fbpx
Connect with us

Louisiana Illuminator

Pregnant workers have new protections. Here’s what to expect from your boss.

Published

on

lailluminator.com – Casey Quinlan – 2023-08-24 05:00:11

Pregnant workers have new protections. Here's what to expect from your boss.

by Casey Quinlan, Louisiana Illuminator
August 24, 2023

Almost two months after workplace accommodations for pregnant workers became law, the rules surrounding what employers can and cannot do have yet to be finalized — but that doesn't mean the protections are not in place.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's proposed regulations are expected to offer more clarity once finalized, but workers can still access their rights under the new Pregnant Workers Fairness Act and employers are still required to understand the law and follow it.

Here's what you need to know about why workers say the law was needed, what workers' rights are under the law and employers' obligations to employees.

Why the law was needed

Other federal laws cover the rights of pregnant workers but advocates have long argued that many of them are too narrow to address the situations pregnant workers face when they seek accommodations. The Americans with Disabilities Act, for instance, does not consider pregnancy to be a disability but pregnancy-related complications, such as preeclampsia, do qualify. Under the ADA, a pregnant worker can't seek out an accommodation in the hope of preventing dangerous pregnancy-related complications.

The Pregnancy Discrimination Act, passed in 1978, prohibits discrimination against pregnant employees but it's difficult in practice for workers to receive accommodations under the law, because it requires finding another worker who received accommodations like the ones they're seeking. This can be a challenging and time-consuming process because workers may not be aware of what kinds of accommodations their coworkers are seeking or may not have access to this information in the way their employer does.

Despite those laws, 23% of mothers said in a survey last year that they had weighed whether or not to leave their job because their workplace lacked reasonable accommodations or they were worried about pregnancy discrimination.

The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, which passed in December, has been in the works for a decade. In the intervening years, states began taking their own action. As of April, 30 states — including Alaska, Colorado, Minnesota, and Tennessee — as well as the District of Columbia, and four localities, had similar laws to the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, some of which may offer stronger protections in certain situations than the PWFA, according to A Better Balance, a worker advocacy nonprofit. Twenty states did not have state protections like these at the time of its state analysis, including Alabama, Missouri, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan. The nonprofit has a comprehensive list of state policies on pregnant workers' rights.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX

SUBSCRIBE

What are your employee rights 

Congress and federal agencies, employment agencies, labor organizations, private employers with 15 or more workers, and state and local governments with 15 or more workers are subject to the law, according to the EEOC.

While the rules haven't been finalized, if you think your rights have been violated, you can already take action. On June 27, the EEOC began allowing workers to file charges under the law for violations that occurred on that day or later. Workers need to take this step before they can file a lawsuit against their employer. The law protects employees and job applicants who need accommodations because of pregnancy, childbirth, or conditions related to pregnancy and childbirth. Under the PWFA, pregnant workers should be able to make requests for reasonable accommodations, such as closer parking, uniforms in their size, and additional rest time.

The PWFA is similar in many ways to the Americans with Disabilities Act. It does not require an employer to provide an accommodation if doing so would bring it “undue hardship,” or in other words, it would come at great difficulty or expense to the employer.

But the law is also a bit different than the ADA. Unlike the ADA, where the employee has to be able to do the essential functions of their job or they no longer qualify for accommodations, the PWFA says that workers do not always have to be able to perform an essential function temporarily because of their pregnancy. It is expected that they will be able to resume those duties in the near future.

The EEOC'a proposed rules define the “near future,” or when workers will be able to perform essential functions of their job after being temporarily unable to do so, as generally going up to 40 weeks. This does not mean workers will always have 40 weeks but that needing 40 weeks doesn't disqualify an employee for the accommodations. The regulations also say that if there are multiple options for effective accommodations, the employer should favor the worker's preferred accommodation.

Liz Morris, deputy director for the Center for WorkLife Law, said applicants and new employees who want to work remotely because of their pregnancy will also be covered in the PWFA. Applicants can request accommodations during the hiring process itself, such as making modifications to a physical test. If a pregnant applicant anticipates that they will need adjustments from an employer because of their pregnancy, the applicant can agree to a general policy without accommodations and then request them once they are employed.

