Pro-abortion Washington Post offers keen summary of the status of pro-life legislation

By Dave Andrusko

A headline in yesterday’s Washington Post deftly summarized what pro-lifers are busy adamantly promoting and pro-abortionists greatly fearing: “States are readying abortion restrictions in case SCOTUS reconsiders Roe.” Rachel Roubein, writing at “The Health 202,” also brings into focus the pro-abortionists’ crusade to legalizing abortion on demand through all of pregnancy. She draws her conclusions from the work of WaPo reporters Caroline Kitchener, Kevin Schaul and Daniela Santamariña.

Roubein lists four categories of pro-life legislative efforts. Their counts differ slightly from National Right to Life’s Department of State Legislation’s but are in the ballpark.

First, “Four states are pursuing 15-week bans mirroring Mississippi’s legislation.” The Supreme Court has already heard oral argument in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. Mississippi’s “Gestational Age Act” protects unborn babies from abortion after 15 weeks. The thinking is if the High Court agrees this law meets constitutional muster, these states want to have a law in place.

Second “Thirteen states have proposed their own version of Texas’s ban, which deputizes private citizens to enforce the law through civil suits.” We’ve written many times about Texas’s Heartbeat Law. To this date it has rebuffed numerous challenges both at the Texas Supreme Court and the United States Supreme Court. Under SB 8, abortions may not be performed after the unborn child’s heartbeat is detectable, generally around the sixth week of pregnancy. States differ on who has standing to sue and whom they can sue.

Third, “Six states are currently considering new ‘trigger laws.’” These are law passed in anticipation of the day Roe is overturned.

And fourth, “Eight states are reviewing bans on medication abortion, which now accounts for more than half of abortions nationwide.” (Medication abortions are chemical induced abortions.) They are labeled “safe, safe, safe.”

Christina Francis is chair of the board of the American Association of Pro-life Obstetricians and Gynecologists (AAPLOG). She has debunked the “safer than Tylenol and Viagra, and 14 times safer than childbirth” numerous times.

One of the largest studies to date, which analyzed high-quality registry data obtained from nearly 50,000 women in Finland, found that the overall incidence of immediate adverse events is four-fold higher for medical abortions than for surgical abortions. The same study showed that nearly 7% of women will need surgical intervention — a significant number when you consider there are nearly 900,000 abortions per year in the U.S., 40% of which are medication abortions.

On the pro-abortion side, “Seventeen states have homed in on protecting the right to abortion or strengthening existing statewide Protections.”

This is followed by questions asked of Caroline Kitchener. Here’s the first: “States are pursuing a ton of abortion bills ahead of the Supreme Court’s ruling on Mississippi’s 15-week ban this summer. What’s really stuck out to you this year?”

Kitchener replied

We see a lot of antiabortion bills every session, but the stakes feel really different this year. When Republican states have passed these wildly restrictive laws in the past, they’ve always been blocked by the courts, ruled unconstitutional as a clear violation of Roe v. Wade, which protects the right to abortion until a fetus is viable outside of the womb.

But this year, all bets are off. Texas found a way to ban abortions after six weeks. The Supreme Court could overturn Roe in June. Antiabortion lawmakers are watching all this — and they’re excited.

Correct. We are excited!!