Latest news with #2023Act
Yahoo
14-05-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
South Carolina Supreme Court upholds ‘fetal heartbeat' abortion ban
South Carolina's Supreme Court upheld the state's 'fetal heartbeat' law in a Wednesday ruling. Justices ruled the state can continue to ban abortion starting at six weeks of gestation, when the current law states a 'fetal heartbeat' can begin to be detected. Abortions in the state have been banned as soon as a health care provider can detect 'cardiac activity, or the steady and repetitive rhythmic contraction of the fetal heart, within the gestational sac,' under a 2023 law called the Fetal Heartbeat Protection from Abortion Act. Many other states, including Texas, Oklahoma and Idaho, have passed similar 'heartbeat' abortion bans, with some Republican-led states doing so after the 2022 overturning of Roe v. Wade. The law states that such cardiac activity occurs at around six weeks after conception, but Planned Parenthood challenged the law's merit in court, arguing that it uses an alternative definition of when the fetal heart forms and when a heartbeat starts. They argue that this type of 'cardiac activity does not occur until all four chambers of the heart have formed' and that a 'heartbeat' ban should start at around nine or 10 weeks after conception. Justices noted in their ruling that the definition of a 'fetal heartbeat' in the 2023 law is ambiguous and does not convey a 'clear, definite meaning.' 'Not one of the terms the General Assembly used in the definition-not 'cardiac activity' nor 'steady,' 'repetitive,' 'rhythmic,' 'contraction,' 'fetal heart,' nor even 'gestational sac,'-is a precise medically defined term,' they wrote. Health care workers disagree on the precise meaning of these words, they added, which forced them to 'turn to rules of statutory construction and other evidence of what the General Assembly intended.' Associate Justice John Few wrote in the ruling that the language of the 2023 law was identical to a 2021 version of the law, which was understood to mean a six-week abortion ban. Because lawmakers understood the law to mean abortions should be banned in the state at six weeks, that is how lawmakers should interpret the 2023 act. 'We count at least sixty separate instances during the 2023 legislative session in which a member of the House or Senate referred to the 2023 Act as a six-week ban on abortion, many of which specifically referenced the Court's analysis of the 2021 Act,' he wrote. 'We could find not one instance during the entire 2023 legislative session in which anyone connected in any way to the General Assembly framed the Act as banning abortion after approximately nine weeks.' Anti-abortion groups called the Supreme Court's decision a victory. 'Planned Parenthood has failed in attempting to rewrite the science of human development to further their agenda for more abortions and more profit,' said Caitlin Connors, political director of Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America. As did South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster (R). 'Time and time again, we have defended the right to life in South Carolina, and time and time again, we have prevailed,' the governor wrote in a statement. 'Today's ruling is another clear and decisive victory that will ensure the lives of countless unborn children remain protected and that South Carolina continues to lead the charge in defending the sanctity of life.' Meanwhile, Planned Parenthood vowed to continue to challenge the law until South Carolinians can receive abortion care. 'Justice did not prevail today, and the people of South Carolina are paying the price,' said Paige Johnson, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood South Atlantic, in a statement. 'People have been forced to carry pregnancies against their will, suffered life-threatening infections, and died as a direct result of this abortion ban. The cruel politics of South Carolina lawmakers are harming families and destroying a health care system as more and more providers feel the state. But we will never back down, and neither should you.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
The Hill
14-05-2025
- Health
- The Hill
South Carolina Supreme Court upholds ‘fetal heartbeat' abortion ban
