Latest news with #CI-128
Yahoo
26-03-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Personhood bill set to pass House, though likely to fail to reach threshold to move to voters
The Montana State Capitol in Helena on Wednesday, April 26, 2023. (Photo by Mike Clark for the Daily Montanan) A bill seeking an amendment to the Montana Constitution to confer 'personhood' rights on embryos passed the House after a 57-43 vote on Tuesday. In support of House Bill 316, sponsor Rep. Lee Deming, R-Laurel, argued in committee that voters hadn't fully understood what they had done when they voted to add abortion as a constitutional right in CI-128 in the 2024 election. But the bill received significant opposition in both its committee hearing and on the floor Tuesday. Opponents said it would nix Montanan's right to an abortion, as well as access to in vitro fertilization, while Deming argued there was no greater violation of privacy and dignity than abortion. The right to privacy has been used in court cases protecting the right to an abortion. 'The human being in the womb possesses his or her own right of privacy, again, I can't think of a greater violation of privacy than abortion,' Deming said. 'The state has a vested interest in protecting the lives of the most vulnerable human beings. And the human being in the womb has a life interest equal to that of his or her mother.' During the floor discussion, Rep. Greg Overstreet, R-Stevensville, said the personhood issue was comparable to slavery. 'In pre-Civil War Southern states, African-Americans did not have the legal standing of personhood,' Overstreet said. 'Why is that? Because you can't buy and sell people if they have the legal status of personhood. Because it's so easy to deny people their basic rights if you say they're not people.' HB 316 offers no recourse for victims of rape or incest. It passed along party lines out of the House Judiciary Committee. The bill could even outlaw birth control, Rep. SJ Howell, D-Missoula, said on the floor. Howell mentioned other issues, specifically surrounding choices being made for someone who is pregnant. They said someone could push for specific healthcare a woman wouldn't want, or that as written, the legislation could be used to possibly prevent a mother from being able to move out of state. Abusers could potentially use the right of the embryo to dictate how someone lives their life, Howell added. 'I think one of the serious unintended consequences of an initiative like this is that it creates a legal pathway for more of that cohesive control,' Howell said. 'Control over a woman by someone who does not have her best interests at heart.' Proposed constitutional amendments need 100 out of the Legislature's 150 total members to pass. Given the House vote, 43 senators would have to vote for it — an unlikely occurrence given the partisan divisions of the issue and just 32 Republicans serving in the upper chamber.
Yahoo
28-02-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Montana House tables ‘abortion travel' bill that would have criminalized medical travel
Photo illustration by Getty Images. Just four months ago, Montanans overwhelmingly supported a state constitutional amendment that enshrined the right to an abortion in Montana's foundational document. Even though voters seemed to decisively settle the issue, that has not stopped some lawmakers from proposing more restrictions on the medical procedure. It did not stop the Montana House Judiciary Committee from overwhelmingly tabling a bill to prohibit some pregnant women from traveling for an abortion on Thursday, by a 16-to-4 margin, after emotional testimony on Tuesday and concerns ranging from domestic violence to criminalizing doctors and violating the federal Constitution's right to travel. House Bill 609 would have made it a criminal act a criminal act for Montanans to travel out of state for an abortion without a doctor's recommendation, if the fetus was 'viable.' Kerri Seekins-Crowe, R-Billings, who is sponsoring the measure tried to reassure fellow lawmakers that her bill was tailored narrowly so that it only would be applicable if the pregnancy was beyond 24 weeks, often considered the point of fetal viability, and only if a doctor didn't determine abortion was medically necessary. While supporters of the bill were pilloried for 'treating women as property,' Seekins-Crowe pushed back and said she will not make apologies for standing up for the unborn. 'There are some Montanans whose voices are not being heard and that's what I want you to hear,' Seekins-Crowe said. 'I want you to hear my passion for those Montanans who could have never chosen to vote for CI-128 (which codified abortion as a right in the state's constitution), or not vote. They will never drive, or play basketball. They will never see the marvelous Montana sunsets or sunrises. While I do respect women who have life-threatening conditions, that is truly not what this bill is about.' She gave her own example of a pregnancy she had where the child was not expected to survive. 'He is now a 32-year-old man and a father,' she said. 'Those are the ones I am standing up for and if I am called an extremist because I speak for those who don't have a voice, then I will accept that.' HB 609 would have made Montana an oddity: A place where abortion was protected by the state's Constitution, and yet state law would have among the strictest travel laws in the nation, where any person who traveled out of state for an abortion when the fetus is viable, open to possible criminal prosecution, as well as anyone who aids or helps them travel. Similar bills proposed in other states are often call 'abortion travel,' but supporters of Seekins-Crowe's proposal called it 'abortion tourism,' a term which others derided. Anyone who helped a pregnant woman travel for an abortion could have also be found guilty, and those guilty of violating HB 609 could have faced as long as 40 years in prison. 'Montana women and their unborn children deserve better than an abortion industry that prioritizes profit over protection, secrecy over safety and convenience over care,' Seekins-Crowe said at the beginning of her testimony. She said the measure was necessary because she feared for young women who would be taken out of state to have an abortion, without parental consent or support. 