Election 2026

Abortion and Marriage Amendments on Virginia Ballot This Fall

Virginians will vote on two constitutional amendments that affect the family this fall. Question 1 asks voters to enshrine abortion in the state constitution and Question 2 would redefine marriage.

A “Yes” vote on Question 1 creates a constitutional “right” to abortion in the state. A “No” vote would help save babies’ lives.

A “Yes” vote on Question 2 removes the definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman from the Virginia Constitution. A “No” vote keeps the Constitution’s existing definition of marriage unchanged.

Both measures were referred to the ballot by the Virginia legislature.

Question 1 — Abortion

Question 1 asks voters to enshrine abortion in the state constitution.

If approved, the proposed amendment would add the following language to the Virginia Constitution:

That every individual has the fundamental right to reproductive freedom, including the ability to make and carry out decisions relating to one’s own prenatal care, childbirth, postpartum care, contraception, abortion care, miscarriage management, and fertility care.

The amendment goes on to say that, though the state may regulate abortion in the third trimester, it may never prohibit an abortion a physician says is needed to protect the woman’s “physical or mental health.” This exception creates a significant loophole which will result in third trimester abortions.

The Family Foundation, which opposes both amendments, explains that Question 1 would:

• Allow abortions into the ninth month of pregnancy on healthy babies who feel pain.

• Eliminate parental consent and notification requirements on abortions for minors.

• Weaken existing health and safety regulations meant to protect women.

• Enable “gender transitions” for minors without parental involvement.

Question 1 gives this “right” to “every individual,” with no exception for minors. The Family Foundation warns that its “reproductive freedom” and “fertility care” language could allow girls and boys to receive opposite-sex hormones without their parents’ knowledge or consent.

The Family Foundation offers several videos explaining Question 1, the abortion amendment, in more detail.

The campaign behind Question 1 is led by Virginians for Reproductive Freedom. Its largest donors are Planned Parenthood Action Fund, the Virginia League for Planned Parenthood and the ACLU, according to the Virginia Public Access Project. 

Opponents include the Virginia Catholic Conference, Virginias for Safe Reproductive Policy and Virginia Medical Professionals for Women’s Safety.

The money gap is significant. Ballotpedia reports that supporters of Question 1 have raised more than $2.8 million, compared to about $172,000 for opponents.

According to the Wason Center, polling from January 2026 showed support for the Question 1 at 66%, with 28% in opposition. Those numbers were up from January 2025, when the same poll found support for the amendment was at 61% versus 32% in opposition. 

Question 2 — Marriage

Question 2 targets the institution of marriage by attempting to remove its natural definition from the state constitution. 

In 2006, Virginians added the definition of marriage — the union of one man and one woman —to their constitution by a vote of 57% to 42%.

Question 2 would strike that language. In its place, it would require the state to issue marriage licenses to, and treat equally, any two coupled adults, “regardless of the sex, gender, or race” of either person.

The Family Foundation explains that Question 2 would:

• Repeal the marriage amendment defining marriage as between one man and one woman.

• Enshrine gender ideology into the state constitution, which threatens parental rights and protection for girls in sports and their private spaces.

According to the Family Foundation, by listing “gender” separately from “sex,” Question 2 writes transgender ideology into Virginia’s constitution. They say that would put pressure on schools, businesses and the government to adopt policies conflicting with biological reality.

The campaign for Question 2 is led by Virginians for Marriage Equality, backed by the ACLU of Virginia and Equality Virginia. 

The Family Foundation leads the opposition.

According to Ballotpedia, supporters have raised more than $242,000, most of it services donated by the ACLU of Virginia. Opponents reported about $5,800 in contributions.

Focus on the Family urges all our friends to pray, vote, and encourage your family and friends to do the same. Voting is a civic duty. As Bible-believing Christians, it is incumbent upon us to vote our values this fall.

Early voting in Virginia runs through October 31. Election Day is November 3.

Christians: Go Out and Vote This November

The late Chuck Colson once wrote, “The next time you hear someone tell you that Christians ought to take a vacation from politics, tell them to go fly a kite. Listen, it’s our duty as citizens of the kingdom of God to be the best citizens of the society we live in.”

The 2026 midterm election on November 3 is just a few weeks away, and early voting has already begun in many states. In fact, more than 1.2 million votes have already been cast.

If you’re not already registered to vote, consider registering today.

Focus on the Family encourages you to make your voice heard and vote for Christian values on or before November 3.

One of our six “Guiding Pillars” at Focus on the Family is the importance of social responsibility. We believe God has ordained the social institutions of family, church and government for the benefit of mankind.

