When New York voters go to the polls, they will see propositions in addition to candidates for elective office. The first of these props will be presented on the ballot as follows.

This proposal would protect against unequal treatment based on ethnicity, national origin, age, disability, and sex, including sexual orientation, gender identity and pregnancy. It also protects against unequal treatment based on reproductive healthcare and autonomy.”

A “YES” vote puts these protections in the New York State Constitution.

A “NO” vote leaves these protections out of the State Constitution.

Who doesn’t love protections? Who isn’t for equal treatment? New Yorkers are cool with gay and trans folks, and enshrining the right to abortion is certainly a huge motivator in New York, Unsurprisingly, this prop is expected to pass by a huge margin. Except here’s what the constitutional amendment actually states,

§ 11. a. No person shall be denied the equal protection of the laws of this state or any subdivision thereof. No person shall, because of race, color, ethnicity, national origin, age, disability, creed [or], religion, or sex, including sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, pregnancy, pregnancy outcomes, and reproductive healthcare and autonomy, be subjected to any discrimination in [his or her] their civil rights by any other person or by any firm, corporation, or institution, or by the state or any agency or subdivision of the state, pursuant to law.

b. Nothing in this section shall invalidate or prevent the adoption of any law, regulation, program, or practice that is designed to prevent or dismantle discrimination on the basis of a characteristic listed in this section, nor shall any characteristic listed in this section be interpreted to interfere with, limit, or deny the civil rights of any person based upon any other characteristic identified in this section.

§  2. Resolved (if the Assembly concur), That the foregoing amendment be submitted to the people for approval at the general election to be held in the year 2024 in accordance with the provisions of the election law. (Changes in bold and underlined.)

The breadth of this constitutional amendment is stunning, but on its surface, it appears to be a fairly banal anti-discrimination law of the sort that was enacted back in 1964 with the Civil Rights Act. Except this isn’t a statute, but a constitutional amendment. But it’s largely being sold as a means of protecting the right to abortion, albeit without limitation of any sort.

This November New York voters will see on the back of their ballots a question that supporters argue will safeguard abortion access across the state.

There’s just one problem: “Abortion” appears nowhere in the text of the question.

Proponents refer to Proposition 1, the first of six ballot questions this election cycle, as the New York Equal Rights Amendment. They tout the measure as a much-needed constitutional safeguard to enshrine abortion access and prohibit new classes of discrimination.

If this is what you hear about the prop, and given the sensibilities of New Yorkers toward abortion, there is little reason not to support it. But there’s more.

At the same time, opponents have seized on vague language in the measure, warning the law would undermine “parents’ rights” and allow transgender kids to participate in girls’ sports teams. The nonpartisan New York City Bar Association says those claims are false.

Putting aside that the NYCBA is about as nonpartisan as the ABA, this is correct in that a committee report concludes that objections to Prop 1 are unfounded.

WHAT PROP 1 WILL NOT DO

• WILL NOT impact parental rights. Prop 1 does not address parental rights, which are governed by other developed areas of State and federal law. Prop 1 does not change existing law with respect to parental consent, or parents’ ability to be involved in decision-making about healthcare or medical procedures for their minor children, including gender-affirming care.
• WILL NOT change current law with respect to participation on sports teams. Prop 1 prohibits discrimination on the basis of gender identity and gender expression. Prop 1 does not change existing law and has no explicit provision relating to participation on sports teams. Prop 1 is consistent with Title IX, the controlling federal law that has already been interpreted by federal courts to require young people to play on sports teams that match their gender identity and expression.
• WILL NOT impact or change the qualifications for voting.  A separate part of the State Constitution governs qualifications for voting based on citizenship status. Prop 1 does not enfranchise any new classes of voters.

Underlining the words “does not” is hardly an answer, and to the extent any explanation is proffered, it’s extremely shallow and dubious. Of course a constitutional amendment changes existing law, which is why it’s a constitutional amendment. But even more importantly, this barely scratches the surface of the mischief this amendment could cause due to the scope of its language.

If New York seeks to provide a right to abortion in its Constitution, then it should do so in a stand-alone amendment that doesn’t sweep in myriad other issues. If so, there could be a discussion, now wholly omitted, about whether the right to abortion should exist unfettered to the moment of birth, at any time and for any reason, or no reason. Perhaps New Yorkers would approve such a measure, but nobody is raising this question and there is nothing in the ballot statement that would alert voters to what is at stake.

But vague, sweeping laws invariably have unintended collateral consequences, and this one could wreak havoc with nearly every facet of personal as well as state and business relations. And yet, it’s being falsely sold to the public as a pedestrian defense of abortion and anti-discrimination amendment. There are a great many questions about what this amendment means and what it will do. Not only are there no serious answers to these questions, but there is no one raising them. When havoc ensues, this will be why.