South Carolina's Supreme Court upheld the state's 'fetal heartbeat' law in a Wednesday ruling. Justices ruled the state can continue to ban abortion starting at six weeks of gestation, when the current law states a 'fetal heartbeat' can begin to be detected. Abortions in the state have been banned as soon as a health care provider can detect 'cardiac activity, or the steady and repetitive rhythmic contraction of the fetal heart, within the gestational sac,' under a 2023 law called the Fetal Heartbeat Protection from Abortion Act. Many other states, including Texas, Oklahoma and Idaho, have passed similar 'heartbeat' abortion bans, with some Republican-led states doing so after the 2022 overturning of Roe v. Wade. The law states that such cardiac activity occurs at around six weeks after conception, but Planned Parenthood challenged the law's merit in court, arguing that it uses an alternative definition of when the fetal heart forms and when a heartbeat starts. They argue that this type of 'cardiac activity does not occur until all four chambers of the heart have formed' and that a 'heartbeat' ban should start at around nine or 10 weeks after conception. Justices noted in their ruling that the definition of a 'fetal heartbeat' in the 2023 law is ambiguous and does not convey a 'clear, definite meaning.' 'Not one of the terms the General Assembly used in the definition-not 'cardiac activity' nor 'steady,' 'repetitive,' 'rhythmic,' 'contraction,' 'fetal heart,' nor even 'gestational sac,'-is a precise medically defined term,' they wrote. Health care workers disagree on the precise meaning of these words, they added, which forced them to 'turn to rules of statutory construction and other evidence of what the General Assembly intended.' Associate Justice John Few wrote in the ruling that the language of the 2023 law was identical to a 2021 version of the law, which was understood to mean a six-week abortion ban. Because lawmakers understood the law to mean abortions should be banned in the state at six weeks, that is how lawmakers should interpret the 2023 act. 'We count at least sixty separate instances during the 2023 legislative session in which a member of the House or Senate referred to the 2023 Act as a six-week ban on abortion, many of which specifically referenced the Court's analysis of the 2021 Act,' he wrote. 'We could find not one instance during the entire 2023 legislative session in which anyone connected in any way to the General Assembly framed the Act as banning abortion after approximately nine weeks.' Anti-abortion groups called the Supreme Court's decision a victory. 'Planned Parenthood has failed in attempting to rewrite the science of human development to further their agenda for more abortions and more profit,' said Caitlin Connors, political director of Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America. As did South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster (R). 'Time and time again, we have defended the right to life in South Carolina, and time and time again, we have prevailed,' the governor wrote in a statement. 'Today's ruling is another clear and decisive victory that will ensure the lives of countless unborn children remain protected and that South Carolina continues to lead the charge in defending the sanctity of life.' Meanwhile, Planned Parenthood vowed to continue to challenge the law until South Carolinians can receive abortion care. 'Justice did not prevail today, and the people of South Carolina are paying the price,' said Paige Johnson, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood South Atlantic, in a statement. 'People have been forced to carry pregnancies against their will, suffered life-threatening infections, and died as a direct result of this abortion ban. The cruel politics of South Carolina lawmakers are harming families and destroying a health care system as more and more providers feel the state. But we will never back down, and neither should you.'
Newsweek
14-05-2025
- Politics
- Newsweek
Map Shows States With Strictest Abortion Laws After SC Supreme Court Ruling
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. South Carolina's Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld the state's six-week abortion ban, making it among the states with the strictest abortion laws. Why It Matters Conservative states like South Carolina moved to ban most abortions after the United States Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, the landmark case that for decades guaranteed reproductive rights across the country regardless of one's state. Tens of millions of women live in states where abortion is banned or heavily restricted, about three years after the ruling. Voters in states like Kansas have upheld reproductive rights in ballot measures, but legal battles to restore abortion rights in some states have been less successful. What To Know South Carolina's highest court on Wednesday handed down its ruling in the case Planned Parenthood v. South Carolina, which dealt with the question of when a fetal heartbeat begins. The court sided with the state, which argued the heartbeat begins about six weeks into a pregnancy. Attorneys representing Planned Parenthood argued this only occurs when all four chambers of the heart have been formed, about nine weeks into a pregnancy. Abortion rights protesters demonstrate at the U.S. Supreme Court on April 2, 2025. Abortion rights protesters demonstrate at the U.S. Supreme Court on April 2, 2025."Based on our interpretation of the statutory definition of 'fetal heartbeat,' we hold the 2023 Act bans abortion—unless an exception applies—when electrical impulses are first detectable as a 'sound' with