The EEOC regulations also get into detail about pregnancy-related medical conditions that apply to workers under the PWFA, A Better Balance Vice President Elizabeth Gedmark said.

“…The proposed rule discusses pregnancy-related issues ranging from preterm labor to anxiety and depression while also making clear that limitations can also be ‘modest, minor, and/or episodic,'” she told States Newsroom over email.

Lactation, potential pregnancy, miscarriage, infertility and fertility treatments, and having an abortion are also listed in the regulation. An employee who needs to take leave because of a limitation due to a condition related to pregnancy and childbirth should qualify for that leave under the PWFA, according to the proposed rules. The EEOC gives miscarriage and childbirth as examples of reasons for workers to take different forms of leave. The same definition of “near future” also applies. I

A Better Balance provides sample letters for employees to use when requesting work accommodations related to pregnancy.

Getty Images

What employers need to know

The rules are going through a public comment period through Oct. 10, and Victor Chen, director of communications at the EEOC, told States Newsroom that employers are not required to follow the proposed rules just yet. But he added that the PWFA itself provides direction for employers. He suggested employers read the EEOC's list of commonly asked questions and listen to its webinar. He said the EEOC “will move as quickly as possible to finalize the regulation” after the comment period closes.

Morris said that although the regulations aren't set in stone, “If I were an employer, I would certainly follow them for now, as they are an excellent indication of how the law will ultimately be interpreted.”

The rules specify that employers can't deny work to an applicant or employee because of their need for an accommodation, make a decision for a pregnant worker without any discussion on which accommodation they will receive or force them to go on leave if there is an accommodation they could take to continue working. They also can't retaliate against workers for advocating for themselves under the law and reporting discrimination nor can they try to stop workers from enjoying their legal protections.

Michael Fallings, the managing partner of Tully Rinckey PLLC's Austin office, who specializes in federal employment law, said he thinks it will be useful for employers to have more information on how to fairly treat pregnant workers seeking reasonable accommodations.

“I think it could be helpful for employers because I think some employers are in fear of litigation at times and now that you have a law in place that says what you can or cannot do, it provides some basis for the employers,” he said.

Morris said that employers should keep in mind that they need to swiftly provide accommodations and if they can't, they should think about interim accommodations. The proposed EEOC regulations explain that an “unnecessary delay” could result in a violation of the law.

The future of the law and its regulations

The law's regulations may be tweaked during the rulemaking process and could be eventually challenged in the courts. The Alliance Defending Freedom, which has been involved in numerous lawsuits challenging abortion rights,  called the proposed regulations “federal overreach.” The ADF, a legal advocacy group, has argued that the administration doesn't have the legal authority to include abortion in its implementation. Morris said that accommodations related to abortion are reasonable to include because the EEOC has always defined pregnancy, childbirth and related medical conditions in the courts as including abortion.

Organizations that supported or opposed the law will also have the opportunity to suggest changes to the regulations. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce advocated for the passage of the law and will provide a public comment on parts of the rule that could be changed, the group told States Newsroom, but declined to elaborate on what should be revised.

Morris said her organization also plans to submit a public comment on the proposed EEOC regulations. She wants to see some revisions on the issue of medical certification to make it even easier for employees to receive accommodations.

“A shocking number of people don't receive prenatal care because they don't have access to it either because of financial barriers or because they live in a remote area where it's difficult to travel to, to receive prenatal care,” she said.

SUPPORT NEWS YOU TRUST.

DONATE

Louisiana Illuminator is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Greg LaRose for questions: info@lailluminator.com. Follow Louisiana Illuminator on Facebook and Twitter.

Read More

The post Pregnant workers have new protections. Here's what to expect from your boss. appeared first on lailluminator.com

Please follow and like us:
Pin Share

Louisiana Illuminator

Lawmakers across the U.S. seek to curb utility spending on politics, ads and more extras • Louisiana Illuminator

Published

on

lailluminator.com – Robert Zullo – 2024-03-03 15:00:47

Lawmakers across the U.S. seek to curb utility spending on politics, ads and more extras

by Robert Zullo, Louisiana Illuminator
March 3, 2024

After a string of scandals and amid rising bills, lawmakers in statehouses across the country have been pushing legislation to curb utilities spending ratepayer money on lobbying, expert testimony in rate cases, goodwill advertising, charitable giving, trade association membership and other costs.

