In the leadup to the election, the proposal was the subject of misinformation, with false claims that it would facilitate undocumented immigrant voting or enable children to receive gender-affirming care without parental involvement.

No person shall, because of race, color, ethnicity, national origin, age, disability, creed or, religion, or sex, including sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, pregnancy, pregnancy outcomes, and reproductive health care and autonomy, be subjected to any discrimination in his or her their civil rights by any other person or by any firm, corporation, or institution, or by the state or any agency or subdivision of the state, pursuant to law.b.

Nothing in this section shall invalidate or prevent the adoption of any law, regulation, program, or practice that is designed to prevent or dismantle discrimination on the basis of a characteristic listed in this section, nor shall any characteristic listed in this section be interpreted to interfere with, limit, or deny the civil rights of any person based upon any other characteristic identified in this section.The amendment expands the state constitution's protections against discrimination, including ethnicity, national origin, age, disability, sex (including sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender expression), pregnancy and pregnancy related outcomes, and reproductive healthcare and autonomy.

[5] On May 7, 2024, Livingston County Supreme Court justice Daniel J. Doyle ruled that the referendum cannot take place, since the New York Attorney General issued an opinion of the proposed amendment after lawmakers voted on it, rather than before.

Finally, Democrats, who wanted to make sure to meet the deadline, agreed to the wording Republicans proposed, written at a college reading level and omitting the terms "abortion" and "LGBT".

[21][19] The attorney general's proposed language was:[21] Protects against unequal treatment by New York and local governments no matter your sex, age, disability status, ethnicity, or national origin.

Protects abortion.When ruling on the case, Albany County Judge David Weinstein simply decided to implement his own version of the proposal, against the wishes of either side's lawyers and bypassing the BOE.

[24] While several parties have been critical of the final draft excluding the word "abortion" in its text, other advocates argue doing so helps to preserve rights of woman for all pregnancy outcomes, as well as for in vitro fertilization and contraception.

[27][28] Hell Gate NYC said many of the arguments against the proposal were "lies, plain and simple", highlighting a quote by Elise Stefanik which included several of them: "Proposition 1 would give our hard earned NY taxpayer dollars to illegals, fund sex change operations for minors without parental consent, and force schools to allow men and boys in women and girls sports and bathrooms".

[19] The amendment was supported by a number of Democratic politicians in the state, including Governor Kathy Hochul, U.S. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries.

[13] With the majority of New Yorkers in favor of protecting abortion rights, many opponents focused on transgender issues, suggesting that including age among anti-discrimination provisions would give children the same power as parents.

[31] Shortly before Election Day, Richard Uihlein gave $6.5 million to a political action committee (PAC), Vote No on Prop 1, to oppose the amendment.

[1] According to The New York Times, although the proposal faced right-wing opposition, it succeeded in several counties where voters otherwise voted for Donald Trump, the Republican presidential candidate.