Advancing Life and Liberty Through Action

Feb 8, 2026


Oregon: “Equal Rights” Constitutional Amendment


Text of Ballot Language / Question

As certified by the Oregon Attorney General, the ballot title reads:

Amends Constitution: Specifies that prohibited discrimination includes discrimination concerning gender identity/pregnancy, related health decisions, sexual orientation

Result of “Yes” Vote: “Yes” vote specifies that prohibited sex discrimination includes intent/effect to discriminate concerning gender identity/pregnancy, related health decisions, sexual orientation. Repeals inoperative same-sex marriage prohibition.

Result of “No” Vote: “No” vote retains current language prohibiting sex discrimination, not specifying pregnancy, gender identity, sexual orientation. Retains inoperative language requiring one man, one woman for marriage.

Summary: Amends Constitution. Article I, section 46, of the Oregon Constitution currently provides that “Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the State of Oregon or by any political subdivision in this state on account of sex.”

Measure would add provisions specifying that “‘On account of sex’ includes laws, policies, and actions that discriminate, in intent or effect, based on (a) pregnancy/pregnancy outcomes and related health decisions; (b) gender identity and related health decisions; (c) sexual orientation, including the right to marry; or (d) sex.”

Measure repeals constitutional provision limiting marriage to “only a marriage between one man and one woman.” This provision has been held to violate the United States Constitution and has no current legal effect, but remains in Oregon Constitution.

For the full text of the proposed constitutional language, see here.

What It Does: Decoding the Text

The “Equal Rights for All” (ERA) Amendment sought to amend the state constitution to enshrine radical abortion and LGBT ideology in state law. Though the language sounds benign, in reality it would have:
  • Enshrined current state law that permits abortion on demand and up to birth in the state constitution.
  • Enshrined same-sex marriage in the state constitution, nullifying the current constitutional provision defining marriage between one man and one woman.
  • Based on language that states the “equality of rights” cannot be denied or abridged based on “pregnancy/pregnancy outcomes and related health decisions . . . gender identity and related health decisions” (among others),
    • Created a “right” transgender affirming “care” (possibly including minors as there are no explicit references to limitations based on age).
    • Permitted infanticide (given no “right” can be denied or abridged on account of “sex,” which includes the vague and undefined term “pregnancy outcomes,” it is possible to argue that no laws shall “abridge” the “pregnancy outcome” of a child born alive from a failed abortion, such as requiring an abortion provider to have medical equipment on hand to provide life-saving care to such an infant — essentially legalizing infanticide by neglect).
  • Given biological males identifying as female the “right” to access to female-only facilities (bathrooms, locker rooms, etc.). accommodations (women's shelters, etc.), and be incarcerated in female-only prisons.
  • Given biological males identifying as female the “right” to participate in female sports.
  • Threatened parental rights, given it may have:
    • Prohibited parental notification and/or consent for minor girls seeking abortion (as there are no explicit references to limitations based on age).
    • Placed parents at risk of losing custody of their minor child if they do not agree with their child's decision to socially and/or medically reject their sex (“transition genders”).
  • Created a “right” to assisted reproductive technologies, like IVF.
  • May have required taxpayer-funded abortion.
  • May also have infringed on the freedoms of religion and speech given there are no conscience protections outlined. For example, as abortion, gender “transitions,” and same sex marriage would be constitutional “rights” under the proposal:
    • A clergyman may be required to perform a same-sex marriage or prohibited from providing counseling to gender-confused individuals.
    • Medical professionals may be compelled to prescribe puberty-blockers or perform abortions against sincerely held religious beliefs.
Fiscal Impact

While there is no official fiscal impact statement, the state may incur costs; for example, on lawsuits related to what would constitute “abridging” a right.

Current Status & Next Steps
  • Filed in June 2024 as a (citizens) initiated constitutional amendment; some signatures submitted Nov. 2025.
  • It needs to collect 160,551 valid signatures by July 2, 2026; then can be placed on the ballot.
  • If placed on the ballot, it would have become law via a simple majority vote.
  • It will not be on the ballot. The citizen-led effort is no longer viable (as the campaign that was actively collecting signatures has ceased its efforts), and the state legislature opted not to take action by the end of the session.
HOW TO TAKE ACTION

While we have a victory this year (thank you to those who prayed!), those seeking to advance this initiative are continuing to gather support. Reach out to Oregon Right to Life and get involved with the Oregon Family Council to stay up to date on these and other important issues!
TAKE ACTION