At least a dozen states have considered bills to limit how gas, water and electric utilities can spend customers' money, according to a tracker maintained by the Energy and Policy Institute, a watchdog group funded by environmental and climate-focused foundations that concentrates on utilities and fossil fuel interests.

Another, Louisiana, has opened a proceeding at its public service commission to investigate use of ratepayer cash on trade association dues, “activities meant to influence the outcome of any local, state, or federal legislation,” advertising expenses and other costs.

Michigan joined the party last week with the introduction of legislation to ban utility political spending. In states like Illinois, the push has been joined by groups like the AARP and the Citizens Utility Board, a state watchdog group, which said the legislation would “stop electric, gas and water utilities from charging us for a long list of expenses they rack up trying to raise our rates and further increase their political power.”

Three states  – Maine, Colorado and Connecticut – have already signed similar bills into law. The legislation comes as natural gas bills have fallen but average residential electric prices in the U.S. climbed from 13.66 cents per kilowatt hour in 2021 to 15.93 cents per kilowatt hour in 2023, per the U.S. Energy Information Administration. That would mean a monthly bill going from $136.60 in 2021 to $159.30 in 2023 for a house that uses 1,000 kilowatt hours per month.

“It absolutely is a growing trend,” said Matt Kasper, the Energy and Policy Institute's deputy director. “There's a lot of eyes on the industry, how it's operating.”

The institute published a report last year that scrutinized how electric and gas utilities use ratepayer money to “fund political machines that push legislation, curry favor with regulators and alter the outcomes of elections, sometimes even breaking laws in the process.”

Some of the lowlights include:

A massive bribery scandal in Ohio involving FirstEnergy, a utility holding company that  paid nearly $61 million in bribes to the Ohio house speaker's political organization in exchange for a nuclear plant bailout worth $1 billion to the company. A U.S. attorney called it “one of the largest public corruption conspiracies in Ohio history.”In Illinois, the state's largest electric utility, Commonwealth Edison, or ComEd, showered the state House speaker's allies with jobs, contracts and payments to grease the wheels for the company's legislation. Three ex-lobbyists and a former CEO of the company were convicted by a federal jury last year for their roles in the scheme. The speaker's trial is scheduled facing calls for a federal investigation over accusations of using political consultants to back “ghost candidates” in legislative races to draw votes away from candidates it opposed. It also took over a news website as “part of an elaborate, off-the-books political strategy to advocate for rate hikes, agitate for legislative favors, slam political opponents and eliminate anything  … (that) might undermine its near monopoly on selling power in the Sunshine State,” the Miami Herald reported. That's not to mention accusations of hiring private investigators to follow a newspaper columnist who was critical of the company.

Other examples of questionable spending abound. In 2018, South Carolina lawmakers were flooded with bogus emails encouraging them to support Virginia utility giant Dominion Energy's takeover of SCANA Corp., a company struggling under the weight of a failed nuclear project. Dominion denied having anything to do with the fake emails, which were sent by the Consumer Energy Alliance, a group that was then supported by Dominion. (The company is no longer listed as a CEA member).

Consumer Energy Alliance was also involved in a 2016 campaign to support a natural gas pipeline running through Ohio that involved sending 347 letters to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission using the names of locals — more than a dozen of whom signed affidavits denying they signed the letters —  including “an Ohio man who has been dead since 1998,” The Plain Dealer reported.

In Louisiana, Entergy was fined $5 million by the New Orleans City Council after actors hired by a public relations firm working for the utility showed up at public hearings to support a proposed power plant.

Arizona Public Service, which has 1.4 million electric customers in the state, spent $10 million in 2014 that was funneled to dark money groups to help elect its preferred members of the State Corporation Commission, which regulates utilities. That spending wasn't revealed until 2019, when the company complied with a subpoena to release documents.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX

SUBSCRIBE

‘The appetite is there'

However, bills to curb utility influence spending can face an uphill fight, demonstrating the stronghold that the companies can have on state governments.