'Abortion may be legal, but that doesn't mean we allow an unchecked abortion industry to operate in the shadows,' she said. Only two proponents, including the Montana Family Foundation, spoke in favor of the bill. Medical providers and professionals pushed back on the measure, reporting that less than 1% of third-trimester abortions end in abortion, and the vast majority of those are because of medical conditions or problems that arise during the pregnancy. During an hour-long hearing in front of the Montana House Judiciary Tuesday, opponents of the measure told harrowing stories of wanted pregnancies gone wrong, medical complications, and fear of criminalization. Tearful testimony and intimate medical details were used as examples and pleas to lawmakers to stop HB 609. On Thursday, only four Republicans remained supporting the bill: Lee Deming of Laurel, Jedediah Hinkle of Belgrade, Caleb Hinkle of Belgrade, and chairwoman Amy Regier of Kalispell. Ann Angus of Bozeman told about a pregnancy in 2022 where the child she was carrying 'was not compatible' with life. Because she was 24 weeks along, she had to travel out-of-state to end the pregnancy that would have ended with death or possibly life-threatening complications. 'I wouldn't be a grieving mother, I'd be a felon,' she said. Matt Ferrell of Helena worried that the enforcement mechanism would encourage neighbors to spy on neighbors and report them to authorities, something he said was decidedly not in line with the character of the state. Hailey McKnight told the committee that she is at a high risk for miscarriage, and doesn't want to take the risk if HB 609 becomes law. 'If I sought medical care, I could come home as a felon,' she said. 'I would love to have kids in Montana, but I am so afraid to have kids in Montana.' Tess Fields of Blue Mountain Clinic, one of the providers in the state that provides abortion care described the proposal as 'dangerous, draconian and degrading.' She reminded the lawmakers that in 2021 when she testified that some states would continue to restrict access to birth control, ban travel and not make exceptions for cases of rape or incest that people laughed at her, only to watch many of those same things happen. 'How many women need to die,' she asked, challenging the lawmakers that if HB 619 passed, it will lead to the same types of court challenges which have been a part of Montana courts for years. 'We will see you in court,' she said. Jean Branscum, the Executive Director of the Montana Medical Association, which represents the state's healthcare providers, said that her organization is concerned because of the potential to criminalize doctors by simply giving advice. 'Doctors need to have open and transparent communication for all matters,' she said. She said that by recommending some patients leave the state for care, they could risk becoming 'traffickers.' 'I don't think this will help recruit or retain physicians in our state,' Branscum said. A similar concern was raised by the Montana Coalition Against Sexual and Domestic Violence. Beth Brenneman said that her organization, spread throughout the state, often is called upon to take victims of violence to the hospitals or for medical care. That could include victims who have been raped. She said that domestic violence is 2.5 times more likely when the woman is pregnant. 'We don't ask, but we don't know when some of our people if they're pregnant,' she said. 'We bring people to medical care when they need it most. We suspect you want us to continue to provide those services, so please don't make us felons.' Katherine Harmon, a nurse in Billings, had a daughter who was having complications with pregnancy, and lives in the state, but the nearby medical facilities are in North Dakota. She said healthcare providers there refused to deal with it because of the strict prohibitions on abortion. Harmon scheduled an appointment in Billings, and about a week later, her daughter started the journey to state's largest medical corridor in Billings, only to suffer complications and a miscarriage. 'In a rest stop, she bled and completed her miscarriage,' Harmon said. 'And all I felt was rage.' Sarah Kries received news that devastated her during her first pregnancy. Tests after the 20th week revealed a rare condition in which her child would be born, but not able to live, gasping for air until the infant died. 'I made the decision to have my child die with me, her mother rather than gasping for air,' Kries said. She and her husband traveled to Portland where the procedure could be completed, and she went through abortion-clinic protestors who taunted her. 'That was devastating and traumatizing but to be criminalized would have been unfathomable,' said the mother of two living daughters. Sophie Moon, a Mont-PIRG member who represents college-age students and lives in Missoula, brought up concerns about HB 609 criminalizing families. She told the committee that if a parent of a student who isn't from Montana comes to get them to take them home for medical care and an abortion, the parent could be considered trafficking the child under the law. 'It would directly negate parental rights,' she said. Lydia Trom, a mother of three adult children who lives in Bozeman said she was standing up for women and families. 'I value our reproductive rights and the attempt to label our citizens and women as criminals is not OK,' she said. She said that she was traveling out of state when she experienced a miscarriage. 'If this bill was legal at the time and I was further along, I would have been considered a felon,' she said. Dennis Webber of Missoula said that he had concerns about the bill violating the U.S. Constitution. 'The Dobbs decision made abortion a state's issue, but Montana stops at the state line. And Montana cannot stop another state from banning late-term abortions and Montana cannot stop a Montana resident from traveling, or using that state's law when they cross the border there,' he said. 'This takes an already painful choice and makes it more isolating, traumatic and cruel. If the goal is to reduce abortion, this isn't the answer. We need comprehensive sex ed., access to contraception, affordable healthcare and the support of survivors for abuse.'
