A Disservice to Virginians

The proposed amendment, one of the most emotionally and legally charged issues facing Virginia, was introduced without adequate time for legislators or the public to fully understand its content. For 90 minutes, the text of the amendment remained hidden until its sponsor, a Democrat from Arlington, Virginia, finally unveiled a substitute version. Republicans immediately requested a 30-minute recess to review the amendment, but the Democrat chair of House Privileges and Elections granted just five minutes, remarking, “I know you to be a quick reader.”

A Hearing Without Public Participation

The hearing also left no room for meaningful public input. Citizens were invited to testify but did not have access to the legislation before doing so. The five-minute review period was grossly inadequate for such a consequential issue.

Legal and Ethical Concerns

The proposed amendment goes far beyond codifying existing law or the principles of Roe v. Wade. Legal experts and lawmakers have raised alarms about its potential to invalidate critical provisions of Virginia law, including the current requirement for three physicians to certify a third-trimester abortion, which would be replaced by a single physician’s certification and parental notification laws, which could be eliminated under the amendment. 

Marriage Amendment Sparks Further Debate

Adding to the day’s controversies, Democrats also advanced a resolution to redefine marriage in the Virginia Constitution. The proposed language replaces the definition of marriage as between one man and one woman with a fundamental right to marry, introducing “sex” and “gender” as distinct categories for the first time in the state constitution.

I carried legislation during the 2024 session that would have banned males from participating in female sports in grades K-12. A major concern is that the vague wording of this “marriage amendment” could have far-reaching implications, such as allowing males to compete on female sports teams or access female restrooms and changing facilities.

Calls for Deliberation and Transparency

Amending Virginia’s Constitution requires careful deliberation and public input, both of which were absent in the committee’s hearing. I take considering changes to the state’s founding document very seriously, and the process must be transparent and well thought out. Rushing this through was a disservice to all Virginians.

The antics in the House Privileges & Elections Committee last week show that the left fears a fair fight and honest conversation about abortion and traditional families. Why else would they have effectively held a hearing outside the normal legislative methods? Why else would they have to change the amendment at the last minute without alerting anyone, giving any time to thought-out deliberation, and then rush it through to the House floor?

While the results are certainly disappointing, they are not surprising. The fight is far from over, and it is really just beginning.

As always, my team and I are here to assist you with any questions or concerns. Please don’t hesitate to reach out to us at 434.374.5129 or via email at [email protected].