diagnostic medical technology such as a transvaginal ultrasound device and the medical professional observes those electrical impulses as a 'steady and repetitive rhythmic contraction of the fetal heart' during any stage of the heart's development 'within the gestational sac,'" the ruling reads. This means that abortion will remain illegal in South Carolina after six weeks, with some exceptions for rape and incest through 12 weeks, as well as when the life or physical health of the mother is at risk. Six other states restrict abortion between 6 and 12 weeks of pregnancy, according to data from the Guttmacher Institute. Those states still allow some exceptions after the ban kicks in. Meanwhile, abortion remains illegal in most cases in 12 states, which offer varying exceptions. What People Are Saying South Carolina Governor Henry McMaster, a Republican, wrote in a statement: "Time and time again, we have defended the right to life in South Carolina, and time and time again, we have prevailed. Today's ruling is another clear and decisive victory that will ensure the lives of countless unborn children remain protected and that South Carolina continues to lead the charge in defending the sanctity of life." Paige Johnson, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood South Atlantic, wrote in a statement: "Justice did not prevail today, and the people of South Carolina are paying the price. People have been forced to carry pregnancies against their will, suffered life-threatening infections, and died as a direct result of this abortion ban. The cruel politics of South Carolina lawmakers are harming families and destroying a health care system as more and more providers flee the state. But we will never back down, and neither should you. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic will continue to do everything in our power to ensure patients receive the care they need and fight for their ability to control their own bodies, lives, and futures." What Happens Next Abortion rights remain a key legislative issue for many states. In Texas, lawmakers are considering a bill that would crack down on abortion pills, reported The Texas Tribune. In Louisiana, Attorney General Liz Murrill, a Republican, is investigating a New York doctor accused of sending abortion pills into the state.
Yahoo
14-05-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
SC Supreme Court ruling keeps abortion ban at 6 weeks
From left to right, Taylor Shelton, the plaintiff in the case; Vicki Ringer, spokeswoman for Planned Parenthood South Atlantic; and Catherine Humphreville, attorney for Planned Parenthood, stand outside the Supreme Court building on Wednesday, Feb. 12, 2025. (Skylar Laird/SC Daily Gazette) COLUMBIA — A state Supreme Court ruling Wednesday maintains a six-week abortion ban in South Carolina. Issuing their third ruling on abortion since 2022, justices unanimously decided state law's definition of 'fetal heartbeat' — the sound of which makes an abortion illegal — applies to when an ultrasound first detects cardiac activity. Attorneys for Planned Parenthood argued the ban that took effect in August 2023 should apply at nine weeks rather than six, since the heart doesn't actually form until roughly the ninth week of pregnancy. Justices disagreed, noting repeatedly that the debate in the Statehouse and prior arguments before the justices themselves referred to the law 'consistently and exclusively' as a six-week ban. 'The answer to the question is clear: the General Assembly was referring to the occurrence of electrical impulses that mark the early onset of 'cardiac activity' as we interpret 'fetal heartbeat,'' Justice John Few wrote in the opinion signed by three justices. Justice Gary Hill agreed with the majority but wrote his own opinion. Like in the law itself, which doesn't specify a number of weeks when abortion becomes illegal, justices' ruling does not set a timeline. But 'the biologically identifiable moment in time we hold is the 'fetal heartbeat' under the 2023 Act occurs in most instances at approximately six weeks of pregnancy,' Few wrote. Legislators clearly intended the ban to take effect at about six weeks in a pregnancy, justices wrote. If that were not what legislators believed the law to be, 'it is inconceivable that no member of the House or Senate made any effort to point out that the members of this Court misunderstood the General Assembly's intent,' Few wrote. Even legislators opposed to the law indicated they believed it started at six weeks through amendments they proposed. For instance, three amendments introduced in the House during the debate would have held a father responsible for child support starting at six weeks of pregnancy, the point at which legislators believed the ban began. 