New York failed to put abortion rights in its constitution. Here's why some states are hopeful.

[brooklynite]

Politico

In New York, Democrats behind the effort could not agree on final language of a state-level equal rights amendment that would have far-reaching implications beyond just abortion protections. And with Democrats in control of the Legislature and governor’s office, there was little urgency to rush one out.

Then came the Supreme Court’s draft opinion striking down Roe.

Abortion rights supporters urged lawmakers to act, arguing it’s their moral obligation. Gov. Kathy Hochul and legislative leaders pledged that New York will be a “safe harbor” for people seeking abortions. And the legislature moved quickly to pass a series of abortion-related bills.

But the constitutional amendment still failed.

Talks again broke down over final language and its potential effects on religious freedoms in the final days of the state’s legislative session, which ended June 4. Legislators, at an impasse, went home, leaving some backers bewildered and angry.

[lapucelle]

1. What would a constitutional amendment do that the Reproductive Health Act doesn't already do? N/T

[WhiskeyGrinder]

2. Recognize the right to an abortion as a constitutional right.

[lapucelle]

3. Yes, but is that what the proposed amendment would actually achieve?

Section 1. Resolved (if the Assembly concur), That article 1 of the constitution be amended by adding a new section 19 to read as follows:

§ 19. (A) NO PERSON SHALL BE DENIED EQUAL RIGHTS UNDER THE LAWS OF THIS STATE OR ANY SUBDIVISION THEREOF BASED ON THAT PERSON'S RACE, COLOR, ETHNICITY, NATIONAL ORIGIN, DISABILITY, OR SEX INCLUDING PREGNANCY AND PREGNANCY OUTCOMES, SEXUAL ORIENTATION, GENDER IDENTITY, AND GENDER EXPRESSION.

In addition, based on the headline, the Politico writer seems to think that the NYS Legislature can simply "put" things in the state constitution. After any amendment is approved by the legislature, it goes to voters in the form of a referendum.