Montana Senate gives initial OK to bills changing access to abortion

Republicans backed proposals that would restrict access to abortions or put in place additional processes a woman must go through before receiving an abortion. Democrats opposed the measures on an initial vote.

Similar attempts have been met with a veto pen in past sessions by Democratic governors, but Montana for the first time in 16 years has a Republican in that office.

During his State of the State address in January, Republican Gov. Greg Gianforte said he supported two bills, including House Bill 136 that would ban abortions after 20 weeks gestational age and HB 167 that would put to voters the so-called "Montana Born-Alive Infant Protection Act."

In support of House Bill 136, Sen. Greg Hertz, R-Polson, said the state should involve itself in when women can access abortions.

"Our rights and the freedom to live should include the unborn child," Hertz said. " ... We must value our most vulnerable and we must value life."

Speaking against the bill, Sen. Janet Ellis, D-Helena, shared the story of her niece's pregnancy. At 18 weeks gestational age the niece learned the pregnancy would not be viable because of anencephaly, a condition when the brain and skull do not develop.

"Legislators should not be interfering with such a challenging and heartbreaking decision," Ellis said. "This decision needs to be made by individuals involved and their health care provider. Period."

The third bill would require notification of the opportunity to have an ultrasound (HB 140) and the final (HB 171) would require a woman to have what's called "informed consent" that includes warnings of death and other dangers at least 24 hours before a medical, or drug-induced, abortion.

In opposition to the bills, several Democrats noted the state's new political landscape for abortion legislation and said the proposals would face legal challenges.

"I know you all waited 16 years for these bills to get to the courts," said Sen. Ellie Boldman, D-Missoula.

On Wednesday, Sen. David Howard, R-Park City, advocated for his Senate Bill 315, the Born-Alive Infant Protection Act, in a Senate committee. Howard's bill is similar to the "born-alive" referendum but would not put the question to voters and instead become effective upon passage by the Legislature and being signed by the governor.

The bill would need to clear the Senate by Wednesday's transmittal deadline to advance.

Gianforte's policy director spoke in support of Howard's bill Wednesday. Howard said Thursday he was aiming to amend his bill to include a provision that if it passes, the referendum bill would be struck.

Montana first saw a "born-alive" bill in 2019 after the concept came into the spotlight over failed legislation in Virginia that year that would have removed barriers to third trimester abortions when a patient's life or health is at risk.

At the time, that state's governor said third-trimester abortions are "done in cases where there may be severe deformities. There may be a fetus that's nonviable. So in this particular example, if a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen. The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that's what the mother and the family desired. And then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother."

The anti-abortion movement seized on that message as part of a broader opposition to abortion rights and several "born-alive" bills have been introduced around the country since.

Democrats and others opposed to the bills have pointed out there are already protections in state and federal law for infants.

House Bill 167 was amended in the Senate, and will head back to the House for representatives to concur the amendments. HB 136, 171 and 140 have not been amended and will be on their way to the governor upon final approval by the Senate.

— Reporter Seaborn Larson contributed to this story.