Wyoming has signed the nation’s first explicit ban on abortion pills since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade last summer. Governor Mark Gordon, a Republican, signed the bill into law on Friday night, while allowing a separate measure restricting abortion to become law without his signature. While the pill is already banned in 13 states with blanket bans on all forms of abortion and 15 states with limited access to abortion pills, until now no state had explicitly passed a law prohibiting them. Medication abortions have become the most preferred method for ending pregnancy in the US, with the most common form of abortion being a two-pill combination of mifepristone and another drug. The ban on abortion pills in Wyoming will take effect in July, with the implementation date of the sweeping legislation banning all abortions not specified in the bill.
Important Details about Wyoming governor signs measure prohibiting abortion pills –
– Wyoming Governor Mark Gordon has signed into law the nation’s first explicit ban on abortion pills since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade last summer.
– 13 states already have blanket bans on all forms of abortion.
– 15 states already have limited access to abortion pills.
– No state had passed a law specifically prohibiting such pills until now.
– A group seeking to open an abortion and women’s health clinic in Casper is evaluating legal options.
– The governor has allowed a separate measure restricting abortion to become law without his signature.
– Medication abortions became the preferred method for ending pregnancy in the U.S. even before the Supreme Court decision.
– The law prohibiting abortion pills would take effect in July, pending any legal action.
– Abortion currently remains legal in the state up to viability.
– The implementation date of the sweeping legislation banning all abortions is not specified in the bill.
– Women have already been traveling across state lines to places where abortion pill access is easier.
– Courts have put on hold enforcement of abortion bans or deep restrictions in Arizona, Indiana, Montana, Ohio, South Carolina, Utah, and Wyoming.
– Idaho courts have permitted abortions during medical emergencies.
Wyoming Gov. Mark Gordon has signed into law the nation’s first explicit ban on abortion pills since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade last summer. The bill was signed on Friday night, while Gordon allowed separate legislation restricting abortion to become law without his signature.
Abortion pills are already banned in 13 states that have blanket bans on all forms of abortion, and 15 states already have limited access to abortion pills. However, until now, no state had passed a law specifically prohibiting such pills, according to the Guttmacher Institute. The ban on abortion pills is set to take effect from July, unless any legal action is taken that could potentially delay it.
A group seeking to open an abortion and women’s health clinic in Casper said it was evaluating legal options. The clinic is one of two nonprofits suing to block an earlier Wyoming abortion ban. No arrests have been made, and organizers say the clinic may tentatively open in April, depending on abortion’s legal status in Wyoming then.
The Republican governor’s decision on the two measures comes after the issue of access to abortion pills took center stage this week in a Texas court. A federal judge there raised questions about a Christian group’s effort to overturn the decades-old U.S. approval of a leading abortion drug, mifepristone.
Medication abortions became the preferred method for ending pregnancy in the U.S. even before the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, the ruling that protected the right to abortion for nearly five decades. A two-pill combination of mifepristone and another drug is the most common form of abortion in the U.S.
Wyoming’s ban on abortion pills raises concerns about women’s access to basic health care, including safe, effective medication abortion. Wellspring Health Access President Julie Burkhart expressed outrage at the move.
In a statement, Gordon expressed concern that the Life is a Human Right Act may result in a lawsuit that will delay any resolution to the constitutionality of the abortion ban in Wyoming. He noted that earlier in the day, plaintiffs in an ongoing lawsuit filed a challenge to the new law in the event he did not issue a veto.
“I believe this question needs to be decided as soon as possible so that the issue of abortion in Wyoming can be finally resolved, and that is best done with a vote of the people,” Gordon said in a statement.
Wyoming ACLU advocacy director Antonio Serrano criticized Gordon’s decision to sign the ban on abortion pills, stressing that a person’s health, not politics, should guide important medical decisions — including the decision to have an abortion.
Of the 15 states that have limited access to the pills, six require an in-person physician visit. Those laws may withstand court challenges, as states have long had authority over how physicians, pharmacists, and other healthcare providers practice medicine. States also set the rules for telemedicine consultations used to prescribe medications. However, generally, that means health providers in states with restrictions on abortion pills could face penalties, such as fines or license suspension, for trying to send pills through the mail.
Women have already been traveling across state lines to places where abortion pill access is easier. That trend is expected to increase.
Since the reversal of Roe in June, abortion restrictions have been up to states, and the landscape has shifted quickly. Thirteen states now enforce bans on abortion at any point in pregnancy, and another, Georgia, bans it once cardiac activity can be detected, or at about six weeks’ gestation.
Courts have put on hold enforcement of abortion bans or deep restrictions in Arizona, Indiana, Montana, Ohio, South Carolina, Utah, and Wyoming. Idaho courts have forced the state to allow abortions during medical emergencies.
The new law in Wyoming explicitly banning abortion pills will provoke debate on the constitutional right to choose until the country’s divided Supreme Court resolves the issue fully. Meanwhile, women’s access to basic health care remains on the line.