As Christians, we are called to influence these institutions according to God’s design and purpose. As citizens in a constitutional republic, one way we can do that is through voting.

While some Christians may shy away from “politics,” it’s important to remember many “political” issues today are moral issues that Scripture is clear about and Christians should care about. These issues include:

  • The sanctity of human life.
  • The definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman.
  • The God-given reality of biological sex.
  • The defense of religious liberty and free speech.
  • The protection of parental rights.
  • And children’s right to be raised by their mother and father.

In the midterm election, voters will elect 35 of 100 members of the U.S. Senate, all 435 members of the U.S. House, numerous state governors and elected representatives, and local officials. It’s important that well-informed Christian citizens vote for candidates who most align with their values.

Additionally, voters in 39 states will have at least one ballot measure to consider, and many have several measures. For example, voters in:

  • Nevada (Question 6); Virginia (Question 1); and Idaho (Prop 1) will decide whether to create a “right” to abortion. A “no” vote protects human lives.
  • Virginia (Question 2) will decide whether to repeal the state’s definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman. A “no” vote protects natural marriage.
  • Vermont (Prop 4) will consider enshrining protections for “gender identity” into the Vermont Constitution. A “no” vote protects women, Christians and common sense.
  • Missouri (Amendment 3) will consider repealing the state’s constitutional “right” to abortion and prohibiting puberty blockers, hormones and surgeries for minors with sexual identity confusion. A “yes” vote protects infants and children.
  • Colorado (Prop 135) will decide whether to ban harmful and damaging “transgender” medical interventions. A “yes” vote protects children.
  • Colorado (Prop 134); Nebraska (Fairness for Girls Amendment); and Washington (Initiative 638) will consider banning males from competing in girls sports. A “yes” vote protects girls sports.
  • Arizona (Prop 318) will decide whether to safeguard girls’ restrooms and locker rooms by keeping males from entering them. It also reserves boys sports for male athletes. A “yes” vote protects women’s safety and privacy.

Other important issues are also on the ballot. Please know what you’ll be voting on in your state before you go vote.

Chuck Colson offered more encouragement to Christians to vote, saying, “Our Founders recognized that true rights come not from government, but from God Himself. Government must not take those rights away.

“And to protect those rights, we must vote.”

If you’re not already registered to vote, please do so today. And remember to vote on or before November 3, according to your state’s early voting laws. You can check your state’s secretary of state’s office to learn more about early voting.

Please also remember to pray for our nation (1 Tim. 2:1-2)!

Related articles and resources:

Christians Must Get Out to Vote This November

Why Should I Vote?

Understanding the Importance of Voting

Every Single Vote Matters

5 Easy Ways Christians Can Get Involved in Politics

Are You Registered To Vote? If Not, Today is the Day to Do It.

Photo from Shutterstock.

Prop 1 Would Create a Statutory ‘Right’ to Abortion Under Idaho Law

This November, Idaho voters will decide whether to pass Prop 1, the so-called Reproductive Freedom and Privacy Act.

A “Yes” vote creates a statutory “right” to abortion in Idaho until fetal viability. A “No” vote would leave in place Idaho’s Defense of Life Act, which protects babies from fertilization.

Prop 1 is a citizen-initiated statute. If it passes on November 3, it will take effect on January 1, 2027, as new state law.

Under Idaho’s current law, the Defense of Life Act, babies are protected from abortion except to prevent the death of the pregnant mother or during the first trimester when rape or incest are reported to law enforcement.

If approved, Prop 1 would create a “right” to abortion for any reason until fetal viability — the point when a baby can survive outside the womb.

But the initiative goes even further. 

It redefines fetal viability as the point when a physician determines a preborn baby has a “significant likelihood of sustained survival” outside the womb “without extraordinary medical measures.”

The language does not define what counts as an “extraordinary medical measure” and would give abortionists the power to decide which babies die. 

That ambiguity could have significant consequences later in pregnancy, including in the third trimester, when a baby may be capable of surviving outside the womb but might require intensive medical support.

The measure does not say whether common NICU interventions for extremely premature babies— like a ventilator — would be considered an “extraordinary medical measure.” 

It is unconscionable to think that Prop 1 might sentence a viable premature baby to death because he or she needs a ventilator in the NICU.

Stop Prop 1, the campaign to defeat Proposition 1, explains that this initiative would:

• Legalize late-term abortions — for any reason.

• Eliminate requirements for minors to obtain parental consent before getting an abortion.

• Redefine “fetal viability.”

• Eliminate safety requirements that only doctors can perform abortions.

Idaho already has one of the strongest life-protecting laws in the nation. Prop 1 would remove that protection and give abortionists the power to decide which babies die.

