COLOMBIA – Less than a week after it passed the South Carolina Senate, a bill to ban most abortions in the state began its legislative journey through the House on February 3 with a subcommittee hearing that lasted nearly four hours. of exciting testimonials from both supporters and opponents of the measure.
The so-called “fetal heartbeat” bill, which prohibits abortion after about 6 to 8 weeks of pregnancy, appears to be heading towards likely approval in the Republican-dominated legislature, as even leading Democratic critics acknowledge that they already have more than enough votes by the majority.
But that did not discourage dozens of Southern Carolinians from appearing in person or virtually to testify in three-minute spurts about the bill, including several who said they had testified many times before in previous years, in what is likely to be their last chance to do so. it before addressing probable legal challenges.
The subcommittee ended up voting 3 to 2 along the party lines to advance the project. A full committee hearing is expected next week before moving on to the House floor for a plenary vote soon after.
Republican governor lieutenant Pamela Evette testified that, in supporting the project, she hoped the state “would end up on the right side of history”. Governor Henry McMaster has repeatedly promised to sign the bill if it comes to your table.
“If we are using the heartbeat as a scientific test for when our life ends, I think it only makes sense to use it to determine when our life begins,” said Evette, who also testified before a Senate panel on the bill.
Susan Dunn, the longtime legal director for the South Carolina chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, noted that several states that have passed similar bills have seen courts quickly find them unconstitutional.
“Everything in the world that you would be doing for the citizens of South Carolina is buying a lawsuit,” said Dunn.
Most advocates of the bill recognize that it will initially be overturned by the lower courts, but say they hope that these cases will lead the United States Supreme Court to reconsider its historic decision Roe v. 1973 Wade, who determined that women have a constitutional right to access abortion.
Hayden Tomlin, an Irishman who said he moved to South Carolina about three years ago, warned that his country’s experience shows the complications that banning abortion can cause. Ireland banned abortion until 2019, but Tomlin said it only forced many women to travel to other jurisdictions, such as England, to obtain them.
“The painful and lonely journey of these women to a foreign land to have a traumatic procedure done in secret,” said Tomlin, “is really a shame and a curse on my country’s history.”
Holly Gatling, executive director of anti-abortion SC Citizens for Life, encouraged lawmakers to pass the bill the same way it passed the Senate, without changing it in any way.
This would speed up the process, as it would avoid the need for Chamber and Senate negotiators to meet and reconcile their differences. On a policy level, it would also mean that the bill would continue to include exceptions for cases of rape or incest, which some Republicans are opposed to.
One of the most controversial provisions added in the Senate would require doctors to provide the local sheriff with the name and contact information of women who had an abortion due to rape or incest.
Charleston County Sheriff Kristin Graziano, the state’s only sheriff, condemned the proposal, warning that it would “victimize the victim again”. Republican supporters have said they hope it will help the state fight violent crimes.
Follow Jamie Lovegrove on Twitter @jslovegrove.