Ohio Democrats seek to codify reproductive care, align state law with constitutional amendment
Ohio Democratic lawmakers will try to push back against existing abortion regulations and align state law with the state constitution in a new bill to codify reproductive care.
State Reps. Anita Somani, D-Dublin, and Desiree Tims, D-Dayton, introduced House Bill 128 this month, which seeks to repeal 'archaic laws in our state that do not improve outcomes or access to care,' Somani said, laws that include 'unnecessary ultrasounds' and hospital transfer agreements that hinder physicians from conducting care at certain clinics or facilities that provide abortion care.
'They were passed to create roadblocks for those seeking abortion care and those providing that care,' Somani said.
The bill is a reintroduction of a measure from the last General Assembly that only had one committee hearing, never received a vote and died with the end of a session run by a Republican supermajority which has in the past shown more support for anti-abortion measures than reproductive rights efforts pushed by the Democrats.
'I would hope that all of the stories of women dying because of restrictive abortion laws (nationwide) would help people understand what these restrictive abortion laws do,' Somani told the Capital Journal.
Somani's previous bill, House Bill 343, sought to repeal legislation approved by the legislature in 2019 that banned abortion after six weeks of gestation, called the Heartbeat Act by supporters.
That law spent most of its existence in court as abortion rights groups fought to have it rejected. The bill couldn't be enforced while it was tied up in multiple courts, and it was ultimately struck down by a Hamilton County judge last October.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
In his decision, Judge Christian Jenkins cited the state's constitutional amendment, approved by 57% of Ohio voters in November 2023, which established rights to reproductive health, including abortion, miscarriage care, and fertility treatments.
The fate of the 2019 law hasn't been decided yet, however, as Ohio Attorney General (and 2026 governor hopeful) Dave Yost has appealed the decision to the First District Court of Appeals.
Yost has said he isn't planning to fight the six-week ban's rejection on appeal, instead aiming his arguments at other provisions of the law, saying not all state regulations that could be considered connected to abortion care can be eliminated.
'The state respects the will of the people regarding the six-week abortion ban, but the state is also obligated to protect provisions in S.B. 23 (the Heartbeat Act) … that the constitutional amendment does not address,' a spokesperson for Yost said when the appeal was filed.
It's the idea of litigating law after law that drove Somani to the legislation she hopes to see considered in the new General Assembly.
Before, during, and after the passage of the constitutional amendment, reproductive rights advocates went to court to fight laws regarding fetal and embryonic remains disposal, the 24-hour waiting period required before an abortion, a two-visit minimum for pregnant individuals before the procedure can take place, and virtual prescription of medication used for abortions, along with the six-week ban lawsuit.
'Our hope is to align legislation with the constitutional amendment, and not have to go through each piece of previous legislation,' Somani said.
As an OB/GYN as well as a legislator, Somani said codifying the care established in the state constitution would also address maternal and infant mortality, issues the state has struggled with for years, particularly when it comes to Black infants and mothers.
In recent research from Groundwork Ohio, the state was also one of the worst in the country for low infant birth weight among Medicaid enrollees, with premature birth rates also increasing since 2019.
H.B. 128 would also add nondiscrimination, civil, and criminal protections for 'evidence-based care,' according to the bill sponsors.
'This legislation ensures that health care providers can focus on what matters most: providing high-quality, compassionate care to those who need it,' Tims said in a statement on the bill.
The bill was referred to the Ohio House Health Committee on Wednesday, where it will be subject to testimony from supporters and opponents before the chamber can vote on the measure.