In Virginia, for example, another round of legislative attempts to prevent candidates from accepting donations from public service companies like Dominion Energy, the state's largest electric utility and long the biggest corporate donor in Virginia politics, died in House and Senate committees. Both houses are controlled by Democrats.

“Time will tell what will happen,” Del. Josh Cole, a Democrat who was carrying the House version of the legislation,told the Virginia Mercury.  “The appetite is definitely there for it.”

A separate proceeding at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has been looking into the “rate recovery, reporting and accounting treatment of industry association dues and certain civic, political and related expenses.”

The Edison Electric Institute, which represents investor-owned electric utilities and is one of the trade groups affected by some of the state-level legislation, said electric customers benefit when its member companies “have a seat at the table,” adding that they are among the most regulated businesses in the nation.

“We engage on their behalf through lobbying, advocacy and regulatory proceedings as part of our work to ensure that electricity customers have the affordable, reliable and resilient clean energy they want and need. Engaging in discussions with policymakers and regulators is essential to achieving these outcomes,” EEI spokeswoman Sarah Durdaller said in a statement. “We bring unique expertise and insights on how policy proposals will affect business operations, the cost for capital, and, ultimately, our customers. … There are strict laws in place already to ensure that lobbying activities are always funded by shareholders not customers.”

The American Gas Association, which represents natural gas utilities, did not respond to a request for comment.

On Monday, across the street from the Washington, D.C., hotel where the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners was holding its winter policy meeting, a group of climate justice organizations held a rally to call attention to energy company influence, taking aim at corporate sponsorship of the event and a lack of progress on renewable power.

“When we see events like this where utility execs fund gatherings and hobnob with regulators …  we need to speak out,” said Sukrit Mishra, D.C. program director at Solar United Neighbors, a nonprofit that helps communities form solar co-ops. He voiced support for state legislative efforts as well as federal legislation introduced by U.S. Rep. Kathy Castor, a Florida Democrat, to prevent utility companies from using ratepayer dollars to fund political activities.

“The public is ready to hold utilities accountable. We need regulators to do the same.”

SUPPORT NEWS YOU TRUST.

DONATE

Louisiana Illuminator is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Greg LaRose for questions: info@lailluminator.com. Follow Louisiana Illuminator on Facebook and Twitter.

Read More

The post Lawmakers across the U.S. seek to curb utility spending on politics, ads and more extras • Louisiana Illuminator appeared first on lailluminator.com

Please follow and like us:
Pin Share
Continue Reading

Louisiana Illuminator

Telehealth abortions on the rise since Dobbs, new report shows • Louisiana Illuminator

Published

on

lailluminator.com – Sofia Resnick – 2024-03-03 10:00:24

Telehealth abortions on the rise since Dobbs, new report shows

by Sofia Resnick, Louisiana Illuminator
March 3, 2024

Researchers studying national abortion trends found that in the 15 months since Roe v. Wade fell, abortion rates remained elevated despite more limited access throughout the U.S., according to the Society of Family Planning's latest #WeCount report published Wednesday.

Partially explaining this is a rise in people having abortions via telemedicine, Ushma Upadhyay, co-chair of #WeCount, told States Newsroom. Before the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, about 4% of total recorded abortions were via Telehealth abortion; that rose to 16%, as of September 2023.

“Telehealth abortion has really had a huge impact,” said Upadhyay, a professor at the University of California, San Francisco's Advancing New Standards in Reproductive Health. “We're addressing unmet need that existed in those states, even before Dobbs. I think that a lot of the unmet need in the blue states is being met, as well as people traveling from states with abortion bans.”

In the nation overall between July and September 2023, there were between 81,000 and 89,000 abortions monthly, numbers that are slightly smaller than in the previous report covering April through June 2023, but higher than in the months leading up to the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision.

“Some of the volume may also be due to reductions of barriers to abortion care, including increased financial support for low-income abortion seekers, reduced burden of cost and travel by use of telehealth, and improved access via care navigation from practical support groups and public health departments,” the report reads.

