Virginia’s “Reproductive Freedom” amendment: Beware!

By Robert G. Marshall ( bio - articles - email ) | Oct 13, 2025

The State of Virginia’s 2025 General Assembly passed a proposed so-called Reproductive Freedom Constitutional Amendment (RFCA) to Virginia’s Constitution (S.J.Res 247) which will be on Virginia’s November, 2026 ballot if passed a second time by Virginia’s 2026 legislature. Other states have faced or will face similar challenges, so the Virginia experience should put all American citizens on their guard.

Note that court application and interpretation of the RFCA and other similar laws and amendments depends solely on the words used, not on debates, press releases, briefings or obfuscating statements from abortionists designed to minimize voter opposition. Chief Justice John Marshall in 1819 noted, “The words of an instrument, unless there is some sinister design that shuns light, will always represent the intention of those who frame it.”

The RFCA reads, “Every individual has the fundamental right to reproductive freedom.” The term, “individual, ” applies to females, males, adults, and minors. The absence of a minimum age for reproductive rights is critical. Unlike Article 2 Section 1 of Virginia’s Constitution, which sets a voting age minimum of 18, the RFCA does not specify an age threshold for exercising reproductive rights. The RFCA states, “The Commonwealth shall not discriminate in the protection or enforcement of this fundamental right.” (Note that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1967 that “neither the Fourteenth Amendment nor the Bill of Rights is for adults alone.” [Gault, 1967]

The words of this Virginia amendment would allow minors to legally access birth control, abortion, sterilization, or transgender “sex change” medical procedures or drugs without parental consent or knowledge. This effectively nullifies any minimum legal age of sexual consent. Note also that parents would be powerless to intervene or sue adult sexual predators, Planned Parenthood or similar groups from “changing” the sex of minor children, using this language:

The Commonwealth shall not penalize, prosecute, or otherwise take adverse action against an individual who aids or assists another individual, with such individual’s voluntary consent, in the exercise of such individual’s right to reproductive freedom.

Indeed, Virginia’s sexual trafficking laws would become unenforceable, as minors would have the legal right to “consent” to any sexual behavior with any number of persons of any age, from purchasing pornography to engaging in prostitution. Prohibiting these would infringe on “reproductive freedom.”

Earlier this year it was discovered that Fairfax County School administrators secured abortions for minor children without parental knowledge or consent in probable violation of state law. If RFCA passes, sexually “progressive” school counselors, administrators, or social workers could “affirm” sex and gender changes and procure birth control, transgender sex changes, abortion, and sterilization for minors behind parents’ backs without fear of lawsuits.

The so-called Reproductive Freedom Amendment would restrict the General Assembly from passing laws to curb “reproductive freedom” unless they pass the “strict scrutiny standard” of constitutionality. Courts in nine states, using the strict scrutiny standard, have struck down laws which restricted tax paid abortion funding, required parental consent or notification before a minor’s abortion, provided waiting periods prior to abortion, or required abortion to be performed by a licensed physician.

Therefore, General Assembly efforts to restrict minors from pursuing their ”fundamental right” to transgender sex changes would be deemed unconstitutional. “Abortion” is not mentioned in the Constitutional Amendment, but removing all legal restrictions or prohibitions of abortion and unrestrained sexual license is the main purpose of the FRCA.

Below are votes in the Virginia House of Delegates and Senate taken in 2025 on passing S. J. Res. 247, the Constitutional Amendment allegedly for “reproductive freedom.” This was done on a straight party line vote. Every Democrat in the Virginia House of Delegates and the state Senate voted YES, and every Republican who voted, voted NO. Three Republicans in the House of Delegates missed the vote, two of whom submitted notes to the House of Delegates Clerk indicating they would have voted NO on the Amendment.

---

FOR REFERENCE:

02/13/2025 House of Delegates: (SJ247 Vote—2025 Regular Session | LIS)
Agreed to by House (51-Y 46-N)

YEAS: Anthony, Askew, Bennett-Parker, Bulova, Callsen, Carr, Clark, Cohen, Cole, Convirs-Fowler, Cousins, Delaney, Feggans, Gardner, Glass, Hayes, Helmer, Henson, Hernandez, Herring, Hope, Jones, Keys-Gamarra, Krizek, Laufer, LeVere Bolling, Lopez, Maldonado, Martinez, McClure, McQuinn, Mundon King, Price, Rasoul, Reaser, Reid, Seibold, Sewell, Shin, Sickles, Simon, Simonds, Singh, Sullivan, Thomas, Torian, Tran, Ward, Watts, Willett, Mr. Speaker—51

NAYS: Arnold, Austin, Ballard, Batten, Bloxom, Cherry, Cordoza, Coyner, Davis, Earley, Ennis, Fowler, Freitas, Garrett, Gilbert, Green, Griffin, Higgins, Hodges, Kent, Kilgore, Leftwich, Lovejoy, McNamara, Milde, Morefield, Oates, Obenshain, O’Quinn, Orrock, Owen, Phillips, Runion, Scott, P.A., Tata, Taylor, Wachsmann, Walker, Ware, Webert, Wiley, Williams, Wilt, Wright, Wyatt, Zehr—46

NOT VOTING: Campbell, Knight, Marshall—3, Delegate Knight was recorded as not voting. Intended to vote nay. Delegate Marshall was recorded as not voting. Intended to vote nay.

---

01/21/2025 Senate: (SJ247 Vote—2025 Regular Session | LIS)
Agreed to by Senate (21-Y 19-N)

YEAS: Aird, Bagby, Boysko, Carroll Foy, Deeds, Ebbin, Favola, Hashmi, Locke, Lucas, Marsden, McPike, Pekarsky, Perry, Roem, Rouse, Salim, Srinivasan, Surovell, VanValkenburg, Williams Graves—21

NAYS: Cifers, Craig, DeSteph, Diggs, Durant, French, Hackworth, Head, Jordan, McDougle, Mulchi, Obenshain, Peake, Pillion, Reeves, Stanley, Stuart, Sturtevant, Suetterlein—19