Yahoo
11-02-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
‘Personhood' bill moves to Montana House Floor
Montana Rep. Lee Deming speaks to the House Judiciary Committee about a proposed amendment to the Montana Constitution which would define personhood from the moment of conception (Photo screeshot Montana Public Affairs Network). Just a little more than 90 days ago, Montana voters soundly approved a state constitutional amendment that enshrined the right to an abortion in state law. A bill championed by Montana House Rep. Lee Deming, R-Laurel, would essentially put the question again to voters in 2026, and many opponents told lawmakers they worried this new 'fetal personhood' bill would go further than any other legislation in the country — and nullify Constitutional Initiative 128. House Bill 316 would require two-thirds of the Legislature's support in order to place the question before Montana residents. The bill would ask Montanans if they support a 'personhood' amendment, which would confer rights to an embryo upon conception, essentially ruling out the use of in vitro fertilization or other methods without risking criminal penalties. Others who testified at the House Judiciary Committee's legislation last Wednesday also worried that the broad and vague language could wreak havoc because of unintended consequences, including end-of-life decisions, known as 'advance care directives.' In November 2024, Montana voters approved CI-128 by more than a 58% margin, which enshrines the constitutional right to an abortion and privacy in medical decisions. Abortion had been legal in Montana, supported by a 1999 Montana Supreme Court ruling that found that Montanans' right to an abortion is tied to the constitutional right to privacy in the Montana Constitution. However, CI-128 now guarantees the right to an abortion as a stand-alone right. HB 316 was approved in committee along party lines, 12-to-8, and now heads to the full Montana House floor. Deming acknowledged that Montanans recently approved CI-128, but likely didn't understand that it would protect late-term abortions, something that Montana medical providers said do not happen in the state, and rarely happen, overwhelmingly because of medical complications. He also told fellow lawmakers that if the thousands of abortions performed in the state had been illegal, maybe CI-128 wouldn't have passed. 'If an amendment can take rights away — and this is a hypothetical, so please bear with me — why not use a bullet to kill all those people 70 or older? After all, they're generally a drain on their families and society and some are inconvenient to have around. I see no material difference between that hypothetical and the thousands of abortions performed in Montana,' Deming said. Through the testimony, many lawmakers and residents testified that the legislation would also mean halting IVF. 'My heart breaks for those who cannot conceive naturally,' Deming said. 'If there was a way to accomplish it without killing so many human beings, but I don't have the solution.' Much of the testimony surround HB 316 fell along the debate lines of CI-128. 'Conception is not a theoretical or philosophical,' said Derek Oestreicher of the Montana Family Foundation. 'It's a scientifically verifiable event that begins at conception.' Dr. Annie Bukacek, a medical professional who also sits on the Montana Public Service Commission, spoke in favor of the bill, and said it was right to target IVF. 'IVF is where untold human lives are destroyed to bring about one life, with enormous cash profits for individual clinics,' she said. Resident Dick Pence testified that human species were the only animals who appear to do something other than protect their young. 'What other female animal on the plant wouldn't give their life to protect their young? This is not true for the women who claim it is their right to choose,' Pence said. 'The self-centeredness of those women.' Ann Angus of Bozeman testified that she is expecting a child in June, thanks to IVF, and asked lawmakers to stop HB 316. 'I've always wanted kids, and I am pregnant thanks to IVF,' she said. Residents also voiced concerns about some of the 'unintended consequences' of the bill, including patients who developed complications or started to miscarry — or the medical providers who would have to attend to them. Some worried that, like in states that had passed similar legislation, Montana would lose medical providers. A shortage of medical providers is a perennial problem in the rural state. Others worried that language in the bill that talked about 'any stage of life' or condition would place advance directives, often used by older patients, many with terminal conditions, at risk. HB 316 also offers no 'carve-outs' or protections in cases of rape or incest. 'It will drive healthcare providers out of state,' said Amber Nichols, who testified as a resident and scientist. 