However, researchers estimate that in the 14 states with total abortion bans, there were approximately 120,000 fewer abortions compared to before Dobbs.

“People in states with abortion bans or severe restrictions were forced to delay their abortions, to travel to another state, to obtain care from a provider in a shield law state, to self-manage their

abortions, or to continue a pregnancy they did not want,” the report reads.

Upadhyay said the recent small increases over the months does not compensate for the declines in banned states.

“Whenever we publish these numbers, we have to publish whatever we find,” she said. “But it is one of our worries that people will think, ‘Oh, there's no longer a problem.' We know that there are thousands of people living in states with abortion bans that continue to not be able to access abortion.”

States with the largest declines in 15 months were Texas (46,200), Georgia (24,640), Tennessee (17,545), Louisiana (11,465), and Alabama (9,525). Researchers saw the largest surges in Illinois (28,665), Florida (15,155), and California (12,515). Numbers in Wisconsin have fluctuated dramatically with its fluctuating abortion legality. Before Dobbs the state saw approximately 600 abortions per month, which dropped to fewer than 10 per month after Dobbs. Researchers recorded 50 abortions in Wisconsin in September 2023, shortly after providers resumed providing abortions following a court decision.

Though the majority were in-clinic abortions, Upadhyay believes the rate of telehealth abortions is likely to rise. There were a reported 14,110 telehealth abortions in July 2023, 14,060 in August, and 13,770 in September, according to the report, which includes in this tally abortions via telehealth provided by brick-and-mortar clinics and virtual-only providers, including those operating in the five states (Colorado, Massachusetts, New York, Vermont, and Washington) that in 2023 started providing abortion care under shield laws to patients from states with abortion restrictions.

The #WeCount team plans to finish collecting state-by-state data as part of this project through December 2024. Among the data's limitations, it doesn't not include self-managed abortions.

Louisiana Illuminator is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Greg LaRose for questions: info@lailluminator.com. Follow Louisiana Illuminator on Facebook and Twitter.

Read More

The post Telehealth abortions on the rise since Dobbs, new report shows • Louisiana Illuminator appeared first on lailluminator.com

Please follow and like us:
Pin Share
Continue Reading

Louisiana Illuminator

Alabama passes IVF protections while red states still push ‘personhood’ abortion laws • Louisiana Illuminator

Published

on

lailluminator.com – Sofia Resnick – 2024-03-03 05:00:57

Alabama passes IVF protections while red states still push ‘personhood' abortion laws

by Sofia Resnick, Louisiana Illuminator
March 3, 2024

All but six state legislatures are now in session, and abortion-related bills continue to be introduced, especially in states where the procedure is already banned.

It can be hard to monitor them all, so States Newsroom's Reproductive Rights Today team will track certain bills that could become law in their respective states in a biweekly legislative roundup.

Depending on the partisan makeup of a state's legislature and other state government officials, some bills have a higher chance of passing and becoming law than others.

Alabama

Following an explosive Alabama Supreme Court ruling that frozen embryos count as children under state law, which shut down in vitro fertilization programs in Alabama, the state legislature on Thursday passed Republican-sponsored bills to protect IVF.

House Bill 237: Alabama Reflector reported the measure would protect IVF providers

Alabama state Rep. Terri Collins, R-Decatur, sponsored a bill to allow in vitro fertilization processes to proceed in Alabama after a Feb. 16 state Supreme Court decision shut down most IVF programs in the state. The bill passed the state House and Senate Feb. 29. (Brian Lyman/Alabama Reflector)

from criminal or civil action “except for an act or omission that is both intentional and not arising from or related to IVF services.” The bill sponsors in both chambers called the measure, which will automatically repeal next year, a temporary fix aimed at reopening IVF programs.

State Democrats have criticized the bill for not addressing the state Supreme Court's findings about when life begins. The controversial ruling that a frozen embryo is an unborn child was based in part on a 2018 “Sanctity of Life” constitutional amendment. “If in fact, we have a constitutional amendment that requires us to adopt public policy that these embryos have a right to life, can we pass a law that authorizes life to be taken in fertility clinics?” said Rep. Chris England, D-Tuscaloosa.

