Nevada already protects abortion, but advocates aren’t taking any chances post-Dobbs

Editor’s Note: This is part of a series of conversations about voter-initiated efforts to restore abortion access across the country.

Despite neighboring states with various levels of restrictions, Nevada voters approved an abortion referendum more than 30 years ago.  

In 1990, 63% of Nevadans endorsed a law allowing abortion up to 24 weeks of pregnancy and later to preserve the life or health of the patient. The state has expanded abortion protections since the U.S. Supreme Court’s Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision in 2022 overturned the federal right to abortion. 

Republican Gov. Joe Lombardo signed legislation in 2023 approved by the Democratic-led legislature that shields patients and providers from out-of-state investigations related to reproductive health care. Under former Democratic Gov. Steve Sisolak, the state decriminalized medication abortions, nixed informed consent laws and got rid of other restrictions under 2019’s Trust Nevada Women Act. 

And an order finalized on Thursday allows the state Medicaid program to cover abortions for low-income Nevadans. An abortion fund and the American Civil Liberties Union sued the Nevada Department of Health and Human Services over the ban last year. In March, a judge ruled that restrictions on Medicaid funds for abortion care violated the Equal Rights Amendment voters approved in 2022. The state never challenged the ruling. 

But those reproductive health care laws in Nevada didn’t dissuade a coalition of advocates from seeking further protections. Nevadans for Reproductive Freedom launched an effort to enshrine the right to abortion, birth control, childbirth, fertility treatments and related health care last year, Nevada Current reported. 

The initiative faced a roadblock in November 2023 when a judge ruled that the proposed constitutional amendment violated the state's single-subject rule. So the group went back to the drawing board and filed a petition in December that asked voters to codify abortion up to fetal viability or when necessary to protect the life or health of the pregnant patient, the Current reported. 

That revision succeeded: Officials approved the measure for the ballot and announced that advocates gathered more than 127,000 verified signatures. Question 6 is set for Nov. 5. 

As Election Day approaches, States Newsroom spoke with Lindsey Harmon, president of Nevadans for Reproductive Freedom and executive director of Planned Parenthood Votes Nevada. She discussed why her group wants to secure abortion access in a state where it’s already protected, the influx of out-of-state patients at clinics and Nevada’s status as a battleground. 

The following interview has been edited and condensed. 

States Newsroom: Why do you think the ballot measure is needed in Nevada, which already had a 1990 abortion-rights referendum when voters approved abortion up to 24 weeks? 

Lindsey Harmon: In a state like Nevada, where we do have protections already in place, we know that abortion is overwhelmingly popular among the base of supporters. Since Roe has fallen, we are taking nothing for granted. We really looked at this as an opportunity to double down on those protections and get those in the constitution. Not only because we believe they are a constitutional right. We're talking about protecting your own body and making decisions about your own body. But also because we are surrounded by ban states. So we saw it as an obligation to do everything we could to make abortion permanent in the state of Nevada.

SN: Can you explain to readers who aren't familiar how the ballot measure process works in Nevada? For example, will your group have to gather signatures for the petition again, or will it simply appear on the ballot in 2026 if voters approve it this fall?

LH: Because we've already gathered the signatures and we've already qualified for the ballot this year, we will be then referred automatically to the 2026 ballot, at which point once we pass it, then we will be able to amend the constitution. But it takes two votes of the people to amend the constitution in the state of Nevada.

SN: As far as advocacy, will you still be campaigning and spreading the word, essentially two years from now? 

LH: Absolutely. This process doesn't end, and we're not taking our foot off the gas pedal. It’s critically important to not take anything for granted and to put everything you have behind these ballot initiatives. We have the opportunity to educate folks about what it means in a state that is both safe and how that relates to states around us that are experiencing bans currently. 

SN: Neighboring you are abortion ban states, Idaho and Utah, which has an 18-week ban, but a total ban is pending in the courts. Arizona has a 15-week ban, but also has an abortion ballot measure this fall. What has abortion access looked like in Nevada since Roe v. Wade fell?

LH: We've seen a dramatic increase in patients that are coming from out of state, and a lot of patients that we believe are coming from out of state, but are afraid to tell us where they're coming from. We’re seeing a lot of these patients, which unfortunately does two things: It allows us to help these people, but it makes it more difficult to schedule them because they are coming from great distances. And it's sometimes a little bit harder to get appointments for folks in state too now. The Planned Parenthood health centers and independent providers have been doing an incredible job to make sure that they can accommodate all of the patients and make sure everyone is seen in a timely manner. It has been difficult for health centers across the nation, but particularly in states like Nevada, California, Colorado and New Mexico who are now seeing an influx of patients coming in from out of state.

SN: The campaign had a hiccup last year when a judge rejected a version of the initiative that would have expanded the protection to not only abortion but a host of other reproductive health care, such as childbirth, birth control, fertility care, etcetera. Are there any plans to put forth those other rights in separate ballot petitions going forward?

LH: Currently there is an initiative to pursue protections for IVF that will go in front of the legislative session in 2025. Likely protections around birth control as well. We are going to be doing a lot of interim work in the legislature to make sure that we're protecting those rights. We are focused solely on our ballot initiative right now. But I imagine in the future as attacks like these continue to happen, states are going to be turning to the ballot more and more to protect the rights that they care about, which is so counterintuitive to the fact that these are overwhelmingly popular issues. For whatever reason, they've become a political football and are now driving states to the ballot box.

SN: Do you think your state's reputation as a battleground will hurt or help the initiative?

LH: In battleground states, what's critically important is I think you're seeing a lot of candidates talk about this issue in a meaningful way. And so I think that's always helpful. It’s really important to get candidates up and down the ballot on record on these issues. In the past, a lot of candidates have tried to stay away from this issue… Having ballot initiatives like this in battleground states really forces the issue and certainly makes candidates, legislators and elected officials pay attention to this issue and have meaningful conversations with their constituents to develop sophisticated, well-educated platforms.

SN: What made you want to join this line of work?

LH: I saw it as the next frontier. There are a lot of intersections between the right to manage your own body and make decisions about your own life, your pregnancy and future that overlap with the ability to influence, change, support and protect democracy in this country. I'm very honored and pleased to get to do this work in the state of Nevada.