Texas Gov.
Greg Abbott
signed
into law on Wednesday a bill that clarifies that lifesaving medical care for a mother is not prohibited under the state’s
abortion
ban, responding to a chief objection raised by pro-abortion activists.
H.B. 3058
, which passed in the House with 128 of 149 votes, addresses concerns that a difficulty in interpreting Texas’s strict anti-abortion statutes has hindered physicians and healthcare professionals in their ability to provide crisis care for pregnant women.
FOOD STAMPS: WHAT TO KNOW ABOUT THE SNAP BENEFITS PROGRAM
Abortions in Texas have been
completely
banned since the reversal of Roe v. Wade in June 2022, and performing an abortion in the Lone Star State is a felony offense punishable by up to life in prison and civil penalties of no less than $100,000.
Clinician interpretation of Texas’s abortion ban took center stage during this year’s State of the Union address.
Amanda Zurawski
was a guest of first lady Jill Biden after Texas physicians refused to provide Zurawski miscarriage care at 18 weeks. President Joe Biden cited Zurawski’s case as an example of why Congress needs to “codify Roe v. Wade to protect every woman’s constitutional right to choose.”
The legislation clarifies that clinicians will not be held liable under the abortion ban if they are exercising “reasonable medical judgment” to save a woman from the dire complications of ectopic pregnancies or pre-viable premature rupture of membranes.
An ectopic pregnancy is the fertilization and implantation of an egg outside of the uterus, typically in the fallopian tube, and requires immediate treatment,
according
to the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.
The pre-viable premature rupture of membranes can be caused by an infection in the uterus and is a complicating factor in one-third of all premature births,
according
to the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia. It can cause the development of an infection of the placenta, compression of the umbilical cord, and after-delivery infections, putting both mother and child at risk.
The author of the bill, state Sen. Bryan Hughes, told National Review that although the original statutes were already clear, “some doctors and hospitals were not following the law, [so] we wanted to remove any doubt and remove any excuse for not giving the care that the moms need in these cases.”
Republicans in several states with strict abortion regulations have increasingly proposed legislation to clarify the difference between an elective abortion and lifesaving medical care for pregnant women.
This spring, the
Idaho
legislature passed a law that protected the removal of ectopic and molar pregnancies as well as protected hormonal contraceptive methods.
Wisconsin
state legislators have also proposed similar limitations to the definition of abortion.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
The Texas Civil Justice League, a bipartisan legal advocacy group,
commended
the bill, saying it was “something of a minor miracle” that it made it through the legislative process.
“Regardless of where one sits on the spectrum of viewpoints on the larger issue, HB 3058 proves that people working in good faith from across the political spectrum can still come together to remedy an identified problem even if it implicates a bitterly contested and divisive public policy issue,” the organization said.
Correction: A previous version of this story misidentified the Texas Civil Justice League. The Washington Examiner regrets the error.
