The Supreme Court decision Friday, June 24, 2022, on Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, overturned Roe v. Wade. This decision effectively rolled back a decades-long effort to protect civil rights and gender equity nationally and stripped protections and programs for women’s health and reproductive needs. States will determine how access to reproductive rights will be protected. Kansas will vote on this amendment Tuesday, August 2, 2022. If passed, the constitutional amendment will add language to the state constitution that removes the constitutional right to abortion and allows legislators to restrict reproductive healthcare. This blog series raises questions of what kind of leadership is required to preserve civil liberties and human rights in a functional democracy.
In this series, scholars share knowledge on this framing from perspectives of leadership, civil rights, and social movement.
“Bleeding Kansas,” once more
–Mary Hale Tolar, Ed.D., associate professor and dean of the Staley School of Leadership
Bleeding Kansas refers to a time in our nation’s history when the federal government was pressed to take a stand on slavery. It was not the first time, nor was it the last, but in this moment as the nation was growing, the issue of whether or not to tolerate the institution of slavery was forced. The federal government resolved to leave the decision to “popular sovereignty” – let the majority of people voting decide if enslaving other people would be allowed or prohibited in newly established states. That approach led to violent guerrilla attacks and bloody civil confrontations – among neighbors and with outsiders traveling to join the fight in the new territory of Kansas.
Rather than affirming that the individual rights and liberties set forth in our nation’s constitution apply to all humans, thereby condemning slavery as unconstitutional, the federal government put it to the people to decide. With the recent Dobbs decision, the U.S. Supreme Court has done so again.
In overturning Roe v. Wade, the federal court has said it is no longer a constitutional right. It is up to state legislatures to determine if the right to one’s person, commonly understood as the most basic of human rights, applies to women and their reproductive health.
Kansas was then, and is now, the testing ground for the “let the people decide” approach to determining what human rights are secured in our constitution.
The Kansas Supreme Court ruled in 2019 that the state’s bill of rights affirms that a woman has a natural and fundamental right to continue or to end a pregnancy, although not an absolute right, allowing for limit by narrowly tailored legislative action if there is a compelling state interest.
In Kansas today an amendment is on the ballot to remove the current constitutional right to abortion and grant authority to state legislators to restrict reproductive health choices of women including abortion in the cases of rape, incest, or when the pregnant woman’s life is endangered. On Aug. 2, the people of Kansas will decide if the right to one’s person is a constitutional human right, or subject to state control. It is the first following the Dobbs decision, with other states to follow.
Let’s set aside for now the question of whether human rights are or should be granted by popular vote, because in this moment the people are called to decide this issue. So how do people in the states decide? There’s the vote. A right hard won and vigilantly protected still. But how do people come to decide their vote? On what basis, from what values, having what experiences? In what ways are messages crafted and delivered that inform or persuade? Michelle Cottle shared what she learned from observing Kansas canvassing work on this issue in her recent piece in The New York Times.
The vote on this amendment is vital. And in our democracy, the reality told by history is that other votes will follow. So, understanding how and why people come to their ballot choices is also vital. That requires us to engage, to connect, and ask powerful questions. It requires leadership and a commitment to strengthening our civic culture. Co-founder and CEO of Citizen University Eric Liu shared at a Civic Saturday event this summer that the big question that framers of our democratic republic asked, and that we continue to ask, is “how shall we live together?”
What does it mean to exercise leadership in this moment? How do we breach righteous certitude to better understand the deeper tensions surrounding the issues that we, the people, are deciding – not just for ourselves, but for our pluralistic society? Eric Liu suggested “we don’t need fewer arguments – we need better ones.” Better arguments come from discussing with purpose our shared interests and goals and asking the bigger questions – how shall we live together? – to engage others productively in ensuring that we live together well.
So exercising leadership in this moment on this issue looks a lot like active self-reflection, engaging others, and committing to community. Knowing self, understanding others, and building community. It is the work of leadership.
For questions or more information on voting Aug. 2 in Kansas; or visit your local county website.
