Poli Alert Political & Civics
Related Articles
An Oklahoma Senate committee on Monday approved five anti-abortion bills, including legislation that would copy key parts of a restrictive abortion law recently implemented in Texas.
All five measures were approved by the Senate Health and Human Services Committee on party-line votes and now head to the full Senate for consideration.
Similar to Texas’ Senate Bill 8 that took effect in September, a bill from Republican state Sen. Julie Daniels would prohibit physicians from performing an abortion after a “fetal heartbeat” is detected, which can occur as early as six weeks into a pregnancy often before a woman knows she is pregnant.
The bill would allow private citizens to sue doctors who perform an abortion after a “fetal heartbeat” is detected or anyone that “aids or abets” a woman getting an abortion after that cutoff point.
The other four bills were written by Senate President Pro Tempore Greg Treat, a longtime abortion opponent. One of the measures calls for a statewide vote to amend the Oklahoma Constitution to clarify there is no guaranteed right to an abortion in Oklahoma.
Another bill would prohibit an abortion 30 days after the start of a pregnant woman’s last menstrual cycle. Treat said his goal was to move the cutoff point for abortions as close to conception as possible.
Still another measure, Senate Bill 1555, updates the “trigger” law that took effect last year and would prohibit nearly all abortions if the Supreme Court overturns longstanding abortion protections
All five measures were condemned by abortion rights groups.
“Patients have shared devastating stories of trying to access care while abortion rights are under attack, but politicians continue to put their own agendas ahead of individuals’ rights to make private medical decisions,” Planned Parenthood Great Plains Votes Interim President Emily Wales said in a statement.
“What this would really mean is patients that have resources and can travel to parts of the country where abortion is more accessible, they would continue to have access but patients who don’t have those resources would not have the same options,” Wales added.
