Unlike other “heartbeat” bills, Idaho’s legislation will not go into effect until similar legislation in another state has been cleared by a federal court. Presently, all attempts at passing “heartbeat” abortion bans have been blocked by federal courts.
Two bills are currently sitting on the desk of Oklahoma Gov. Ken Stitt (R). One bans abortion after the detection of a fetal heartbeat; the other would suspend a doctor’s license for a maximum of one year if they perform an abortion.
If the bills are not signed by the end of the week, they will go into effect in November.
In Tennessee, lawmakers passed a bill requiring women to bury or cremate fetal remains after a surgical abortion at an abortion clinic. The bill is now on the governor’s desk, awaiting his signature.
Abortion clinics would be required to pay for the cost of burying or cremating the remains of the infant, unless a woman chooses to dispose of the remains at a different location. In that case, the woman who procured the abortion would have to pay for the burial or cremation.
Typically, fetal remains after abortions are treated as medical waste and disposed.
The bills’ sponsor, Rep. Tim Rudd (R-Murfreesboro), said that “charities (are) out there that are set up to help with the burial expenses” of an aborted child.
Additionally, under the bill, a woman who undergoes an abortion would have to fill out a form for the Tennessee Department of Health describing how and where the fetal remains will be disposed.
In Arkansas, Gov. Asa Hutchinson (R) signed a bill April 21 requiring women who were sexually assaulted and seeking an abortion after the 20th week of a pregnancy to report their assault to the authorities.
In Arkansas, abortion is available until the 20th week of a pregnancy, with limited exceptions. Last month, Hutchinson signed a bill that effectively banned abortion altogether in the state; however, it has not gone into effect.
When Hutchinson signed the bill, SB6, he noted that it is contrary to established precedent set by the Supreme Court, but that he hopes the bill will be used to overturn these precedents.
“SB6 is in contradiction of binding precedents of the U.S. Supreme Court, but it is the intent of the legislation to set the stage for the Supreme Court overturning current case law,” Hutchinson said at the time.
(Story continues below)
Subscribe to our daily newsletter
At Catholic News Agency, our team is committed to reporting the truth with courage, integrity, and fidelity to our faith. We provide news about the Church and the world, as seen through the teachings of the Catholic Church. When you subscribe to the CNA UPDATE, we'll send you a daily email with links to the news you need and, occasionally, breaking news.
As part of this free service you may receive occasional offers from us at EWTN News and EWTN. We won't rent or sell your information, and you can unsubscribe at any time.
In Ohio, lawmakers are once again considering a version of the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act, which requires that doctors provide lifesaving care to infants who are born alive after an attempted abortion.
Under Senate Bill 157, a doctor who is found in violation of the law will be charged with “abortion manslaughter,” a felony.
“The heart of the Born-Alive Infant Protection Act is quite simple: no helpless newborn child should be left alone to die,” Mike Gonidakis, president of Ohio Right to Life, said in a published statement.
“It is our sincere hope that shared human decency will compel legislators at the Ohio Statehouse to come together to protect innocent, born babies desperate for a chance to live.”
A similar bill was previously considered in 2019. While that bill passed the Ohio Senate, it was not voted on in the Ohio House of Representatives.