Status: Passed Feb. 29 in the House 94-6 and in the Senate (SB 159) 34-0.Sponsor: Republican Rep. Terri Collins, Decatur

Alaska

Despite the political fallout in Alabama, states continue to introduce proposals to give “personhood” rights to embryos. Abortions are currently protected under Alaska's constitution, but a proposed bill could change that by defining a fetus as a person in the criminal code.

House Bill 107: Alaska Beacon reported the bill would establish the definition of “life” and “person” in criminal law. The proposal has received pushback in the wake of the controversial Alabama IVF ruling. John Skidmore, the deputy attorney general for the criminal division of the Department of Law, said that if passed, it would allow the state to file criminal charges for abortion, though courts would likely rule that unconstitutional.

Status: Introduced in 2023 and heard in the House Judiciary Committee.Sponsor: Republican Rep. Kevin McCabe, Big Lake

Florida

As Florida's legislative session comes to an end for the year (last day of the session is March 8), Republicans postponed a bill that would have let people file wrongful death lawsuits for embryos and fetuses.

Senate Bill 476: Florida Phoenix reported the bill's sponsor said the measure needs more work but would not have applied to IVF. As written it would permit lawsuits to recover damages for the wrongful death suit of unborn children at any stage of development.

Status: Temporarily postponed.Sponsor: Republican Sen. Erin Grall, Vero Beach

Iowa

Abortion is currently legal in Iowa after a court last year blocked a six-week abortion ban. The Iowa House just passed a controversial bill that Democrats warn could result in pushing anti-abortion views and potential misinformation in public schools.

House File 2617: Iowa Capital Dispatch reported the bill would require instructors of human growth and development and health classes to show seventh through 12th grade students ultrasounds and animations that demonstrate the processes of fertilization and fetal development. As an example of acceptable material, the bill cites the “Meet Baby Olivia” produced by the longtime anti-abortion activist group Live Action, best known for trying to entrap Planned Parenthood into criminal activity with undercover . A version of this legislation has been enacted in North Dakota and introduced in Kentucky, Missouri, and West Virginia.

Status: Passed 59-35 this week, going to the Senate for consideration (formerly numbered HF 2031).Sponsor: Republican Rep. Luana Stoltenberg, Davenport

Kansas

Abortion is currently legal in Kansas through 22 weeks' gestation. Two new bills would add abortion-related restrictions, one that would make abortion coercion a felony and one that would require ultrasounds before abortions.

House Bill 2813: Kansas Reflector reported this bill would make it a felony to try to convince someone to get an abortion using coercion or threats.

Status: Referred to House Committee on Federal and State Affairs.Sponsor: Republican Rep. Rebecca Schmoe, Ottawa

House Bill 2814: Kansas Reflector reported this bill would create the Kansas Ultrasound Act, requiring an obstetric ultrasound to be performed before an abortion. The proposal would allow “a woman to avert her eyes from such images.”

Status: Referred to Committee on Federal and State AffairsSponsor: Republican Leah Howell, Derby, on behalf  of anti-abortion groups Kansans for Life and Kansas Family Voice

Kentucky

Republicans continue trying to apply “personhood” to fetuses and embryos. The next foray in Kentucky, where abortion is banned, is child support. “The support obligation begins as soon as that life begins,” said the bill's sponsor.

Senate Bill 110: Kentucky Lantern reported the proposal would allow Kentuckians to collect child support for fetuses, if an order is in place within a year of the child's birth. But the bill's sponsor says that county attorneys cannot use federal resources to enforce this law, and that he would support a new state appropriation to help fund the enforcement. The bill also has support from Democrats, some of whom want it categorized as maternity care support instead of child support. “I worry about this being a stepping stone to things like in-utero visitation and … the downstream consequences that could arise,” said Sen. Cassie Chambers Armstrong, D-Louisville.

Status: Passed unanimously by Senate committee Feb. 27.Sponsor: Republican Sen. Whitney Westerfield, Fruit Hill

House Bill 711: Kentucky Lantern reported this bill would expand state abortion exceptions to pregnancies caused by rape and incest, but no later than six weeks after the first day of the woman's last menstrual period. The proposal would leave it to the physician to determine if rape or incest had occurred. The bill would also clarify abortion exceptions for fatal fetal anomalies, ectopic pregnancies and miscarriages.

