Senate bill targets sending abortion medication to WV, where the procedure is illegal
The Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday, March 27, 2025, advanced a bill meant to target out of state providers or entities who send medications meant to cause abortion to West Virginia. (Will Price | West Virginia Legislative Photography)
A bill advancing in the Senate would make it a felony to prescribe or distribute medications used for abortion to people in West Virginia except for the narrow circumstances when the procedure is legal in the state.
The Senate Judiciary Committee referred Senate Bill 85 to the full Senate on Thursday. Senators are expected to vote on the bill next week.
With few exceptions, abortion has been illegal in West Virginia since 2022. Abortion by telehealth is also illegal in the state.
Sen. Patricia Rucker, R-Jefferson, one of the bill's sponsors, said the intent of Senate Bill 85 is to stop the flow of abortifacients into the state for the purpose of illegal abortions. The bill attempts to enforce the state's abortion ban on out-of-state entities or physicians who would send the medication to West Virginia residents.
The penalty for violating the law would be three to 10 years in prison for a person who is not a licensed medical professional. Licensed medical professionals would face the revocation of their license, according to the bill.
While the legislation is an attempt to stop out-of-state providers from breaking West Virginia law, federal courts are likely to decide the issue of enforcement, an attorney for the judiciary committee said.
Louisiana last month charged a New York doctor with a felony for allegedly sending abortion pills to a pregnant minor in the state, according to reporting by the Associated Press. New York Gov. Kathy Hochul refused to extradite the doctor to face the charges. New York has a shield law to protect abortion providers who prescribe the medication to patients in states where abortion is outlawed.
Kelly Lemon, a nurse midwife, testified that some medications labeled as abortifacients have a lot of other uses in health care. Lemon said the state's existing abortion laws have already led to some of her patients not being able to get misoprostol for managing a hemorrhage and delays in care for treating a miscarriage.
'My biggest concern with this bill is that it's going to further create barriers to how we can get these medications to people when they need it,' she said. The bill, should it become law, would cause delays in care and drive health providers out of the state, she said.
Rucker responded that the bill indicates that pharmacists filling a valid prescription issued by a licensed medical professional or a physician performing a procedure for a legitimate reason are not breaking the law.
Kristin Hawkins, president of Students for Life Action, testified that the bill would close a lot of loopholes for charging physicians and entities that send abortion medication to states where the procedure is not legal. Hawkins said there are websites where people can get abortion pills sent to them, seemingly without a doctor's review.
Emily Womeldorff, director of policy and campaigns for Planned Parenthood South Atlantic, said the bill is part of an ongoing effort to create fear and stigma around reproductive health care.
'This bill is a gross overreach of state authority,' Womeldorff said. 'It's threatening enforcement against health care providers that are located outside of the borders of West Virginia, and our government does not have jurisdiction over health care providers that provide care outside of our state borders.
Sen. Joey Garcia, D-Marion, was the only lawmaker to speak against the bill, calling it bad policy that would harm a woman's ability to get medical care.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
4 hours ago
- The Hill
Louisiana hospitals press Johnson over megabill Medicaid cut proposals
As the 'big, beautiful bill' teeters towards passage in the Senate, every major health system in Louisiana sent a letter Saturday to the state's entire congressional delegation, including Speaker Mike Johnson (R), warning that planned cuts to Medicaid would be 'historic in their devastation.' The letter said that the Senate's version of the bill would cut more than $4 billion in Medicaid funding, with a loss of more than 16,000 jobs. Even the House's version of cuts, the letter stated, would be a more palatable solution. However, the 'economic consequences pale in comparison to the harm that will be caused to residents across the state, regardless of insurance status, who will no longer be able to get the care that they need,' the letter reads. 'Steep cuts will force consolidation of services, staffing reductions and closures, reducing healthcare access to everyone in our communities. Our rural communities will especially feel the impact as many of these hospitals are already in difficult financial situations and are likely to experience a significant reduction of services.' The letter was also sent to Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.), who expressed concerns about the cuts to Medicaid in the Senate version of the bill Thursday and said that the House version would be preferable. However, Cassidy has not since spoken out against the bill, a vote for which kicked off in the Senate Saturday night.
