My Opponent’s Vote for House Bill 347: It Violates the Ohio Constitution, It’s Going to Lose in Court, and Ohio Taxpayers Will Foot the Bill

My opponent, State Representative Angie King (R-Celina), proudly co-sponsored and voted for House Bill 347 — the so-called “SHE WINS” Act. She called it legislation that “ensures a woman’s right to make a fully informed decision about an elective abortion without modifying provisions in the Ohio Constitution” and claimed it simply “requires elective abortions to meet the same informed consent standards applied to other forms of medical care.”

On March 25, 2026, the House passed this bill on a strict party-line vote of 64-32.

Here’s the reality: This isn’t neutral, everyday informed consent that applies equally to every medical procedure. HB 347 singles out abortion with a mandatory 24-hour waiting period, extra state-mandated disclosures, and steep penalties for doctors — including lawsuits that start at $100,000 in damages.

Several specific provisions go beyond what major medical organizations consider sound, evidence-based practice. For example, the bill requires doctors to disclose a long list of possible physical and psychological complications specific to abortion, some of which are not strongly supported by current medical evidence. It also includes language suggesting that medication abortions can be “reversed” if a woman changes her mind after the first pill — a claim that ACOG and other leading groups say is not supported by science and does not meet clinical standards. On top of that, the 24-hour waiting period itself has long been viewed as medically unnecessary for abortion care, adding barriers without improving safety or outcomes.

In 2023, Ohio voters spoke clearly when they passed the Reproductive Freedom Amendment (Article I, Section 22). It protects every person’s right to make their own reproductive decisions, including abortion. The Constitution says the state cannot burden, interfere with, or discriminate against that right unless it’s the least restrictive way to protect health — and only if it’s based on widely accepted, evidence-based medical standards.HB 347 fails that test. It adds extra hurdles and targets only abortion care. Major medical organizations like the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists have said for years that these abortion-specific waiting periods don’t improve patient health — they just create unnecessary barriers.

Ohio courts have already ruled on this exact issue. In the Preterm-Cleveland case, a Franklin County judge blocked Ohio’s existing 24-hour waiting period and similar informed consent rules because they violate the Reproductive Freedom Amendment. That injunction is still in place today. HB 347 is basically the same law repackaged, so it will almost certainly be sued immediately and blocked again.

My opponent’s vote isn’t about protecting women or delivering better medical care — it’s politics over the Constitution that Ohio voters approved. And when the lawsuits start (and they will), Ohio taxpayers will pay the price. The Attorney General’s office will spend our money defending a bill we know is likely unconstitutional, while important priorities like schools, roads, and family needs get pushed aside.

I will not support legislation that violates the constitutional rights of Ohioans. We deserve leaders who actually respect the will of the voters at the ballot box instead of creating expensive court battles we’re destined to lose.

Ohio made its choice on reproductive freedom in 2023. It’s time lawmakers stop wasting time and money fighting that clear decision.

Arienne Childrey

Democratic Candidate for Ohio House of Representatives, District 84

arichildrey.com | 

Paid for by Friends of Arienne Childrey

See infographic below for some key ways in which HB 347 violates the Ohio Constitution: