Coalition for Parents and Children

Attorney Jason Guinasso was the coalition spokesperson. ²

Background

The Coalition for Parents and Children is a pro-life political action committee founded to oppose Nevada Question 6, a 2024 ballot initiative enshrining the right to abortion in the state constitution. ¹

Jason Guinasso was the coalition spokesperson. ² Guinasso is an attorney at Greenman Goldberg Raby & Martinez in Reno and Las Vegas. He is licensed to practice law in Nevada and California, and teaches business law at the University of Nevada Reno. ³

Voters approved the Question 6 abortion initiative in November 2024 with 64 percent of the vote. ⁴

Campaign

The Coalition for Parents and Children did not report any contributions listed before the 2024 election. ^{5 4}

The coalition argued that abortion was already legal in Nevada up to 24 weeks of pregnancy with no restrictions, and that did not change with the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which overturned Roe v. Wade and the national right to abortion. Thus, it contended, that Question 6 was a solution in search of a problem. The coalition argued that Question 6 is vague on when abortion is illegal, and could include up to nine months. ³

The group further contended that if Question 6 passed, it would carry a hidden financial burden of requiring taxpayers to fund abortions without limit, which would likely exceed $120 million annually. The group also argued that under the vague language of the proposal, non-doctors would be able to perform abortions. ³

Litigation

In November 2023, state Judge James T. Russell sided with the Coalition for Parents and Children PAC in its lawsuit to block a proposed ballot initiative in the state to establish a “fundamental right to reproductive freedom,” including abortion, in the state constitution. The judge ruled the ballot language was too broad, could be misleading, “with no limiting language” and a “multitude of subjects that amount to logrolling.” ^{6 2}

In response, the pro-abortion Nevadans for Reproductive Freedom committee narrowly tailored the ballot question to focus only on abortion rights, and Judge Russell later approved the new ballot language. ^{7 8}

In April 2024, the state Supreme Court determined the broad language on reproductive rights relating to multiple procedures including abortion did not violate the state’s single-subject rule and the petition does not create an unfunded mandate on the state. ⁹

In upholding the ballot language, the state’s high court ruled, “This initiative petition’s single subject is the creation of a fundamental right to reproductive freedom. All the petition’s provisions are fundamentally related or germane to that single subject. There is no logrolling.” ¹⁰

After the state Supreme Court ruling allowing multiple medical procedures, coalition spokesperson Jason Guinasso said, “The Court has transformed the single-subject rule into the single-category rule, which will open the floodgates to broad and deceptive initiative proposals like the one at issue in this case.” But he added, “My clients will now focus on educating the voters on why this proposal is bad law and policy for Nevadans.” ¹¹