be proposed in the Ohio House and Senate?

Do you think it doesn't stop the extremists from being extreme and it doesn't stop them from proposing things that are against the will of the voters?

We've seen that happen.

I expect them to do it.

But actually, fundamentally, it's a constitutional right to have reproductive freedom in Ohio effective December 7th and, you know, the voters have spoken.

The only people who seem to be unaware of how any of this works is the extremists who continue to propose these things.

There are laws that I don't like, but I don't walk around talking about how to, you know, just flout those laws or how to break them.

And so I don't I don't understand it.

It seems misguided.

There's a lot of other work to be doing in Ohio, and I wish my colleagues would focus on that.

We've got some bipartisan pieces of legislation that are out there that I think are good ideas for Ohioans.

But the voters have spoken.

The Ohio families want reproductive freedom and they support liberty.

Do you expect to see this on the ballot again any time?

Not anytime soon, But any time.

I do.

I mean, I you've got to believe them when they say, you know, again, the extremists in the Republican Party are bound and determined that they want their beliefs to be implemented and placed on all Ohioans.

They've really ten years ever since I got to the legislature six years ago.

You know, I've watched them, you know, try to implement laws that are not that are not popular and that don't have the consensus vote of the will of the of Ohioans.

And sometimes they've gotten away with it.

And they they seem determined to do it.

Nothing would surprise me.

I think this is going to be held around their necks for the elections next year.

And, you know, the only person I see running for Senate who cares about reproductive freedom is Sherrod Brown.

And so with that in mind, you know, I expect them to you know, they're not going to fare well in the elections.

That's what I predict.

And that is it for this week for my colleagues at the Statehouse News Bureau of Ohio Public Radio and Television.

Thanks for watching.

Please check out our Web site at statenews.org or find us online by searching State of Ohio show.

And please join us again next time for the state of Ohio.

Support for the statehouse news bureau comes from medical mutual dedicated to the health and well-being of Ohioans offering health insurance plans as well as dental, vision and wellness programs to help people achieve their goals and remain healthy.

More at med mutual dot com.

The law offices of Porter right Morris and Arthur LLP.

Porter Right.

Is dedicated to bringing inspired legal outcomes to the Ohio business community.

Moore and Porter right.

Com.

Puerto right inspired every day the Ohio Education Association representing 120,000 educators who are united in their mission to create the excellent public schools.

Every child deserves more at OHEA.org.