This week, Missouri Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft is expected to certify the amendment to the Missouri Constitution proposed by Missourians for Constitutional Freedom. If approved by voters in November, it would enshrine a “right to reproductive freedom” in the Missouri Constitution.

As a high school social studies teacher in St. Louis, this raises fascinating questions about law and policy that are as relevant to my advanced U.S. government and politics students as they are to Missourians in general. It is important to understand the historical context of the initiative.

My students and I have been talking about how the U.S. Supreme Court, in its 2022 decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, found that the U.S. Constitution is agnostic on the issue of abortion, meaning that it does not take a position on whether there is a right to abortion or, for that matter, a right to life for the unborn.

For this reason, and because of the principles of federalism laid down in the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which govern the relationship between the states and the federal government, it is up to the states to regulate abortion.

The Missouri General Assembly passed a law, the Right to Life of the Unborn Child Act, which protects the right to life of the unborn, except in medical emergencies. While the law provides criminal and civil penalties for anyone who knowingly performs or induces a prohibited abortion, it protects pregnant women (who have an abortion performed or induced) from liability.

Voters will likely decide in the coming months whether to uphold Missouri’s legal protections for the unborn or, as the proposed amendment states, to prohibit the state from “denying or impairing a person’s fundamental right to reproductive freedom.”

Missourians should consider maintaining the status quo, which protects the right to life of the unborn while preserving the dignity of women, and vote against the proposed amendment for several reasons.

As I teach my students, legal language can take on a life of its own. Judges can interpret the law broadly or narrowly, depending on their political preferences, and our system of government prohibits the political branches of government from interfering with the judicial function. As Alexander Hamilton wrote in Federalist No. 78, a text my students study, interpreting the law is the “proper and peculiar business of the courts.”

What consequences might all this have if the proposed amendment were passed and our elected officials attempted to regulate abortion?

Nearly every state law regulating abortion would likely be declared unconstitutional. The proposed amendment would make it nearly impossible to pass reasonable and consensual abortion policies, because any law that, as the proposed amendment puts it, limits a woman’s “autonomous choice” (among other hurdles) would be repealed.

In effect, this could result in Missouri courts prohibiting our duly elected legislators from passing future laws protecting heart rate, setting pain thresholds, or even requiring parental consent for minors.

And even after what the proposed amendment calls “fetal viability,” the state may not “under any circumstances” restrict access to abortion if “in the good faith belief of a treating health care professional, doing so is necessary to protect the life or physical or mental health of the pregnant person.” Given the malleability of language, a creative judge could quite plausibly find that abortion is constitutionally protected during all nine months of pregnancy.

Finally, and more generally, is a constitutional amendment really the best approach to “fixing” the abortion issue in Missouri? It is not at all clear that this is the case.

Passing a constitutional amendment removes legislative power from elected officials who are accountable to the people and entrusted with policy-making. should difficult. For this reason, the U.S. Constitution requires that three-quarters of the states agree to proposed changes.

Unfortunately, in Missouri, only a narrow majority is needed to change the state constitution and tie the hands of lawmakers.

Citizens with a civic conscience should participate in the political process at the ballot box in November. And, as with everything else, they should educate themselves about the proposed abortion amendment.

Robert P. Barnidge Jr. teaches social studies at a high school in St. Louis.