'It will disregard the majority of voters have time and time again supported access to abortion in our state. It will signal to daughters, nieces, sisters, friends and neighbors that healthcare decisions are not theirs alone.' Ella Smith, who spoke on behalf of Blue Mountain Clinic, one of the state's healthcare providers that has managed abortions, said that 'personhood' bills like Deming's are no longer theoretical about consequences for healthcare providers. 'Doctors are being criminalized by not providing care in life-threatening situations,' she said. She said that pregnancies can become emergencies quickly, but some providers have been unwilling to intervene until later, risking complications and even a death of a patient. 'We don't have to guess what happens when laws like this exist — the evidence is all around us,' Smith said. 'The sponsors of this legislation ignore the severe harm which they inflict. Women have died because they lived in a state with comparable laws to HB 316 exist.' Elizabeth Brenneman from the Coalition Against Domestic and Sexual Violence said she worried about pregnant women being criminalized under this law for using drugs or not seeking medical attention. Other opponents pointed out that a similar measure to get the initiative before voters has failed three times during the signature-gathering process, as well as seven times at the Legislature. Keegan Nashan of Livingston said she drove to places like Billings, Wibaux and even the Miles City Bucking Horse sale to gather signatures for CI-128. She said that while not all Montanans agreed with abortion, she kept on hearing the message over and over again. 'Ultimately, what is absolutely certain is that Montanans don't think it's any of the government's business,' she said. Robin Turner, the staff attorney at Legal Voice, said that beyond the challenges of abortion, IVF and healthcare access, she said the bill is problematic from a legal standpoint. 'It puts the pregnant person at odds with the fetus and diminishes the right of the pregnant person,' she said. She told committee members that it's unclear who gets to assert the rights of the fetus. Could an abusive spouse, grandparents, Child Protective Services or the police invoke the rights, she wondered. 'This would mean there's no end to what the state can or can't do,' Turner said. 'Women deserve the final say in what they can do with their bodies and medical care.' Martha Fuller, the president and CEO of Planned Parenthood of Montana, urged lawmakers to consider the fear such a law will create for pregnant women. She said women may delay seeking medical care, especially if they think they'll be blamed for problems or accused of 'self-managed abortions.' 'Anyone who has been pregnant knows there's a long, often conflicting list of things that you should or shouldn't do,' she said. Fuller said that meanwhile, providers may be reluctant to act, for fear of being criminalized for doing the wrong thing. 'Actions often need to be taken quickly so the chilling effect of people seeking care for pregnancies they wanted and intended to keep could keep them from addressing complications and could be chilling or dangerous,' Fuller said. While the topic of the bill was 'personhood' and centered on pregnant women and fetuses, it often veered into other weighty topics, from slavery to theology. Oestreicher said that before the Civil War, slaves were also not given personhood rights, and this bill would continue to guarantee that all people were afforded equal protection. Rep. SJ Howell, D-Missoula, asked questions of Deming, especially how could the rights of the mother and the rights of the child be separated. For example, Howell questioned if a woman incarcerated for theft could use pregnancy as a means to escape criminal punishment because the food or care in prison or jail was inadequate. 'I'm concerned about how we really address full personhood,' Howell said. 'How do we follow the law?' Deming replied that his interest was in protecting life from conception to natural death. 'It would be two people under the bill, they just occupy the same space,' Deming said. Rep. Ed Stafman, D-Bozeman, who is both a trained rabbi and attorney, wondered if HB 316 stepped on his religious rights, because of differences centering on when the soul enters the body. 'Why should we enshrine your religious beliefs and exclude mine?' Stafman asked Deming. 'I didn't mention religious rights,' Deming said. 'I'm making a legal argument. I didn't bring up religion. You were the one who brought that up.' 'Legally, then, when does the soul enter the body? Can you give me a legal argument?' he asked Deming. 'I think that's irrelevant. It doesn't matter when the soul enters the body. Of course it matters to you, and I as far as this goes. It's not in the bill. It wasn't brought up. It has nothing to do with this bill,' Deming replied. Stafman took a different line of questioning. 'Twenty percent of pregnancies end in miscarriage. And if you're saying that life begins at conception, and if 20% of them end in miscarriage, doesn't that make God a mass murderer?' Stafman asked. 'I have to say that I object to that question,' Deming said. 'And, no.'
