In the aftermath of the U.S. Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, Minnesota Democrats took control of government and passed sweeping protections for abortion rights into state law. At the start of the 2024 legislative session, they looked poised to go even further.

Top leaders said they wanted to put the question to voters on whether to enshrine protections for everything from sex, race and gender identity to reproductive rights in the state's Constitution in a wide-ranging equal rights amendment.

Three months later, DFLers in control are still debating if — and how — they're going to do it.

Democrats in the House on Thursday presented the latest version of the amendment that they hope will end up on the ballot, but it's still unclear if that language can pass the Senate.

Here's what to know about the amendment, the debate among Democrats and the multimillion-dollar campaigns that could follow.

What would the amendment do?

Unlike many states, which have recently taken up ballot initiatives specifically to address abortion access after the fall of Roe, Minnesota's proposed amendment is an expanded version of an equal rights amendment based on gender that has been debated at the Capitol for decades.

"We are looking to embed our values into our Constitution, and Minnesota values of freedom, fairness and equality," said Betty Folliard, a former DFL legislator who has long been pushing for the equal rights amendment. "This is about equal rights, and all Minnesotans deserve all the same rights."

A version that passed the state Senate last year would ask voters if the Minnesota Constitution should be amended to guarantee equal rights to people no matter their "race, color, creed, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, age, disability, ancestry, or national origin."

What are Democrats debating about?

Constitutional amendments must pass both the House and Senate before they can go on the ballot, but the House didn't take it up last year, arguing that the language needed to more explicitly ensure legal protections for abortion and gender-affirming care.

Since then, a coalition of law professors, constitutional attorneys, legislators and advocacy groups have been working to try and strike a deal. House Democrats rolled out a new version of the amendment on Thursday that also guarantees protections for those making decisions "about all matters relating to one's own pregnancy or decision whether to become or remain pregnant."

"We're hopeful," House Majority Leader Jamie Long, DFL-Minneapolis, said Thursday about the prospects for agreement with the Senate. "We've been in good conversations with the Senate, we've made changes to the language at the Senate's request."

Sen. Mary Kunesh, DFL-New Brighton, who is carrying the amendment in the Senate, said she's "glad to see the House acting to keep this important conversation going."

"Our caucus needs time to review and discuss the new language," she said. "We share a commitment to equal rights and protections, and will work within our caucus and with the House to bring our paths together and pass the Equal Rights Amendment."

Doesn't Minnesota already have abortion protections?

Democrats added abortion rights protections to state law last year when they passed the Pro Act, and Minnesota has its own state Supreme Court precedent in Doe v. Gomez, which affirmed women's constitutional right to abortion. Democrats have said future lawmakers or courts could undo the law and set new precedents.

When could the question go before voters?

The House and Senate proposals differ on when the amendment should be on the ballot.

The Senate version passed last year would put the question to voters this fall, while the House wants to ask voters in 2026 to allow more time to mobilize a campaign on the issue. Supporters of waiting until 2026 say an education campaign is critical so voters understand the implications of the ballot initiative.

Are campaigns gearing up on this issue?

Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life, the state's largest organization opposing abortion, is already spending $1 million on a television, radio and digital ad buy against the push to put a constitutional amendment on the ballot. MCCL is expected to put out a second ad in early May.

On the other side, Minnesotans for Equal Rights is already registered with the state's campaign finance board and is ready to go live the day both chambers pass the amendment, said Megan Peterson, executive director of Gender Justice and Gender Justice Action, who is working to help set up the campaign. They're looking at the successful campaign to defeat an anti-gay marriage amendment in 2012 as a model.

"We know that having conversations with Minnesotans and making sure they know what the amendment is and what it would do is crucial," Peterson said.