Judge declines to order New York to include 'abortion' in description of ballot measure

Judge David A. Weinstein stated, "I lack the requisite crystal ball to predict how the proposed amendment will be interpreted in particular contexts..." This highlights the judge's reluctance to define the amendment's impact on abortion rights.

Weinstein observed, "The central problem with these arguments arises out of the language of the amendment itself," indicating that the complexities of the amendment's language hinder clear interpretation.

The Board of Elections preferred to repeat the proposal's technical language rather than interpret the amendment, showcasing a cautious approach in informing voters about the amendment's implications.

Supporters argued for clarity in the amendment's purpose by including 'abortion' and 'LGBT' to protect abortion access, citing the need for explicit language to inform voters.

Read at Brooklyn Eagle