Florida legislative leaders to discuss further restrictions on abortions

That's my mistake. I misread the question. In any case, people knew of Roe and knew that the right to privacy involved protections for abortions. Your argument that we should assume voters are stupid and ignorant and refuse to construe the amendment consistently with its language is bad one. It's also a rejection of the entire basis of originalism.

 

No, that's not good enough.

Even if people "knew" the right to privacy protects some abortions (assuming it even does after the overturning of Roe), that doesn't mean they knew it protects them past 15 weeks. And it sure as Hell doesn't mean that they supported the line being drawn at the end of the Second Trimester. The most favorable split on the poll question you provided was about 60-40 for First Trimester with '91 being the outlier. I wonder how much that changes if you just swap "First" for "Second."

 

Originalism does not dictate that we conclusively rely on flawed and overturned decisions for definitions that were disputed at the time of those decisions and has been disputed ever since those decisions.

Like it or not, Roe is now one data point in defining "privacy" as far as 1980 legislation and amendments. It is by no means the "end all be all."

 

Originalism dictates that you define terms by their original public meaning. In other words, you define them by their meaning at the time of ratification. I've already posted on this forum cases from the Florida Supreme Court and U.S. Supreme Court from the late 1970s confirming that the "right to privacy" protected abortion rights.

 

Would they know that it protects them past 1 week? How about past 6 weeks? The problem with your argument is that the Roe framework governed at the time of the vote, and you haven't offered a competing framework that would actually protect abortion rights at any point.