Fetal Personhood - There seems to be at least THREE votes on the Florida Supreme Court

This is regarding the Florida Supreme Court's 4-3 decision allowing the abortion amendment to go on the ballot. Below, I look at two of the three dissents written by DeSantis appointees, Justices Renatha Francis and Jamie Grosshans. DeSantis' latest appointee, Justice Meredith Sasso, joins Justice Grosshans' dissent.

There seems to be at least THREE votes on the Florida Supreme Court that would insert fetal personhood into the state constitution, which someone will use in an attempt to lessen the effect of the proposed abortion rights amendment if it were to pass... and assuming they find the right case to bring before the Court because I'm sure the forced-birthers will look for one or manufacture one.

Additionally, because the justices mentioned below have been elevated to the Florida Supreme Court, that makes them prime candidates for an appointment to the federal bench when the next Republican president comes.


Justice Renatha Francis

Renatha Francis is completely unqualified to be a judge or justice in any court. However, she didn't need to be qualified for DeSantis. She just needed to have the right political ideology.

Justices Francis seems to believe that the Basic Rights Clause of the Florida Constitution (article 1, section 2) protects zygotes and fetuses. The Basic Rights Clause says: All natural persons, female and male alike, are equal before the law and have inalienable rights, among which are the right to enjoy and defend life and liberty, to pursue happiness, to be rewarded for industry, and to acquire, possess and protect property. No person shall be deprived of any right because of race, religion, national origin, or physical disability.

This is an snip from her opinion dissenting from the Court's opinion allowing the proposed abortion rights amendment to move forward. Overall, Justice Francis writes that the the amendment and ballot summary didn't sufficiently communicate its purpose and scope, and is therefore misleading. Basically, she wanted to amendment to say "CAUTION: THIS AMENDMENT WILL MURDER UNBORN BABIES." This is a strong #1 contender for the dumbest opinion I've ever read.

Justice Francis writes:

Justice Grosshans seems to be in the same boat as Justice Francis. She also believes this would have an impact on the Basic Rights Clause (article 1, section 2 of the Florida Constitution), specifically, an impact who is protected under this clause. The majority opinion says this is speculative. It is speculative because the Court has never defined personhood in this clause. There is no impact to a definition that does not exist.

Justice Grosshans would have rather the amendment's summary advise voters that the amendment would strip rights guaranteed to "the unborn child" under the article 1, section 2 (Basic Rights Clause).