The legislation faces an uphill battle, not only because a Democratic-led bill on reproductive rights is likely to struggle in the Republican supermajority Statehouse, but also because state operating budget negotiations have taken over much of the discussion as the July deadline approaches.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


San Francisco Chronicle
10 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
9/11 victims' fund architect slams changes to New Hampshire abuse settlement program
CONCORD, N.H. (AP) — An attorney who helped design and implement the 9/11 victims' compensation fund says New Hampshire lawmakers have eroded the fairness of a settlement program for those who were abused at the state's youth detention center. Deborah Greenspan, who served as deputy special master of the fund created after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, recently submitted an affidavit in a class-action lawsuit seeking to block changes to New Hampshire's out-of-court settlement fund for abuse victims. She's among those expected to testify Wednesday at a hearing on the state's request to dismiss the case and other matters. More than 1,300 people have sued the state since 2020 alleging that they were physically or sexually abused as children while in state custody, mostly at the Sununu Youth Services Center in Manchester. Most of them put their lawsuits on hold after lawmakers created a settlement fund in 2022 that was pitched as a 'victim-centered' and 'trauma-informed' alternative to litigation run by a neutral administrator appointed by the state Supreme Court. But the Republican-led Legislature changed that process through last-minute additions to the state budget Gov. Kelly Ayotte signed in June. The amended law gives the governor authority to hire and fire the fund's administrator and gives the attorney general — also a political appointee — veto power over settlement awards. That stands in stark contrast to other victim compensation funds, said Greenspan, who currently serves as a court-appointed special master for lawsuits related to lead-tainted water in Flint, Michigan. She said it 'strains credulity' to believe that anyone would file a claim knowing that 'the persons ultimately deciding the claim were those responsible for the claimant's injuries.' 'Such a construct would go beyond the appearance of impropriety and create a clear conflict of interest, undermining the fairness and legitimacy of the settlement process," she wrote. Ayotte and Attorney General John Formella responded by asking a judge to bar Greenspan's testimony, saying she offered 'policy preferences masquerading as expert opinions' without explaining the principles beyond her conclusions. 'Her affidavit is instead a series of non sequiturs that move from her experience to her conclusions without any of the necessary connective tissue,' they wrote. The defendants argue that the law still requires the administrator to be 'an independent, neutral attorney' and point out that the same appointment process is used for the state's judges. They said giving the attorney general the authority to accept or reject settlements is necessary to give the public a voice and ensure that the responsibility for spending millions of dollars in public funds rests with the executive branch. As of June 30, nearly 2,000 people had filed claims with the settlement fund, which caps payouts at $2.5 million. A total of 386 had been settled, with an average award of $545,000. One of the claimants says he was awarded $1.5 million award in late July, but the state hasn't finalized it yet, leaving him worried that Formella will veto it. 'I feel like the state has tricked us,' he said in an interview this week. 'We've had the rug pulled right out from underneath us.' The Associated Press does not name those who say they were sexually assaulted unless they come forward publicly. The claimant, now 39, said the two years he spent at the facility as a teenager were the hardest times of his life. 'I lost my childhood. I lost things that I can't get back,' he said. 'I was broken.' Though the settlement process was overwhelming and scary at times, the assistant administrator who heard his case was kind and understanding, he said. That meeting alone was enough to lift a huge burden, he said. 'I was treated with a lot of love,' he said. 'I felt really appreciated as a victim and like I was speaking to somebody who would listen and believe my story.' Separate from the fund, the state has settled two lawsuits by agreeing to pay victims $10 million and $4.5 million. Only one lawsuit has gone to trial, resulting in a $38 million verdict, though the state is trying to slash it to $475,000. The state has also brought criminal charges against former workers, with two convictions and two mistrials so far. The 39-year-old claimant who fears his award offer will be retracted said he doesn't know if he could face testifying at a public trial. 'It's basically allowing the same people who hurt us to hurt us all over again,' he said.


