The Idaho Supreme Court ruled on September 6, 2026, that the ballot statements for Proposition One, the Reproductive Freedom and Privacy Act, were misleading and did not comply with state law. This decision affects voters in Idaho who will see the revised statements on the November 3, 2026, general election ballot.

The court granted Idahoans United for Women and Families a writ of mandamus, which orders officials to prepare new, clearer ballot statements. This ruling comes after Idahoans United challenged the original statements prepared by Secretary of State Phil McGrane and Attorney General Raúl Labrador.

Background

Idahoans United for Women and Families is a group advocating for reproductive rights in Idaho. They filed a petition against McGrane and Labrador, claiming the statements they prepared for Proposition One did not clearly convey the effects of a “yes” or “no” vote, as required by Idaho law.

Proposition One aims to establish reproductive rights, including access to abortion. The original statements prepared by the state officials described a “yes” vote as creating reproductive rights and a “no” vote as making no changes to current law. Idahoans United argued these statements were misleading and did not comply with the requirement for clarity and conciseness outlined in Idaho Code section 34-1810(1)(b).

The Ruling

The Idaho Supreme Court found that the statements prepared by McGrane and Labrador failed to meet the statutory requirements. The court stated, "the Yes/No Effect Statements fail to clearly and concisely convey the effect of a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ vote on Proposition One." The court emphasized that the statements should inform voters about the substantive legal changes that would result from their votes.

In its decision, the court ordered the officials to prepare new statements that accurately reflect the effects of voting on Proposition One. The court noted that the original statements mischaracterized both the initiative and existing law, which could confuse voters.

Impact

This ruling is significant for Idaho voters as it ensures that the language they will see on the ballot is clear and accurate. The court's decision reinforces the importance of providing voters with straightforward information about the implications of their votes on important issues like reproductive rights.

The ruling also sets a precedent for how ballot statements should be crafted in the future, emphasizing that clarity and accuracy are essential components of the electoral process. This decision may impact how similar initiatives are presented in future elections.

What's Next

Following the court's ruling, McGrane and Labrador are required to submit revised Yes/No Effect Statements by September 5, 2026. The court will review these new statements to ensure they comply with the statutory requirements.