The Nebraska Supreme Court will hear a challenge on Monday to a recently approved amendment proposal that seeks to enshrine abortion through all nine months of gestation in the Cornhusker State’s constitution.

Nebraska currently bans abortion beyond 12 weeks gestation. The Planned Parenthood and American Civil Liberties Union-fueled and funded ballot measure, if passed, however, would give abortion giants like Planned Parenthood a free pass to execute life in the womb at any point in pregnancy without fear of penalty or regulation from the state.

Nebraska Secretary of State Bob Evnen approved the unlimited abortion amendment and its pro-life rival for addition to the ballot in August “[b]arring any legal challenges” but has until Sept. 13 to decide whether or not they deserve certification. By Aug. 30, the Nebraska Supreme Court agreed to hear a lawsuit challenging the amendment’s constitutionality without requiring a review or appeal from lower courts.

The lawsuit, which is scheduled for oral arguments in front of the state’s highest bench beginning Monday, alleges that the proposed amendment does not pass muster for certification because it violates the Nebraska Constitution’s Single Subject Rule mandating “[i]nitiative measures shall contain only one subject.”

A brief filed by the Thomas More Society on Thursday further asks Evnen to refuse to certify the initiative or declare it invalid.

“The proposed initiative contains several subjects, which are not natural and necessary to each other, and which will confuse voters and create doubt after the election,” the brief states.

The text of the ballot measure in question claims anyone has a “right” to abortion until “viability” but leaves that definition up to the subjective judgment of a “healthcare practitioner.” That means someone who is not necessarily a medically licensed professional could continue ending life in the womb through all nine months as long as he or she claims the baby will not live or the mother’s undefined “health” is at risk.

As the brief notes, this language is “strikingly confusing” and “prone to a wide variety of interpretations” that no doubt paves the way for the usurpation of the state’s pro-life protections, including parental consent for minors, mandatory care for babies born alive after botched abortions, waiting periods, abortion data reporting, a ban on dismemberment, and more.

“The ‘Protect our Rights’ initiative expands abortion: 1. throughout pregnancy for nearly any reason; 2. without any regulation by the State whatsoever; and 3. to be presided over by non-physicians. This is a sea-change, overturning nearly 50 years of Nebraska laws on abortion. Yet the initiative does not allow voters to vote separately on these monumental changes. And its terminology is remarkably confusing,” the brief concludes.

Approximately 72 percent of Nebraskans oppose legalizing abortion through birth, something the pro-abortion amendment would do. A majority of Nebraska voters, 65 percent, however, say they would prefer a law that goes further than the state’s current 12-week ban by prohibiting the abortion of babies beyond the detection of a heartbeat, usually around six weeks gestation.

Jordan Boyd is a staff writer at The Federalist and producer of The Federalist Radio Hour. Her work has also been featured in The Daily Wire, Fox News, and RealClearPolitics. Jordan graduated from Baylor University where she majored in political science and minored in journalism. Follow her on X @jordanboydtx.