This ballot measure is designed to replace Idaho’s life-protecting laws and make future protections for babies, women and families more difficult to pass.

The campaign supporting Prop 1 is led by Idahoans United for Women & Families. 

Opposing the measure is Too Extreme for Idaho/Stop Prop 1, a coalition that includes the Idaho Family Policy Center, Idaho Chooses Life, Right to Life Idaho and the Roman Catholic Diocese of Boise.

According to Idaho Capitol Sun, supporters of Prop 1 have reported about $5.2 million in contributions, compared with roughly $2.5 million raised by opponents, as of the latest financial filings. 

Activists need a simple majority of the votes to pass the abortion measure.

It is critical for pro-life Christians to pray, vote, and encourage friends and neighbors to do their part to defend human life. 

Early voting in Idaho begins as early as October 13. Election Day is November 3.

Please vote to defend life when you cast your ballot this fall.

Protecting Children Is On the Ballot in Colorado

Colorado has three propositions on the November ballot where voters can take action to protect children.

Propositions 133, 134 and 135, respectively, protect children from sexual predators, keep girls sports for females and boys sports for males, and ban irreversible “transgender” surgeries for minors.

A “Yes” vote on all three initiatives will make Colorado safer for children.

After the Colorado General Assembly voted against all three measures, Protect Kids Colorado coordinated a remarkable campaign to place the propositions on the ballot. The organization worked with other groups like Colorado Parent Advocacy Network and Catholic Vote to collect signatures.

Working on a shoestring budget, more than 3,300 volunteer petition circulators gathered more than 500,000 signatures for the three measures. Hundreds of churches across the state hosted signature-gathering events.

Here’s what they were able to place on the November ballot:

  • Proposition 133, “Penalties for Human Trafficking of a Minor,” is also known as “The Children Are Not for Sale Act.” This citizen initiative elevates human trafficking of a minor for sexual servitude from a second-class to a first-class felony. It would require a life sentence in prison for human trafficking of a minor – without parole.
  • Proposition 134, “Male and Female Participation in School and Collegiate Sports,” defines male and female based on biological sex. It mandates that colleges and K-12 schools designate boys and men’s sports for males and girls and women’s sports for females. This commonsense measure is also known as “The Protect Girls Sports Act.”
  • Proposition 135, “Prohibit Surgery on Minors in Response to Perception of Sex or Gender,” prohibits health care professionals from performing “transgender” surgeries on minors with sexual identity confusion. Also known as “The Protect Kids From Irreversible Sex-Change Surgery Act,” this measure keeps state and federal money from being spent on these destructive surgeries.

Here’s more important information to know.

Proposition 133 also expands the definition of trafficking of a minor for sexual servitude to include “knowingly trading anything of monetary value to buy or sell sexual activity with a minor.”

The pro-abortion group Cobalt Advocates opposes this initiative, as it is afraid this expanded definition could be used by abortion opponents to prosecute anyone who helps a minor travel to Colorado to obtain an abortion.

Erin Lee, executive director of Protect Kids Colorado, told The Colorado Sun this was “patently false,” adding, “There is nothing in Proposition 133 that creates a new crime related to abortion.”

She added:

The legislature had an opportunity to strengthen these protections and failed. Now Colorado voters have the opportunity to decide for themselves whether these crimes deserve stronger consequences.

Some voters think the two recent Supreme Court decisions in Little v. Hecox and State of West Virginia v. BPJ already protect girls and women’s sports.

But those decisions only upheld state laws designating girls and women’s sports for females; they did not overturn laws and education policies in states that still allow – or fight to allow – men in women’s sports.

And while the Trump administration’s Department of Justice and Education Department have acted to protect girls and women’s Title IX education rights, states like Colorado still allow boys in girls sports and private spaces.

Proposition 134 is opposed by a coalition of groups called Families, Not Politics. It includes LGBT activist organizations like One Colorado, Transgender Law Center and Inside Out Youth Services. Joining them are radical education and abortion groups, such as the Colorado PTA, the Colorado Education Association, Cobalt Advocates and Rocky Mountains Planned Parenthood, as well as a couple of Unitarian Universalist groups.

Colorado has been at the forefront of promoting false transgender ideology and the destructive “transitioning” of children.

Among other harmful actions, the state’s General Assembly voted to mandate teaching about “LGBT individuals” in all K-12 social studies classes, restricted any beneficial therapy for children with sexual identity confusion, made the state a sanctuary for transgender medical procedures for minors, and allow children as young as 12 to receive therapy without parental knowledge or consent.

