A new assortment of abortion bans and restrictions have been introduced in conservative states across the country in the first few days of the new legislative session. Lawmakers in Iowa, Kansas, Wyoming, Mississippi, Montana, South Carolina, and Idaho have introduced legislation that will make it harder for women to obtain abortions and, in some cases, ban them entirely.

If passed, these laws will make it even harder for women in many states, especially poor and rural women, to obtain a safe and legal abortion. In 2019, the New York Times reported that over 11 million women of reproductive age already live more than one hour away from the nearest abortion clinic. Many states, including states proposing more restrictive laws this session, already only have one abortion clinic to serve their entire population.

Lawmakers appear to be focusing on passing these bills early in their respective legislative sessions, perhaps hoping they will avoid widespread attention in a busy news cycle.

Iowa

In Iowa, a joint resolution has been introduced for a proposed amendment to the state’s constitution. The amendment would say that there is no fundamental right to abortion, or public funding for it. If the resolution is passed, Iowa voters would decide whether or not to amend their constitution in this manner. 

But that’s not all. A recently introduced House Bill is also targeting women by requiring unnecessary and burdensome “informed consent” measures designed to deter women from seeking abortion care. Physicians would be required to inform women about the possibility of reversing the effects of medication abortions (an experimental medical procedure that couldn’t ethically be studied because of the increased risk of hemorrhage for trial participants). 

Iowa has a Republican-majority legislature, and Governor Kim Reynolds has made anti-abortion legislation a focus during her time in office.

Kansas

Similarly, Kansas legislators have introduced a resolution that would put a constitutional amendment on the ballot for Kansas voters. The amendment would state that there is no constitutional right to abortion and that legislators have the ability to pass laws regulating abortion. If the proposed amendment fails to pass, then the fundamental right to abortion that was recognized in a 2019 state Supreme Court ruling would remain in place.

If the anti-abortion amendment passes with a two thirds majority in both chambers, where Republicans now hold a supermajority, it will appear on the ballot in the 2022 primary election. Voters will then decide if it will be added to the state constitution.

Wyoming

Wyoming’s proposed informed consent bill is even more extreme. Among other things, physicians would be required to describe the procedure to their patients in writing and describe the fetus (referred to in the bill as “unborn child”) to the patient verbally. 

Republicans currently control the Wyoming state House, Senate, and governorship with a veto-proof supermajority. If enacted, the legislation would go into effect July 1, 2021.

Mississippi

Perhaps the most disturbing of the bills is Mississippi’s House Bill 338, which would find anyone who performs or induces an abortion guilty of murder. 

HB 338 is just the latest in a slew of anti-abortion measures in Mississippi. In December 2019, Mississippi’s 15-week abortion ban was declared unconstitutional by a federal appeals court. In October, the state filed a brief with the U.S. Supreme Court seeking clarification on this decision. Their goal, said one law professor, is to either get the ban upheld or significantly scale back protections in Roe v. Wade (or repeal it entirely). 

The Mississippi state legislatures and governorship are both controlled by Republicans.

Montana

Montana has introduced four different bills this week all limiting abortion access in different ways. HB 136 would outlaw abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy, with the only exception being to prevent serious health risks to the woman. Physicians who perform abortions after 20 weeks would be guilty of a felony. 

HB 140 would require that physicians inform women seeking abortions that they may listen to the fetal heartbeat and view an active ultrasound of the fetus. 

HB 167 would require that health care providers take necessary actions to preserve the life of an infant that survives an abortion. It declares infants that are born alive after abortions as legal persons, which is already true under existing law.

Finally, HB 171 would institute many new requirements. Health care providers would be prohibited from providing a woman with abortion pills after 70 days have elapsed since her last period. Abortion pills would only be allowed to be administered in person by a physician and would be prohibited from being distributed in schools or on school grounds. Currently, abortion pills can be prescribed through telehealth services and sometimes be mailed to patients, but these accessible practices would be prohibited under this bill. Laws such as these pose a significant hurdle in rural areas, where clinics may be far away.

Republicans also hold a trifecta of control in the Montana governorship and both legislative chambers. The Montana House Judiciary will vote Friday morning to advance the bills to the House floor.

South Carolina

South Carolina has proposed their version of the infamous “Heartbeat Bill,” which, if passed, would make abortion illegal after a fetal heartbeat is detectable. Since many women do not even know that they are pregnant this early on, this bill would virtually outlaw abortion. Additionally, this bill, unlike others recently introduced, criminalizes both the physician administering an abortion after a detectable fetal heartbeat, and the woman receiving it. 

The bill is expected to have an easier path to passage this time around after Republicans picked up three state Senate seats. Governor Henry McMaster has said he would sign the bill in the past. Similar bills have passed in Ohio, Georgia, Alabama, and Missouri, but all of them have been blocked by courts. Anti-abortion activists are hopeful that a new conservative Supreme Court majority would rule in their favor.

Idaho

A proposed Idaho bill would deny state funding to abortion providers and social workers who refer clients to abortion services. It also restricts public employees from procuring, counseling someone on abortion services, or referring to abortion. The bill aims to be applied broadly to school districts, public health districts, counties and cities. A similar bill was introduced last year, but didn’t make it to the Senate floor.