SACRAMENTO — A November ballot initiative that would require parental notification for minors seeking abortions sparked its first public fireworks this week, as supporters and opponents accused one another of lying.
In lawsuits filed in Sacramento County Superior Court, foes and promoters of Proposition 73 said information submitted for the official voter ballot pamphlet was false or misleading, and asked a judge to intervene. The dueling suits ask that certain language be struck from the pamphlet, which will be mailed to voters before the Nov. 8 special election. A hearing is likely next week.
Proposition 73 would prohibit abortions for girls younger than 18 until 48 hours after a physician notified the minor's parent or legal guardian, except in medical emergencies. Judges could grant exemptions for girls they deemed mature enough to make an independent decision, or when notifying parents would not be in the minor's "best interests."
Proponents and opponents of a ballot initiative are allowed to submit written arguments for the voter pamphlet, as well as a rebuttal to the other side's argument. Disputes over the assertions must be settled in court.
Sponsors of the measure struck first, arguing in court papers Thursday that their opponents' pamphlet submission included three questionable statements.
One, they said, is the claim that "millions of parents" urge a no vote on the initiative, a statement they called "political rhetoric passing itself off as an objective statement of fact."
Proponents also took issue with opponents' use of the word "teenager" throughout their ballot arguments, because the initiative would cover only girls 17 and younger -- not 18- and 19-year-olds, who account for the majority of abortions among teenagers in California.
Finally, supporters objected to the suggestion that girls who asked a judge to exempt them from the notification rule would be "put on trial" in a "crowded courtroom." Rather, they say, the process would involve a confidential hearing before a juvenile-court judge.
"These characterizations simply have no basis in fact," said Albin Rhomberg, a spokesman for the Yes on 73 campaign. "This is the official voter guide that goes to millions of households. Their information needs to be accurate."
On Friday, opponents filed their suit, challenging proponents' assertions that parental notification laws in other states have cut pregnancy and abortion rates among teens and that they have done so without causing them "danger and harm."