While the Department of Health and Human Services and the Justice Department are working to stop irreversible transgender medical procedures, all this work could be reversed with a new administration that espouses transgenderism.

Colorado begins sending out ballots to all registered voters on October 2. Voters may mail in their ballots, or drop them off in ballot boxes or at Voter Service and Polling Centers, where they can also vote in person. The state also has same day registration.

For more information, go to Colorado Elections and Voting.

Related articles and resources:

‘Art Club’ Documentary — One Family’s Escape from Gender Ideology, and the Bigger Trend Sweeping the Nation

Colorado Committee Kills ‘Children Are Not for Sale Bill’

Meet Three Heroes Working to Protect Colorado Children

Nebraska Citizens to Vote on Constitutional Amendment Protecting Girls Sports

One Mom’s Journey Advocating for Children and Parental Rights

‘Protect Kids Colorado’ Qualifies Three Child Safety Ballot Measures for November

‘Save Girls Sports’ on the November Ballot — Here’s How You Can Help

Supreme Court to Hear Title IX Girls Sports Case

Washington State Citizens Fight for Parents’ Rights, Girls Sports

Supreme Court Approves States’ Use of DHS Database to Exclude Illegal Voters

The U.S. Supreme Court decided in favor of allowing states to use the Department of Homeland Security’s database to check registered voters’ citizenship.

In a 6-3 per curiam decision (an opinion issued in the name of the Court and not an individual justice), the justices overturned an injunction from District Court Judge Sparkle L. Sooknanan, a Biden appointee, blocking states from using the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) system.

The majority decided the government was likely to succeed in its case, which was sent back to the district court for a full review.    

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote a dissenting opinion, joined by Justices Sotomayer and Kagan.

The Court explained that SAVE was created as part of the “Immigration Reform and Control Act” of 1986” to allow “federal, state, and local government agencies to verify the citizenship and immigration status of noncitizens applying for public benefits.”

President Trump signed an executive order on March 31, 2026, “Ensuring Citizenship Verification and Integrity in Federal Elections,” instructing the DHS to modify SAVE and compile data from more federal databases, including the Social Security Administration and federal citizenship and naturalization records.

The order directed DHS to send state election officials a State Citizenship List, at least 60 days before an election, to ensure that only citizens voted in federal elections.

SAVE was also modified to allow bulk searches, rather than individualized searches, so that election officials could more easily compare state and local voter rolls with the SAVE database.

The League of Women Voters, its local affiliates and the Electronic Privacy Information Center challenged the modifications, alleging that the changes violated Social Security confidentiality rules, the Privacy Act of 1974, and “were arbitrary and capricious under the Administrative Procedure Act.”

The Court disagreed, citing the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act, passed by Congress in 1996, which forbid state, local and federal agencies from blocking DHS from sharing information about citizenship and immigration status.

The justices pointed out, however, that the decision may not have a big impact on the 2026 mid-term elections. The National Voter Registration Act prohibits states from creating new programs that “systematically remove the names of ineligible voters from the official lists of eligible voters” within 90 days of an election.

But states can still use the SAVE program to make individualized inquiries about a voter’s citizenship. In addition, before Sooknanan blocked the use of the program, DHS had already flagged around 30,000 registered voters, in 12 different states, as possible non-citizens. States can still investigate their eligibility.

Reuters reported that most of the errors came from “bureaucratic errors.” For example, New Jersey recently announced that 6,600 non-citizens were added to voter rolls through a “technology glitch” that automatically registered them as they applied for IDs and drivers licenses.

Reports like this lead to voter uncertainty about election results. The mistrust is compounded when the huge number of noncitizens in the U.S. is taken into consideration.

A September 22 report from the Congressional Research Service stated that in 2024 “an estimated 50.2 million foreign-born people resided in the United States, representing approximately 14.8% of the total U.S. population.”

Almost 26 million of these are naturalized citizens, leaving about 24 million noncitizens. Around 12 million of these are “lawful permanent residents” and approximately 14 million are illegal aliens, although that number may be greatly underestimated.

That leaves a lot of room for error when registering voters.

The Supreme Court decision, allowing states to work with DHS to create more accurate voter lists, is one step in the right direction.

Related articles and resources:

9 Election Reforms States Can Implement to Prevent Mistakes and Vote Fraud

Are Elections Secure? 10 Examples of Election Issues Around the Country

Can the US Postal System Be Trusted with Our Ballots?

The Facts About Election Integrity and the Need for States to Fix Their Election Systems

How To Restore Faith in Our Federal Elections

Is it ‘Voter Suppression’ to Require Proof of Citizenship to Vote?

Why (and How) Christians Should Vote