Judge Dismisses Lawsuit Against Virginia Abortions Up to Birth Amendment

A Campbell County Circuit Court judge has dismissed a lawsuit seeking to keep a radical constitutional amendment that would establish a “fundamental right to reproductive freedom” — widely viewed by pro-life advocates as authorizing abortions up to birth — off Virginia’s November ballot.

Judge John Cook ruled against Bedford County Board of Supervisors District 3 member Charla Bansley, who challenged House Joint Resolution 1.

Bansley, represented by Liberty Counsel, argued that state officials failed to follow required procedural steps under the Virginia Constitution, including distributing the proposed amendment to all circuit court clerks for public posting and inspection three months before the 2025 House of Delegates election.

HELP LIFENEWS SAVE BABIES FROM ABORTION! Please help LifeNews.com with a donation!

Cook cited the General Assembly’s earlier repeal of the posting requirement, which took effect July 1, and determined that the provision had been “directory” rather than “mandatory” even while it remained in effect. He also found that Bansley lacked standing, agreeing with Senior Assistant Attorney General Erin McNeil that the supervisor did not suffer unique, particularized harm beyond any generalized impact on voters statewide.

The amendment, if approved by voters Nov. 3, would add language to the Virginia Constitution declaring that every individual has a fundamental right to reproductive freedom, including decisions relating to abortion care. Essentially that means abortions up to birth on demand.

Pro-life groups have described the measure as enabling abortions through all nine months of pregnancy.

Liberty Counsel founder and Chairman Mat Staver previously stated: “Virginia’s House Joint Resolution 1 cannot legally appear on the ballot. This measure is invalid because the General Assembly advanced it to a second legislative vote without completing the constitutionally mandated notice and posting requirements that must occur after its first passage. … Virginia citizens have the right to a transparent, orderly constitutional change, and any misstep undermines the integrity of the amendment process and can interfere with the will of the voters.”

Bansley’s attorneys indicated they will appeal.

“The reality is this was always going to go higher,” said Daniel Schmidt of Liberty Counsel. “No question, this is heading to the (Virginia) Supreme Court.”

The case, Bansley v. Nardo, named House of Delegates Clerk G. Paul Nardo, Elections Commissioner Steven Koski and other state election officials as defendants.

Bansley had sought to block the amendment from appearing on 2026 ballots and to restart the process in later legislative cycles.