MA Legislature Approves Highly-Controversial Abortion Bill
Massachusetts lawmakers have approved legislation that would make one of the most significant changes to the state’s abortion laws since the fall of Roe v. Wade, paving the way for another high-profile battle over abortion policy in the United States.
The proposal has already drawn strong reactions from both abortion-rights advocates and pro-life organizations, each arguing the measure will have far-reaching consequences.
The legislation now awaits the signature of Democratic Gov. Maura Healey, who has consistently supported expanding abortion protections during her time in office.
If signed into law, supporters say it will remove barriers to medically necessary care, while opponents argue it will dramatically expand access to abortion late in pregnancy.
The Massachusetts Senate approved legislation Friday that would change the legal standard for abortions performed after 24 weeks of pregnancy by giving physicians broader discretion to determine when such procedures are appropriate.
Under current Massachusetts law, abortion is generally legal through the first 24 weeks of pregnancy.
After that point, abortions are permitted only if a physician determines they are necessary to preserve the life or physical or mental health of the mother, or if there is a lethal fetal anomaly or a diagnosis indicating the fetus is unlikely to survive outside the womb.
The legislation approved by the Senate would remove those specific statutory conditions and instead allow abortions after 24 weeks “based on the professional judgment of the physician.”
Supporters of the bill argue the change is intended to ensure women experiencing serious pregnancy complications are not denied care because hospitals or physicians fear violating the current law.
State Rep. Christine Barber said some patients have already encountered that problem under the existing legal framework.
Barber cited one case in which a fetus suffered a stroke and was not expected to survive, but she said the patient was nevertheless turned away by hospitals because of uncertainty surrounding the law.
Supporters contend the legislation would provide physicians with greater flexibility to respond to complex medical situations without being limited by a list of specific statutory criteria.
Opponents, however, argue the measure removes important legal safeguards and could permit abortions much later in pregnancy than current law allows.
Myrna Maloney Flynn, president of Massachusetts Citizens for Life, criticized the legislation, saying it places greater emphasis on access than on patient safety.
Advertisement
“While this legislation prioritizes access, it does not prioritize a woman’s safety,” Flynn said in a video urging lawmakers to reject the proposal.
Other national pro-life organizations also condemned the bill after its passage.
Kelsey Pritchard, communications director for Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, told The Center Square that the legislation would legalize “abortion on demand until birth, paid for by taxpayers.”
Pritchard also argued that the proposal would place Massachusetts among a small number of states and jurisdictions that allow abortion throughout pregnancy under broad legal standards.
Abortion-rights supporters dispute that characterization, arguing that the legislation continues to require a physician’s professional medical judgment rather than allowing unrestricted abortions for any reason.
The proposal comes as states continue moving in sharply different directions following the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2022 decision overturning Roe v. Wade.
Since that ruling, numerous Republican-led states have enacted broad abortion bans or strict limitations, while several Democratic-controlled states have expanded legal protections for abortion providers and patients.
Advertisement
Massachusetts has already enacted some of the nation’s strongest legal protections for abortion providers, including shield laws intended to protect physicians who prescribe abortion medication through telehealth to patients living in states where abortion is restricted.
Those protections have become the subject of ongoing legal disputes involving officials in states with stricter abortion laws, Center Square reported.
If Gov. Healey signs the legislation, Massachusetts will once again expand its abortion laws, adding another chapter to the continuing national debate over abortion policy as lawmakers, advocacy groups and courts across the country remain divided over where legal limits should be drawn.
Trump Calls for Impeachment of “Outright Fraud” of a Democratic Senator
It appears that President Donald Trump spent at least part of his birthday watching Fox News Channel, as shortly after Sen. Jack Reed (D-RI) appeared on Fox News Sunday with host Shannon Bream to discuss President Trump’s seemingly imminent deal with Iran regarding reopening the Strait of Hormuz and attacked the president, Trump went nuclear in a post on Truth Social.
As background, the president described what might be included in the deal in a post on Truth Social, saying, ” Barack Hussein Obama’s Deal with Iran, the JCPOA, was an easy, beautiful, smooth road to a Nuclear Weapon, which Iran would have had six years ago, and would have used long before now. My Agreement with Iran is the exact opposite, A WALL TO NO NUCLEAR WEAPON! In fact, they no longer want a Nuclear Weapon, nor will they have one, either through purchase, development, or any other form of procurement.”
He added, “The Deal is scheduled to get signed tomorrow, and immediately after it is signed, the Hormuz Strait is OPEN TO ALL. Our relationship with Iran is a much different and better one than previous Administrations have had. Unlike Obama’s Hundreds of Billions of Dollars in payments to them, including 1.7 Billion Dollars in green, cold cash, no money will exchange hands. At the appropriate time, when all is calm, we will go in and get the Nuclear Dust, buried deep under the powerful sunken granite mountains, thanks to our beautiful B-2 Bombers and their brilliant pilots, and downblend and destroy it, whether in Iran, or the United States. We look forward to working with Iran, and the entire Middle East, long into the future. Hopefully, this process will all work out quickly, easily, and smoothly. If it doesn’t, we have the ultimate alternative, hopefully never to be used again!”
It was after he posted that commentary on the deal that Sen. Reed appeared on Bream’s program and attacked it, saying, that President Trump’s deal puts America in a “much worse position” than the one ex-President Barack Obama had made with the Iranian state years ago, and that getting out of it was a major mistake.
Doing so, the Senator said, “We are negotiating against a country which is leadership has been eliminated. Now we have even more fanatical leadership who has much more invested and much more to leverage their position… abandoning [Obama’s Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action] was a bad mistake by the president.”
Trump responded just hours later, attacking the Senator and saying, “Senator Jack Reed, a Dumocrat from R.I., lied when stating the the Deal we just made is not as good as the Obama disaster known as the JCPOA. Reed is either an outright fraud, or incompetent.”
He added, commenting on how terrible the Obama deal was, “The Obuma Deal was a road to a Nuclear weapon for Iran, cash and all, one of the worst and dumbest (hence Dumocrats!) Deals ever made by the U.S. Our Deal is a WALL against Iran ever having a Nuclear weapon, the complete opposite of Obuma.” Concluding by calling for the Senator’s impeachment, he said, “Impeach Jack Reed!”
May you like
Trump also sounded off on Benjamin Netanyahu on Truth Social, saying, “This morning’s attack on Beirut should not have happened, particularly on a special day when we are so close to a Peace Deal with Iran. Israel has the right to defend itself against threats, but the attack it was responding to was very small and meaningless, nobody was hurt, injured, or killed, and should not disrupt this important process.”
He added, “We are very close to a Deal that will bring peace to the region, including to Lebanon, and all sides should stand down. There should be no more attacks by Israel anywhere in Lebanon, but there should also be no more attacks by any other party, including Hezbollah, against Israel. This could be the beginning of a long and beautiful peace — Let’s not blow it! Thank you for your attention to this matter. President DONALD J. TRUMP
