SIOUX FALLS, S.D. (KELO) -- For 50 years, Roe vs Wade guaranteed a constitutional right to an abortion. Two years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling to overturn the landmark decision shifted the legal battle back to the states. This November, South Dakota voters will take up Constitutional Amendment G. It would essentially restore a woman's right to an abortion in the state. A "yes" vote supports a state constitutional right to abortion in South Dakota, using a trimester framework for regulation: During the first trimester, the state would not intervene in a woman's pregnancy or decision to abort. During the second trimester, the state may regulate abortions but only for the physical health of the pregnant woman And during the third trimester, the state may prohibit an abortion except when medically necessary. Senator Mike Rounds tells KELOLAND News that he is against Amendment G. "Personally, I will vote no, and I would simply, with all due respect to the citizens of the state, ask them to also vote no and not put this into the constitution. There are things that occur scientifically, medically that you can address when you put things into statute, but if you put it into the constitution, you can't modify it by legislative action," said Rounds. Former state lawmaker Nancy Turbak Berry, who helped launch the amendment, says the current abortion ban approved by lawmakers in Pierre isn't what South Dakota voters want. "Our current ban is extreme; there is not even an exception for rape and incest; there is not an exception for the health of the mother," said Turbak Berry. "South Dakota voters twice before have rejected bans like that, and Senator Rounds and the rest of the political crowd around him they know full well South Dakotans don't want this." Rounds says he believes we should always do whatever we can to save lives. Mitchell Baseball Association silent on sentencing; Legion plans next steps "That means the mother's life, but it also means the child's life. And when you allow as this does with the way that it is written for abortions to be performed in the third trimester," said Rounds. "That's something that the vast majority of people of South Dakota would say, that's not what I thought this was all about." Turbak Berry says in 52 years, South Dakota has never had an abortion at or near birth. "Here's why: if a woman is approaching the end of her pregnancy, she is near term, and for some reason, her health or life requires that the pregnancy be ended, doctors don't abort the fetus; they deliver the baby. And to suggest otherwise is just kind of insulting to both the medical profession and to the women of South Dakota." "I think most people in South Dakota when they realize that this allows for abortion up through the third trimester. I think they will think twice about putting that into the constitution, said Rounds. "For decades, the right-to-life folks wanted to convince everybody that abortion should be banned because their slogan was life begins at conception. That didn't work for them, said Turbak Berry. "So now they've gone to the other end of pregnancy and they are trying to scare everybody by talking about abortion at or near birth abortion in the third trimester, that's just nonsense." The issue brings up strong opinions on both sides. South Dakota voters will vote on Amendment G on November 5th.