A Butler County judge has dismissed a lawsuit filed by two Republican state lawmakers and a local city council member challenging Ohio's voter-approved abortion-rights constitutional amendment, ruling that none of the plaintiffs could show they were personally harmed by the measure. Ohio voters approved the amendment in 2023, and it has since reshaped the state's legal fight over reproductive care.
Butler County Common Pleas Judge J. Gregory Howard found that state Reps. Jennifer Gross and Levi Dean, along with Lebanon City Council member Kristen Eggers, lacked standing to bring the challenge, according to Cleveland.com. Gross represents Butler County and Dean represents Xenia, but both filed the suit as private individuals rather than in their official legislative roles. Gross and Dean had argued the amendment restricted their ability as lawmakers to enact abortion-related laws, an argument Howard rejected outright, per the same report.
Eggers, meanwhile, claimed the amendment infringed on her right to prevent her two minor daughters from getting an abortion without her consent. Howard rejected that standing argument as well, the outlet's report notes, finding that none of the three plaintiffs had demonstrated the kind of personal harm required to bring the case. Because the case was dismissed on standing grounds, Howard did not rule on the lawsuit's core argument — that the 2023 amendment changed Ohio's constitution so fundamentally that it could not legally have been adopted through a statewide ballot initiative in the first place.
A Legal Theory Rooted in a Constitutional Convention Argument
That underlying theory traces back to the lawsuit's origins. The Butler County case was originally filed in May 2026 by anti-abortion group Faith2Action and state lawmakers, who argued that the amendment modified multiple sections of the Ohio Constitution, according to Live Action. The ruling can still be appealed, per Cleveland.com's report.
This marks the second time in recent months that a procedural challenge to Ohio's amendment has ended in state court without resolving its underlying arguments. About a month earlier, the Ohio Supreme Court dismissed a separate lawsuit brought by Trumbull County Common Pleas Judge David Engler, who argued the amendment improperly stripped him of judicial authority over judicial-bypass proceedings for minors seeking abortions. Engler had sued state election officials, alleging voters were not informed that Issue 1 would remove parental consent and judicial bypass mechanisms, as reported by the Statehouse News Bureau. Hoodline covered that Trumbull judge's abortion gambit as it made its way through the courts. The Butler County case was later dismissed for lack of standing. The Ohio Supreme Court dismissed Engler's case without an opinion, the Statehouse News Bureau reported.
Voters Rejected a Higher Threshold Before Passing the Amendment
Ohio voters approved the reproductive-rights amendment, known as Issue 1, on November 7, 2023, with approximately 56.6% of the vote, enshrining Section 22 into Article I of the state constitution, according to the Center for American Progress. That vote followed a separate special election just months earlier, in which Ohio voters defeated a Republican-backed measure by 57% to 43% that would have raised the threshold for passing voter-led constitutional amendments from a simple majority to 60%, per Wikipedia. State lawmakers had organized that special election specifically to make Issue 1 harder to pass.
Statutory Fights Continue Even as Constitutional Challenges Fail
While direct attacks on the amendment itself have repeatedly failed, Ohio courts have already struck down several specific abortion restrictions under its protections. Courts have struck down part of a heartbeat law banning abortions starting about six weeks into pregnancy, as well as a law requiring burial or cremation of fetal remains from surgical abortions, per Cleveland.com's reporting. State courts are expected to rule on several other Ohio abortion restrictions in the next couple of years, including a mandatory 24-hour waiting period, a telehealth medication-abortion ban, testing requirements tied to the heartbeat law, and record-keeping requirements for abortion providers.