Fox News
11 minutes ago
- Fox News
MAGA Monks
Democrats downplay Trump's 'stunning' foreign policy wins, but the 'President of Peace' doesn't care. He's fighting to end hell on earth so he can get into heaven. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit FOX News Radio
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
California redistricting fight gets heated as lawmakers debate new congressional maps
The Brief A hearing was held Tuesday to discuss plans to redraw California's congressional districts. The committee hearing turned chaotic, with shouting and interruptions, as Republican Assemblymember David Tangipa and residents criticized the process, costs, and lack of public input. The California Legislature is expected to approve a proposed congressional map and declare a Nov. 4 special election by Thursday. SACRAMENTO, Calif. - A California legislative hearing turned into a shouting match Tuesday as a Republican lawmaker clashed with Democrats over a partisan plan to rewrite U.S. House maps to win Democrats more seats. What we know A committee voted along party lines to advance a new congressional map in response to a Republican redistricting effort in Texas that President Donald Trump wants. California Democrats do not need any Republican votes to move ahead. Assemblymember David Tangipa, one of two Republicans on the committee that was considering the proposal Tuesday, spent 30 minutes asking questions of his colleagues before being told to make time for other members, prompting some boos from audience members. When the committee began voting, he shouted for more time. At times during the hearing, lawmakers interrupted one another until the chair, a Democrat, called for order. "This is not the way we conduct our hearing," Assemblymember Gail Pellerin, who chairs the committee, said as she called for order several times after hours of discussion. Tangipa argued that California should spend its resources on other issues such as health care. Lawmakers are expected to schedule a Nov. 4 special election to put the new maps before voters, and they haven't revealed a cost estimate for the unexpected election. California Republicans estimated a special election could cost more than $230 million. "I'm asking how much this costs because the state is in a massive deficit and it's so personal to me," Tangipa said after the vote. He said his stepsister died a few weeks ago after a Medicaid provider refused to sign off on services she needed. California begins voting on proposed congressional map Tuesday's hearings were the first chance for California residents to tell lawmakers how they feel about the new congressional boundaries. A hearing in the Senate was far calmer, and the proposal passed easily. California Democrats said they are pushing back against Trump and his desire to reshape U.S. House maps to his advantage in an expanding fight over control of Congress ahead of the 2026 midterm elections. The California Legislature is expected to approve a proposed congressional map and declare a Nov. 4 special election by Thursday to get the required voter approval. In Texas, state Rep. Nicole Collier stayed at the Capitol overnight and into Tuesday to protest a Republican requirement that she and some of her Democratic colleagues have around-the-clock law enforcement surveillance after they ended a two-week walkout that delayed a vote on the Trump-backed map. RELATED:Redistricting California: Newly proposed congressional maps released On Tuesday, eight other Texas Democrats said they'll join Collier in spending the night on the House floor. State Department of Public Safety officers are shadowing the lawmakers to ensure they return to the Capitol and do not leave Texas again. To leave the House floor Monday, the Democrats had to sign what they called "permission slips" agreeing to the surveillance. Texas' Republican-controlled House scheduled a vote for Wednesday on the new map. California Republicans mount an opposition campaign Dozens of residents from up and down the state, leaders of local Republican groups and the conservative California Family Council showed up to a hearing Tuesday to voice opposition to Democrats' plan. Some said the process has been shrouded in secrecy because the map was drawn without meaningful public input. Others said they would rather have lawmakers focus on addressing issues instead of trying to bypass a bipartisan redistricting process. "There's different needs and different requirements for everybody," Jim Shoemaker, a Republican running for Congress in a district south of Sacramento, said in an interview. "But if you have somebody that just has a little portion of an area, they're not going to represent the people the way they should because they're looking at the wrong thing." Labor union members and several key Democratic political allies said the partisan plan is needed to protect democracy and to fight back the president's aggressive agenda. Public remarks may have little sway, though, as Democratic leaders are determined to rapidly advance the proposal. Some Republican lawmakers filed an emergency petition with the state Supreme Court arguing Democrats are violating the state constitution. They assert that lawmakers can't vote this week because the constitution requires new legislation to have a 30-day wait for public review. Democrats hold 43 out of California's 52 U.S. House seats and want to win five more. The proposal would try to expand that advantage by targeting battleground districts in Northern California, San Diego and Orange counties, and the Central Valley. Some Democratic incumbents also get more left-leaning voters in their districts. Texas Democrats have police escorts In Texas, Republican legislative leaders assigned state troopers to watch their Democratic colleagues and ensure they don't flee the state again, as they did recently to block a vote on new maps. Suburban Dallas Rep. Mihaela Plesa said one followed her on her Monday evening drive back to her apartment in Austin after spending much of the day on a couch in her office. She said he went with her for a staff lunch and even down the hallway with her for restroom breaks. "This is a waste of taxpayer dollars and really performative theater," Plesa said in a telephone interview. A message seeking comment was sent Tuesday to the Department of Public Safety. A national brawl unfolding Redistricting typically occurs once at the beginning of each decade after the census. But Trump is looking to use mid-decade redistricting to shore up Republicans' narrow House majority and avoid a repeat of the midterms during his first presidency. After gaining House control in 2018, Democrats used their majority to stymie his agenda and twice impeach him. Nationally, the partisan makeup of existing district lines puts Democrats within three seats of a majority. Of the 435 total House seats, several dozen districts are competitive, so even slight changes in a few states could affect which party wins control. ___ Vertuno reported from Austin, Texas. Associated Press writer Sophie Austin in Sacramento and John Hanna from Topeka, Kansas contributed to this report. The Source Information for this story came from the Associated Press.