Share this:

A bill to put a constitutional amendment related to abortion on the ballot in Wyoming failed introduction Thursday in the Senate, dealing a setback to abortion opponents who sought a popular vote after the state’s high court recently tossed two abortion bans. 

Senate Joint Resolution 7, “Right of health care access-separation of powers,” would have asked voters to amend the Wyoming Constitution to empower the Legislature to define health care “for purposes of the right of health care access and to clarify when and how the legislature may impose restrictions on the right of health care access.”

It did not muster the high threshold of votes required during a budget session, and failed by a single vote, 20-11.

The vote follows January’s Wyoming Supreme Court decision that struck down two abortion bans as unconstitutional. State lawmakers passed the bans.

In a 4-1 decision that hinged on constitutional language, the court determined the bans conflict with a 2012 amendment to the Wyoming Constitution that protects individuals’ rights to make their own health care decisions. 

Plaintiffs argued that abortion is enshrined in the “right of health care access” in Article 1, Section 38, which states that “Each competent adult shall have the right to make his or her own health care decisions.” Wyoming’s attorneys countered that abortion is not health care. 

Gov. Mark Gordon greets lawmakers ahead of his State of the State address Monday, Feb. 9, 2026, in Cheyenne. (Mike Vanata/WyoFile)

Following that bombshell decision, which resonated across the country and made national news, anti-abortion activists decried it and called for legislative action. 

The voters of Wyoming should settle the matter once and for all, Gov. Mark Gordon said in a statement at the time, which he reiterated during his State of the State Address on Monday. 

“The question of abortion deserves careful deliberation,” Gordon said in his address. “I urge the Legislature to take up this issue earnestly and put forward a genuine solution to the voters of Wyoming that provides a clear, irrefutable, durable and morally sound resolution to this fraught issue.”

He called on the Legislature to pass such an amendment during the session and deliver it to his desk. 

A constitutional amendment requires a two-thirds vote in both the House and Senate to appear on the ballot in the following general election.

‘Missed the mark’

Sen. Tim Salazar, R-Riverton, during the 2026 Wyoming Legislature budget session in Cheyenne. (Mike Vanata/WyoFile)

Senate Joint Resolution 7 was sponsored by Riverton Republican Sen. Tim Salazar and co-sponsored by 20 far-right and Freedom Caucus-aligned lawmakers, including members who attended a “prayer for life” in front of the Wyoming Supreme Court on Monday just before the session opened.

When Salazar presented the measure to the Senate chamber on Thursday afternoon, he framed it as a way to tackle “one of the most important issues of our day.

“As you know, I will work with anyone to resolve this terribly important issue,” he said. 

Sen. Cale Case, a Lander Republican, cast one of the no votes. Authorizing the Legislature to make such a sweeping definition gives the body far too much power, he said, and runs counter to Wyoming values. 

“The people of Wyoming would never go for it,” Case said. “It just misses the mark.” 

On top of that, Case believes that health care is a private issue that competent adults have the right to make on their own, he said. He is also in favor of the separation of powers.

For more legislative coverage, click here.

Katie Klingsporn reports on outdoor recreation, public lands, education and general news for WyoFile. She’s been a journalist and editor covering the American West for 20 years. Her freelance work has...

Leave a comment

WyoFile's goal is to provide readers with information and ideas that foster constructive conversations about the issues and opportunities our communities face. One small piece of how we do that is by offering a space below each story for readers to share perspectives, experiences and insights. For this to work, we need your help.

What we're looking for: 

  • Your real name — first and last. 
  • Direct responses to the article. Tell us how your experience relates to the story.
  • The truth. Share factual information that adds context to the reporting.
  • Thoughtful answers to questions raised by the reporting or other commenters.
  • Tips that could advance our reporting on the topic.
  • No more than three comments per story, including replies. 

What we block from our comments section, when we see it:

  • Pseudonyms. WyoFile stands behind everything we publish, and we expect commenters to do the same by using their real name.
  • Comments that are not directly relevant to the article. 
  • Demonstrably false claims, what-about-isms, references to debunked lines of rhetoric, professional political talking points or links to sites trafficking in misinformation.
  • Personal attacks, profanity, discriminatory language or threats.
  • Arguments with other commenters.

Other important things to know: 

  • Appearing in WyoFile’s comments section is a privilege, not a right or entitlement. 
  • We’re a small team and our first priority is reporting. Depending on what’s going on, comments may be moderated 24 to 48 hours from when they’re submitted — or even later. If you comment in the evening or on the weekend, please be patient. We’ll get to it when we’re back in the office.
  • We’re not interested in managing squeaky wheels, and even if we wanted to, we don't have time to address every single commenter’s grievance. 
  • Try as we might, we will make mistakes. We’ll fail to catch aliases, mistakenly allow folks to exceed the comment limit and occasionally miss false statements. If that’s going to upset you, it’s probably best to just stick with our journalism and avoid the comments section.
  • We don’t mediate disputes between commenters. If you have concerns about another commenter, please don’t bring them to us.

The bottom line:

If you repeatedly push the boundaries, make unreasonable demands, get caught lying or generally cause trouble, we will stop approving your comments — maybe forever. Such moderation decisions are not negotiable or subject to explanation. If civil and constructive conversation is not your goal, then our comments section is not for you. 

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *