A Wisconsin state Senate committee on Friday approved legislation that would bring a Texas-style ban on most abortions after about six weeks of pregnancy to Wisconsin.
The bill, which is being spearheaded by Sen. Julian Bradley, R-Franklin, and Rep. Donna Rozar, R-Marshfield, was approved 3-2 along party lines by the Senate Committee on Government Operations, Legal Review and Consumer Protection. It will now head to the Senate floor for consideration by the full chamber.
The legislation would prohibit “any person from performing, inducing, or attempting to perform or induce an abortion on a woman if a fetal heartbeat is detected except when a medical emergency exists,” according to an analysis from the nonpartisan Legislative Reference Bureau.
“Under the bill, a ‘medical emergency’ means a condition that so complicates the medical condition of a pregnant woman as to necessitate immediate medical intervention to avert her death or for which a delay will create serious risk of substantial and irreversible physical impairment of one or more of the woman's major bodily functions,” according to the LRB.
Circulation of the bill was first reported by the Cap Times last month.
The bill does not contain an exemption for pregnancies that result from rape or incest.
The bill would also allow individuals to sue health care providers that perform, or attempt to perform, an abortion for “no less than $10,000” per procedure.
The proposal from Bradley and Rozar is similar to legislation enacted in Texas last year that implemented some of the tightest restrictions on abortion access in the country.
“We're doing everything we can to protect the beating hearts of the unborn in Wisconsin with this vital bill,” Bradley said in a Friday statement. “Once a baby's heart starts beating, an abortionist definitely shouldn't be allowed to stop it. Because of a similar law in Texas, more than 10,000 lives have been saved. We must start that good work here in Wisconsin as soon as possible.”
Bradley, via a spokesperson, last month did not answer a question about why exceptions for pregnancies that result from rape or incest were not included in the bill.
The Wisconsin bill, like the Texas law, would bar abortions once embryo cardiac activity can be detected. That typically occurs around the sixth week of pregnancy — a point at which many people do not know they are pregnant.
It would also deputize private citizens to sue health care providers who perform or attempt to perform an abortion for financial “damages.” The person suing does not need to be related to the pregnant person having the abortion. A lawsuit can be brought by “any other person,” according to the bill’s text.
Similar to the Texas law, it would prevent government officials acting in their official capacity from enforcing the ban, creating a novel legal obstacle to challenging the legality of the bill in court. Such a legal challenge would only occur if the bill became law — which is unlikely, given that Democratic Gov. Tony Evers has vowed to veto additional restrictions to accessing abortion in Wisconsin.
“I will sign a heartbeat bill,” GOP gubernatorial hopeful former Lt. Gov. Rebecca Kleefisch said in September. “I have a long history of being pro-life and I will fight for every human being with a heartbeat.”
A spokesperson for Nicholson said he would sign the proposed "heartbeat" bill into law.
"As governor, Kevin would sign legislation that prevents abortion and protects innocent life," Nicholson's spokesperson told the Cap Times in an email.
Wisconsin has had a ban on all abortions — except when an abortion is deemed medically necessary to save the mother's life — since 1849. However, that law has been unenforceable since 1973 under the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Roe v. Wade.
Under Wisconsin's currently unenforceable ban, any person who “intentionally destroys the life of an unborn child” is guilty of a class H felony, punishable by up to six years in prison, a fine of up to $10,000, or both. Law enforcement officials — county district attorneys — would decide whether or not cases should be pursued against health care providers if Roe v. Wade was overturned under Wisconsin’s current law.
Under the proposed bill, private citizens would be responsible for enforcement — not state officials.
