The United
States midterm elections will not only see voters decide on who takes control
of the House and the Senate, but in five states, the poll will be decisive on
abortion legislation after the fall of Roe v. Wade. On Tuesday, voters in
California, Michigan and Vermont will decide if they wish to enshrine abortion
rights in their respective state constitutions.

On the
other hand, Montana and Kentucky will decide to do away with the little
remaining protections for abortion rights.

 The referendums on November 8 come months
after the Supreme Court overturned its landmark Roe v. Wade judgement. This is
the highest number of ballot propositions in one year, according to the
National Conference of State Legislatures, a bipartisan group.

In
Michigan, a key battleground in the midterms, the ballot initiative seeks to
create a constitutional right to reproductive freedom that would invalidate a
1931 state law that bans abortion without exception for rape or incest.

The
initiative comes after a judge temporarily blocked the enforcement of the 1931
anti-abortion law in August.

In
Kentucky, abortion was briefly illegal after Roe v. Wade fell. Now, voters will
decide whether they seek a comprehensive outlawing of abortion in the state.
Rachel Sweet, who runs Protect Kentucky Access and opposes the referendum, said
it would nearly be impossible to restore abortion in Kentucky if the referendum
passes, NBC News reported.

In Montana,
a passing of the ballot initiative referendum will mean healthcare providers in
the state may be prosecuted with criminal charges if they do not take “reasonable
actions” to save an infant who is born alive, including after an attempted
abortion.

The
proposed punishment includes a $50,000 fine and a 20-year jail term.

The
proposal has understandably been heavily criticised by healthcare
professionals. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists have
called the proposed legislation a “cruel law” that would mandate aggressive
treatments in extremely complex situations. These treatments, they say, could “prolong
suffering and deny families the choice to offer comfort or spiritual care.”