OMAHA, Neb. – As ballot deadlines loom, courts in Nebraska and Missouri are grappling with legal arguments that could alter measures aiming to expand abortion rights and potentially take them out of voters’ hands.

In Missouri, just a day before the state’s Supreme Court is set to debate whether a proposed abortion-rights amendment should be included on the ballot, Republican Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft decertified the measure, thus removing it from the ballot himself.

This move by Ashcroft, who is against abortion, is seen as largely symbolic, as the Supreme Court is expected to have the final say on whether the measure, designed to repeal Missouri’s near-total abortion ban, will be voted on by the public or not.

The Missouri Supreme Court hearing is scheduled for Tuesday, mere hours before the state’s deadline to finalize changes to this year’s ballot.

In Nebraska, on Monday, the Supreme Court heard arguments in three lawsuits seeking to prevent one or both of the state’s competing abortion initiatives from appearing on the ballot.

One initiative would embed in the Nebraska Constitution the right to have an abortion until viability or later to safeguard the health of the pregnant woman. The other would enshrine Nebraska’s existing 12-week abortion ban, passed by the Legislature in 2023, which includes exceptions for rape, incest, and the life of the pregnant woman.

Two lawsuits, one filed by an Omaha resident and the other by a Nebraska neonatologist who both oppose abortion, argue that the measure seeking to expand abortion rights breaches the state’s rule against addressing more than one subject in a bill or ballot proposal. They claim that the ballot measure pertains to abortion rights up to viability, abortion rights post-viability to protect the woman’s health, and whether the state should be allowed to regulate abortion, amounting to three distinct issues.

However, opponents of the abortion rights measure focused much of their argument on the wording of the proposal, with attorney Brenna Grasz suggesting that the wording extending abortion rights to “all persons” could also apply to third parties, such as parents seeking to compel a minor child to have an abortion.

“Is this a single-subject argument?” Chief Justice Mike Heavican questioned.

Attorney Matt Heffron, representing the conservative Chicago nonprofit Thomas More Society, argued that the Protect Our Rights initiative blends competing subjects into a single measure. He contended that supporters of abortion up to fetal viability would also be supporting abortion after that point to safeguard the mother’s health, which may not align with their views.

“This represents a significant change in Nebraska law, which was passed by legislators, and each of these issues should be voted on separately by the voters,” Heffron asserted.

Despite the legal battle, abortion is on the November ballot in nine states, with various measures reflecting the complex landscape of abortion rights in the United States.

Abortion rights advocacy groups have historically emerged victorious in most cases, even after the overturning of Roe v. Wade by the U.S. Supreme Court. However, with increasing challenges and court battles, the fight for abortion rights continues to be contentious and multifaceted.

Associated Press writer Summer Ballentine contributed to this report from Columbia, Missouri.