The Florida Supreme Court seemed to offer a compromise Monday when it greenlit the state’s six-week abortion ban while simultaneously approving a ballot initiative that would, if enacted, create a constitutional right to reproductive freedom. And indeed, the court’s split decision offers hope that Floridians can reestablish their state as an abortion refuge in the South this November. But an ominous current lurked beneath the rulings: Six of the court’s seven justices appeared to endorse fetal personhood under the state constitution as it stands now, expressing support for—as one justice put it—“the unborn’s competing right to life” over the patient’s right to bodily autonomy. The majority’s rhetoric indicates that if the pro-choice amendment fails this fall, the Florida Supreme Court remains ready to grant fetuses and embryos a constitutional right to life that prohibits the Legislature from legalizing abortion in the future.

There’s no doubt that this court is supremely hostile to abortion. In its first decision on Monday, the conservative supermajority overturned decades of precedent protecting access to abortion under the Florida Constitution’s right to privacy. In 1980 voters enshrined this right, the cornerstone of Roe v. Wade, into the state’s founding charter, with an evident understanding that it would safeguard reproductive autonomy. Yet, by a 6–1 vote, the court gutted the amendment by ignoring historical evidence of its broad original meaning. At the same time, by a 4–3 vote, the court upheld a proposed amendment that would restore an expansive right to abortion access throughout the state. It will require 60 percent support to pass in November.

This second ruling might seem to temper the majority’s hostility toward reproductive freedom. Not quite: Piecing together the fractured opinions, it becomes clear that six justices stand ready to institute fetal personhood under existing state law. The disagreement among this far-right supermajority comes down to tactics, timing, and deference to democracy. Three are prepared to now wield fetal personhood as a sword against any expansion of abortion, even by constitutional amendment. Three are waiting to impose personhood if the upcoming amendment fails and will not weaponize the doctrine today to keep the initiative off the ballot. (All but one of these justices were appointed by Gov. Ron DeSantis.) Just a single justice, Jorge Labarga—who dissented from the court’s first decision gutting the right to privacy—declined to board the personhood train.

© Slate