Last week, federal judges blocked two Kentucky pro-life bills: one banning abortion based on sex, race, or a disability diagnosis (otherwise known as eugenics) and the other a heartbeat law. Also last week, a federal judge blocked an Ohio law banning dilation and evacuation (D&E) abortion procedures. Indiana’s eugenics abortion ban was blocked by a federal judge and is still waiting to hear back from the Supreme Court.
Meanwhile, other states are passing and considering new pro-life legislation at an impressive pace. Mississippi recently enacted a heartbeat law, banning most abortions after the fetal heartbeat can be detected, at about six weeks of pregnancy. Iowa put one in place last May. One is working its way through the Georgia legislature, along with others in Tennessee and Missouri. Utah’s governor recently signed a bill banning abortion based on a Down syndrome diagnosis, while a similar Arkansas measure is working its way up in Little Rock. A dilation and evacuation ban bill is being deliberated in North Dakota.
And, naturally, whenever a new pro-life bill becomes law, the abortion industry mounts a new legal offensive. When you’ve got multiple legal challenges in different circuits, you increase the chance that there’s going to be disagreement among the courts and therefore increase the likelihood that the issue will be taken up by the Supreme Court.
Between the number of heartbeat laws, anti-eugenics abortion bills, and D&E bans, the real question is which issue will get the chance to chip away at Roe v. Wade first.