New York is the latest state to put abortion rights on its ballot since a landmark decision by the US Supreme Court.

But it’s not just abortion rights that are on the ballot for voters in Proposition 1, a proposed state constitutional amendment called the Equal Rights Amendment. It also covers protections for other forms of discrimination. This part of the proposal has been the focus of criticism.

The push for the proposal began shortly after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, which for decades provided federal abortion rights. The court’s decision, dubbed the Dobbs case, effectively turned the issue over to the states.

Since then, more than 20 states have passed some bans or strict restrictions on abortion. A handful of states have gone the other way, proposing — and winning approval in a statewide referendum — to include abortion rights in their constitutions.

New York, where Democrats outnumber Republicans by more than 2 to 1, has been considered a strong abortion-rights state. Republicans and other critics say the proposed amendment isn’t needed here and that putting it on the ballot is a “cynical political maneuver” to boost voter turnout in a presidential election year.

“No one can credibly argue that abortion rights are at risk in New York,” John Faso, a former Republican congressman who has been a leading critic of the proposal, told Newsday.

Sen. Liz Krueger (D-Manhattan), who helped push the amendment through the state Legislature, said opponents are trying to downplay the issue.

“Since Dobbs, 24 other states have banned, for all purposes, the right to abortion. To say that it will not be a possibility here is a beautiful fairy tale, but look what has happened in this country in the last two years. Krueger said.

Asked why a constitutional amendment is needed when New York has a strong state abortion law, Krueger said, “Because the courts change. Elections change who is in the executive chamber and who is in the legislative chamber.”

Support for the proposal is strong. In the most recent Siena College poll, 69 percent of voters said they favored the amendment, while 22 percent opposed it. More than three-quarters of women surveyed said they supported it.

But unlike other states, New York’s proposal is broader than just abortion.

The New York Constitution already contains prohibitions against discrimination based on race and religion. The amendment would add protections for a person’s ethnicity, age, national origin, disability and sex, which include pregnancy and pregnancy outcomes, sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression. While it doesn’t specifically use the word “abortion,” it says it protects “reproductive autonomy” and access to reproductive health care, such as in vitro fertilization and contraceptives.

If approved by voters, those rights would be protected by the state constitution and could not be changed simply by the passage of a new law by the state Legislature.

Voters will have to “flip the ballot” to read the proposition, as it is printed on the other side of the ballot paper. Advocates have tried to raise awareness, worried that many voters won’t bother to read the back of the ballot.

Critics say the gender protections could pave the way for transgender athletes to insist on a constitutional right to participate in women’s sports. They also say a minor could go to court and claim a constitutional right to receive puberty-blocking drugs or other transitional medical treatment and override any parental right to object.

“The person might say, ‘I have a constitutional right.’ Parental rights are statutory rights, Law 101 says constitutional rights override statutory rights,” Faso said.

But advocates say that’s not an accurate representation.

“Proposition 1 does not change existing law regarding parental consent or the ability of parents to be involved in making decisions about health care or medical procedures for their minor children, including sex-affirming care,” said the New York Bar Association. York. in a report on the proposal.

“Proposition 1 does not change New York’s Human Rights Law, which requires parental consent for minors to receive medical procedures,” said Susan Cersovsky, co-chair of the Bar’s Committee on Sex and the Law, which helped conduct the review.

In addition, the bar said approval of the proposal would not “change the current law regarding participation in sports teams.”

“Proposition 1 is consistent with Title IX, the controlling federal law that has already been interpreted by federal courts to require youth to play on sports teams that match their gender identity and expression,” the report states. While Title IX controls, it is also the subject of ongoing legal battles in several states.

Critics say the proposed amendment was initiated in the legislative process focused on abortion and that Democrats muddled it by adding additional protections.

Krueger doesn’t buy it.

“People who say it’s confusing are really opposed to abortion rights, but they don’t dare say that because we’re in a blue, pro-choice state, so they’re trying to focus on other arguments,” Krueger said. “People are trying to screw things up on purpose because they really don’t want the right to abortion in the constitution.”