'While none of these Amendments passed, they each clearly indicate the members proposing them — again, opponents of the Act — considered the 2023 Act to be effective upon events occurring at approximately six weeks of pregnancy,' Few wrote. Much of Planned Parenthood's argument centered around the exact wording of how the law defined a 'fetal heartbeat.' A fetal heartbeat, under the 2023 law, is 'the steady and repetitive rhythmic contraction of the fetal heart.' Those electrical impulses are not 'steady' or 'rhythmic,' as the law requires, attorneys for Planned Parenthood argued. At that point, the pregnancy is still considered an embryo, not a fetus. And no heart forms until several weeks later in the pregnancy, meaning there is no 'fetal heartbeat,' attorneys argued. But the words 'steady' and 'rhythmic' have no medical definition, Few wrote. Legislators have previously used the words 'embryo' and 'fetus' interchangeably, and attorneys for Planned Parenthood didn't give an exact moment when the pregnancy changes from one to another. And it's unclear exactly when a heart is considered 'formed,' Few wrote. One word did have a clear meaning, justices decided. Under the law, most abortions are no longer legal after 'the unborn child's fetal heartbeat has been detected.' That suggests 'an actual, observable event,' Few wrote. 'The only point in the progression of a pregnancy when cardiac activity goes from 'cannot be detected' to 'detected'' is the moment a doctor can hear the electrical impulses that occur around six weeks, Few wrote. Gov. Henry McMaster praised the state high court's latest decision as again upholding the law, as justices did in 2023. 'Time and time again, we have defended the right to life in South Carolina, and time and time again, we have prevailed,' McMaster said in a statement. 'Today's ruling is another clear and decisive victory that will ensure the lives of countless unborn children remain protected and that South Carolina continues to lead the charge in defending the sanctity of life.' Taylor Shelton, the plaintiff in Planned Parenthood's case, quickly learned she was pregnant but couldn't get an appointment for an abortion before the six-week cutoff, attorneys have said in court filings. Attorneys argued that Shelton, who traveled to North Carolina to receive an abortion, should have been eligible for one in her home state. Many people don't yet know they're pregnant by six weeks in a pregnancy, said Jace Woodrum, executive director of the state American Civil Liberties Union. Some doctors are reluctant to provide lifesaving care to pregnant women out of fear that they'll be prosecuted under the law, he said. Under the law, doctors who violate the ban face the possibility they'll lose their license, spend up to two years in prison and/or have to pay a $10,000 fine. 'The extreme ban on most abortions is endangering the lives of pregnant South Carolinians and driving medical care providers away from our state,' Woodrum said in a statement.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
08-05-2025
- Politics
- First Post
Bangladesh: Access to internet to be a civil right for the first time
Earlier this week, the interim government held a meeting where the council of advisers approved the drafting of the new ordinance titled 'Cyber Surokkha Adhyadesh-2025'. This development is in line with the Yunus government's promise to repeal the Cyber Security Act of 2023 read more Bangladesh's interim government is working on an ordinance that will make access to the internet a civil right first time in the history of the country. The Muhammad Yunus-led government is set to finalise a law that will abolish nine controversial provisions of the Cyber Security Act of 2023. One of the provisions removed during the drafting of the new ordinance was the punishment for conducting any 'hateful, misleading, or defamatory propaganda' against the liberation war, its spirit, Mujibur Rahman, the national anthem, or the national flag. Law adviser Asif Nazrul noted that this provision had frequently been misused in the past to 'harass' individuals. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Earlier this week, the interim government held a meeting where the council of advisers approved the drafting of the new ordinance titled 'Cyber Surokkha Adhyadesh-2025'. This development is in line with the Yunus government's promise to repeal the Cyber Security Act of 2023. Nazrul stated that the nine provisions that were abolished had been responsible for 95 per cent of all cases previously filed under the 2023 Act. 'When we first took office, we pledged to repeal the previous cybersecurity act and replace it with amodern law,' he said. Once the new ordinance comes into effect, all the previous cases registered under the previous act will stand cancelled. For the first time, Bangladesh will formally recognise internet access as a civil right. The new ordinance also establishes clear definitions and criminal penalties for online sexual harassment and the exploitation of women and children. While it continues to address targeted abuse and hate speech, it eliminates provisions that previously punished the expression of general opinions or speech.
