In a surprising turn of events, the Texas House voted 129-6 in favor of a bill that aims to clarify when emergency abortions can be performed. The bill, known as Senate Bill 31 or the Life of the Mother Act, now only needs one more procedural vote before it lands on Gov. Greg Abbott’s desk for approval. Crafted with input from both physicians and anti-abortion groups, the bill was sponsored by Rep. Bryan Hughes, the Mineola Republican famous for authoring the state’s 2021 abortion ban.
During the introduction of the bill, Hughes emphasized the importance of recognizing exceptions when the life of the mother is in danger. Texas law currently prohibits abortions except in cases of a medical emergency that threatens a woman’s life or a “major bodily function.” However, doctors have expressed confusion over the vague language of the exception, leaving them uncertain about when they can legally perform an emergency abortion. This lack of clarity has led to tragic consequences, as highlighted by a report from ProPublica which revealed that at least two women had died due to the ambiguity surrounding Texas’ abortion ban.
SB 31 seeks to standardize the language around exceptions in Texas’ abortion laws, making it clear that doctors can act even if the risk of death or impairment is not immediate. Moreover, the bill ensures that discussions between doctors, colleagues, or patients regarding the best treatment option do not constitute “aiding and abetting” an illegal abortion. By placing the burden of proof on the state in cases where a doctor is accused of performing an illegal abortion, SB 31 aims to provide clarity and protection for medical professionals. Additionally, the Texas Medical Board will be tasked with offering a continuing education course about the law for physicians.
Although the bill received bipartisan support this session, some abortion rights advocates initially voiced concerns about the outdated abortion statutes from the 1800s that are still technically in effect in Texas. These statutes, currently under review by the courts, could potentially be revived by tweaking their language, raising fears that anti-abortion groups might exploit them to restrict access to abortion. Despite these worries, amendments to SB 31 have addressed some of the concerns regarding the enforceability of the pre-Roe ban.
As the bill moves closer to becoming law, Rep. David Lowe, one of the six lawmakers who voted against it on second reading, criticized the legislation for allegedly weakening protections for unborn children. However, the final text of SB 31 includes provisions explicitly stating that the bill does not take a stance on the enforceability of the pre-Roe ban, easing some of the concerns raised by opponents. While the bill may not be perfect, it represents a step towards providing clarity and safeguards for doctors facing difficult decisions in emergency situations.
