From The Texas Tribune:
A bill seeking to clarify Texas’ abortion laws has passed out of a Senate committee, with amendments attached that aim to appease criticism from the left and the right.
Texas law bans abortion except to save the life of the pregnant patient, with penalties of up to life in prison, $100,000 fines and loss of licensure. But the law is confusing and vague, doctors and hospitals say, forcing them to delay or deny medically necessary abortions for fear of triggering the strict penalties.
Senate Bill 31 is intended to clarify when doctors can legally intervene. It aligns language between the state’s three abortion bans, removes any requirement that a medical crisis be imminent before a doctor can act, and requires doctors and lawyers to undergo training on the laws.
The original bill was closely negotiated between anti-abortion groups and medical associations, but in the weeks since it was introduced, abortion advocates and conservative groups have pushed for changes to the language of the legislation.
One set of amendments addresses concerns about whether the clarifying bill would change the legal status of the state’s pre-Roe abortion statutes. These laws, passed in the 1800s, allow for criminal charges to be brought against someone who has an abortion, as well as anyone who “furnishes the means” for an abortion.
Some conservative lawmakers have argued these statutes are in effect and have threatened to prosecute abortion funds, nonprofit groups that help pay for Texans to get abortions out-of-state, under this statute, although a federal judge has ruled the law is likely “repealed by implication,” and their work is likely protected.
Abortion funds and other advocates worried that amending the pre-Roe statutes in this clarifying bill would serve to revive them. The amended version of the bill says the legislation is neutral on the question of whether the pre-Roe statutes are in effect, while legal battles play out to resolve that question.
The bill is written “solely to clarify statutory text and to ensure medical care may be provided to a pregnant woman in a medical emergency … without prejudice to, or resolution of, any question concerning any provision within” the pre-Roe statutes, the committee substitute says.
It also specifically says a woman who has an abortion cannot be criminalized “as a party, principal, perpetrator, or accomplice” to the prohibited abortion.
Some conservative lawmakers and more strict anti-abortion groups had raised concerns that clarifying the existing exceptions would serve to widen them, and raised concerns about striking the word “life-threatening” to describe the medical conditions women must be facing to qualify for an abortion.
The committee substitute adds that term back in, but says a doctor does not need to wait until the patient has experienced physical impairment or the risk of death is imminent before they intervene. Life-threatening, the bill specifies, means “capable of causing death or potentially fatal. A life-threatening physical condition is not necessarily one actively injuring the patient.”
One example described in a committee meeting is of a pregnant woman who has cancer, which is expected to become life-threatening over weeks or months if she is unable to be treated due to her pregnancy. Under this clarifying bill, a doctor could perform an abortion even though she is not facing an emergent risk of death.
These amendments have the support of anti-abortion groups and the medical associations which originally negotiated the bill and agreed to only attach amendments that everyone involved would sign off on.
The bill will go now to the Senate floor for a vote. A companion bill awaits a vote from a House committee.