13 hours ago
France to ban smoking in parks, beaches, and near schools
PARIS -- France has struggled to kick its smoking habit. A new public health decree published Saturday aims to change that. In the coming days, smoking will be banned in all French parks and sports venues, at beaches and bus stops, in a perimeter around all schools, and anywhere children could gather in public. In a country where smoking has for generations been glamorized in cinema and intertwined with the national image, government crackdowns on tobacco use have met resistance. 'In France, we still have this mindset of saying, 'this is a law that restricts freedom,''' Philippe Bergerot, president of the French League Against Cancer, told the Associated Press. The ban aims ''to promote what we call denormalization. In people's minds, smoking is normal,'' he said. ''We aren't banning smoking; we are banning smoking in certain places where it could potentially affect people's health and ... young people.'' It's been illegal to smoke in restaurants, bars and public buildings since a series of bans in 2007 and 2008. Ever-higher taxes mean a pack now costs upwards of 12 euros ($14). Yet more than 30% of French adults still smoke cigarettes, most of them daily, one of the higher rates in Europe and globally. The Health Ministry is particularly concerned that tobacco remains popular among young people, citing public health statistics showing that 15% of 17-year-olds smoke. Black market cigarette trading is common. More than 200 people in France die each day of tobacco-related illness, Health Minister Catherine Vautrin said in a statement Saturday. That adds up to some 75,000 deaths per year. In a Paris park as the ban loomed, views were mixed. Parisian Natacha Uzan welcomed the end of smoking in restaurants. But she said: ''Now outside, in parks, I find it becoming a bit repressive.' The broader ban is a ''good thing'' for Anabelle Cermell, mother of a 3-month-old boy. ''I tell myself, oh, it's really not ideal for him, but there's not much I can do about it, or I would have to ... not take the bus, not go to parks.' The government said last month that the new ban would take effect July 1. The official decree introducing the ban was published Saturday, and a health minister's statement said that a government order specifying the perimeters set by the ban would be published in the coming days. Electronic cigarettes are exempt from the new ban. Other European countries have gone farther. Britain and Sweden have tightened smoking regulations in public spaces. Spain is extending its smoking ban to café and restaurant terraces, which are exempt from France's new ban.
Yahoo
16 hours ago
- Yahoo
California will see 'devastating' healthcare cuts under GOP bill, Newsom says
As many as 3.4 million Californians could lose their state Medi-Cal health insurance under the budget bill making its way through the U.S. Senate, Gov. Gavin Newsom said Friday. Newsom said the proposed cuts to healthcare in the "one big, beautiful bill," a cornerstone of President Trump's second-term agenda, could force the closure of struggling rural hospitals, reduce government food assistance for those in need and drive up premiums for people who rely on Covered California, the state's Affordable Care Act health insurance marketplace. "This is devastating," Newsom said. "I know that word is often overused in this line of work, but this is, in many ways, an understatement of how reckless and cruel and damaging this is." Medicaid provides health insurance for about 1 in 5 Americans and generally uses income, rather than employment, as a condition for enrollment. Roughly 15 million Californians, more than a third of the state, are on Medi-Cal, the state's version of Medicaid, with some of the highest percentages in rural counties that supported Trump in the November election. More than half of California children receive healthcare coverage through Medi-Cal. The Senate is still debating its version of the bill. But the current version would require many Medicaid recipients to prove every six months that they work, volunteer or attend school at least 80 hours per month. States would be required to set up their work eligibility verification systems by the end of 2026, just after the midterm elections. States that do not set up those systems could lose federal Medicaid funding. Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson told reporters last month that the aim of the policy was to encourage poor Americans to contribute and "return the dignity of work to young men who need to be out working instead of playing video games all day." The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimated this month that the requirements would cut about $344 billion in Medicaid spending over a decade and leave 4.8 million more people uninsured. Health policy experts warn that work requirements can lead to people who are eligible, but can't prove it, losing their benefits. Newsom said 5.1 million people in California would need to go through the work verification progress and about one-third would "likely" meet the requirements. The other two-thirds would "go through the labyrinth of manual verification," Newsom said. He said 3 million people in California could lose coverage through the new Medicaid work requirements, and 400,000 more could lose their insurance if they were required to re-verify their eligibility every six months. Newsom said that the state's estimate was based on the number of people who dropped off Medicaid in New Hampshire and Arkansas after those states briefly implemented their own work requirements. Last year, California became the first state in the nation to offer healthcare to low-income undocumented immigrants. The expansion, approved by Newsom and the Democratic-led Legislature, has cost the state billions and drawn sharp criticism from Republicans. Assembly Minority Leader James Gallagher (R-Yuba City), who has previously called on Newsom to walk back that coverage, said on social media Friday that Newsom and Democratic legislative leaders had "obliterated" the healthcare system. Newsom's budget proposal in May proposed substantial cuts to the healthcare program for undocumented immigrants, including freezing new enrollment in 2026, requiring adults to pay $100 monthly premiums and cutting full dental coverage. Lawmakers ultimately agreed to require undocumented immigrant adults ages 19 to 59 to pay $30 monthly premiums beginning July 2027. Their plan adopts Newsom's enrollment cap but gives people three months to reapply if their coverage lapses instead of immediately cutting off their eligibility. Democrats agreed to cut full dental coverage for adult immigrants who are undocumented, but delayed the change until July 1, 2026. In Congress, the GOP bill could also pose a serious threat to 16 struggling hospitals in 14 rural counties, which received a $300-million lifeline in interest-free loans in 2023, Newsom said. He said the Republican members of Congress in California who supported the bill and represent rural parts of California, including Central Valley Rep. David Valadao (R-Hanford) and Rep. Kevin Kiley (R-Rocklin), are "gutting an already vulnerable system." Some senators are pushing to change a requirement that would require states to freeze and cut by half the tax they impose on Medicaid providers, slashing a key source of funding for rural hospitals. Michelle Baass, the director of the California Department of Health Care Services, said that change could be "fatal for the many rural and critical-access hospitals that are already financially strained." Newsom said in aggregate, the cuts could threaten California's progress in reducing the share of residents without health insurance, which stands at about 6.4%. Get the L.A. Times Politics newsletter. Deeply reported insights into legislation, politics and policy from Sacramento, Washington and beyond, in your inbox twice per week. This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
