Lawsuit to Stop Virginia Amendment for Abortions Up to Birth Heads to Appeals Court

Liberty Counsel has appealed to the Court of Appeals of Virginia in Bansley v. Nardo regarding a court order dismissing a legal challenge to the state’s pro-abortion amendment for the upcoming 2026 ballot. The case is about whether the Virginia government followed the proper legal process for proposed constitutional amendments.

Liberty Counsel represents Charla Bansley, District 3 Supervisor for the Bedford County Board of Supervisors, who is challenging House Joint Resolution 1 (HJR 1). HJR 1 aims to establish a “fundamental right to reproductive freedom” in the Virginia Constitution.

However, Bansley claims the ballot initiative is invalid after discovering Virginia’s House of Delegates missed several key procedural steps mandated by the Virginia Constitution before the amendment can go before the voters, such as distributing the amendment to all circuit court clerks statewide and posting it for public inspection three months prior to the 2025 House of Delegates election.

Get the latest pro-life news and information on X (Twitter). Follow @LifeNewsHQ

The lawsuit names as defendants Clerk of the Virginia House of Delegates G. Paul Nardo; Commissioner of Elections Steven Koski; and other Virginia election offices and officials. Bansley is asking the court to block election officials from printing 2026 ballots with HJR 1 and to order its amendment process be restarted for the 2027-2028 legislative and election cycles.

In July 2026, Campbell County Circuit Court John T. Cook signed an order dismissing the challenge citing the procedural lapses in the constitutional amendment process were not actually mandatory and have since been repealed. However, Liberty Counsel objected in the signed order arguing that the amendment procedures where binding, required, and in effect under state law at the time the failures in the amendment process took place. Before the dismissal, Liberty Counsel had argued that a retroactive repeal cannot erase past unlawful conduct or make a defective process valid.

In addition, Judge Cook determined Bansley did not have standing to bring the case despite 120 years of legal precedent in Virginia where voters have had standing to challenge flawed constitutional amendment procedures.

Liberty Counsel’s Founder and Chairman Mat Staver said, “This case will ultimately be determined by Virginia’s highest courts. Virginia’s House Joint Resolution 1 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.”