Status: Introduced Feb. 26.Sponsor: Republican Rep. Ken Fleming, Louisville

South Dakota

Abortion is currently illegal in South Dakota, but that could change with a potential ballot-question decision. In an attempt to thwart the measure, Republicans have advanced a bill that would allow people to remove their signatures from ballot-question petitions.

House Bill 1244: South Dakota Searchlight reports that an emergency clause in the legislation would make it effective immediately, ahead of this spring's deadline for petitions to place questions on the Nov. 5 general election ballot. Initiated measures and referendums need 17,508 signatures from registered voters to make the ballot; initiated constitutional amendments need 35,017. Rick Weiland of Dakotans for Health said the abortion-rights ballot petitions already have 50,000 signatures.

Status: Passed 59-9 Feb. 20; passed Senate State Affairs Committee Feb. 28.Sponsor: Republican Rep. Jon Hansen, Dell Rapids

Utah

Abortion is currently legal in Utah up to 18 weeks' gestation, awaiting a state Supreme Court decision on whether to uphold a trigger abortion ban. In an attempt to try to speed up the court's decision, Republican lawmakers, on the last day of the legislative session, passed a bill that would repeal last year's legislation that bans abortion clinics.

House Bill 560: Utah News Dispatch reported the bill would repeal portions of HB 467 that are already enjoined in court. Democrats have argued the bill disrupts the separation of powers by interfering in ongoing litigation.

Status: Passed House 59-10 on Feb. 21; passed Senate 24-0 on March 1.Sponsor: Republican House Majority Whip Karianne Lisonbee, Clearfield

West Virginia

Abortion is currently illegal in West Virginia. This week state senators voted to require high schoolers to watch a video created by the anti-abortion activist group Live Action.

Senate Bill 468: West Virginia Watch reported the bill would require eighth and 10th grade public school students to view a video called “Meet Baby Olivia,” which depicts insemination fetal development. Republican Sen. Tom Takubo, a doctor, voiced concerns about the measure during debate, saying there were “discrepancies in the video that are grossly inaccurate.”

Status: Passed the Senate 27-6 on Feb. 27; referred to House Health and Human Resources Committee.Sponsor: Republican Sen. Patricia Rucker, Jefferson

Wyoming

Abortion is currently legal in Wyoming, but Republican lawmakers are trying to increase regulations for clinics by requiring them to be licensed surgical centers and for their doctors to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital. In 2016 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a similar law in Texas was unconstitutional.

House Bill 148: WyoFile reported this bill was amended last week to require patients to undergo an ultrasound at least 48 hours before the abortion. Currently, having an ultrasound is optional.

Status: Passed the House 53-9 on Feb. 23 and the Senate 24-6 on March 1.Sponsor: Republican Rep. Chip Neiman, Hulett

U.S. Congress

Meanwhile, this week the U.S. Senate failed to pass a bill to protect IVF access nationwide.

S. 3612: States Newsroom reported the bill, introduced earlier this year, would bar limitations on “assisted reproductive technology services” that are “more burdensome than limitations or requirements imposed on medically comparable procedures, do not significantly advance reproductive health or the safety of such services and unduly restrict access to such services.” In the wake of the recent IVF situation in Alabama, the SenateDemocratic sponsor asked for unanimous consent in the Senate to avoid having to send the bill to the House. But Republican Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith of Mississippi blocked the bill.

Status: Introduced in January; failed unanimous consent request Feb. 28.Sponsor: Democratic U.S. Sen. Tammy Duckworth, Illinois

SUPPORT NEWS YOU TRUST.

DONATE

Louisiana Illuminator is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Greg LaRose for questions: info@lailluminator.com. Follow Louisiana Illuminator on Facebook and Twitter.

Read More

The post Alabama passes IVF protections while red states still push ‘personhood' abortion laws • Louisiana Illuminator appeared first on lailluminator.com

Please follow and like us:
Pin Share
Continue Reading

News from the South

Trending