The Daily BS • Bo Snerdley Cuts Through It!
The Daily BS • Bo Snerdley Cuts Through It!

Get my Daily BS twice-a-day news stack directly to your email.


‘Barbaric’: Even Massachusetts Democrats revolt over new abortion up to birth law

by

 

BOSTON — When Democrats in Massachusetts start describing a Democratic abortion law as “extremist,” “dangerous” and “barbaric,” it might be worth paying attention.

Nine Massachusetts House Democrats broke ranks with their party to oppose a sweeping abortion measure that Democratic Gov. Maura Healey signed into law Monday. The legislation removes the state’s previous statutory framework limiting abortions after 24 weeks to specified circumstances and instead permits a physician to perform an abortion after 24 weeks when, in the doctor’s professional judgment, it is medically appropriate.

Healey and supporters say the change is designed for patients confronting complicated devastating medical circumstances late in pregnancy.

But some Democrats who voted against it say Massachusetts just erased a guardrail they believe should have remained.

State Rep. Jeffrey Turco didn’t bother tiptoeing around the subject. “This new law represents an extremist and dangerous position,” Turco told Fox News Digital. He argued that the legislation permits abortion “until the moment of birth” and complained that lawmakers pushed the measure through too quickly for adequate public scrutiny.

Then Turco delivered his verdict: “The new law is barbaric.” Not exactly the quote Democratic leadership was hoping to put on the brochure.

Turco wasn’t alone.

Democratic state Rep. Chris Markey told Fox News the legislation creates a “very slippery slope” and could place doctors in difficult ethical and legal situations. But Markey’s most politically significant point may have been this one: “You can still be pro-choice and see this law as going beyond the norms of acceptability.”

That’s the argument emerging from the Democratic dissenters.

They aren’t all demanding an abortion ban. They’re saying the law Massachusetts already had permitted abortion through 24 weeks and allowed later procedures under defined circumstances — so why eliminate that structure?

Before the change, Massachusetts permitted abortions at 24 weeks or later when necessary to preserve a patient’s life or physical or mental health, or when there was a lethal fetal anomaly or a grave fetal diagnosis indicating incompatibility with sustained life outside the uterus. The new law replaces those statutory criteria with the professional medical judgment of a physician.

Democratic Rep. Dennis Gallagher said he struggled with his vote but ultimately concluded that Massachusetts didn’t need to make this change. “At that point in a pregnancy, if the health of the mother is fine and the baby’s health is fine, I just think alternatives should be encouraged for that baby,” Gallagher told Fox News.

Gallagher still described abortion as a decision for a woman and her doctor. That’s precisely what makes this intraparty revolt noteworthy. These aren’t nine Republicans who wandered into the Democratic caucus room. They’re Democratic legislators saying their own party crossed a line.

Rep. Alan Silvia, another Democrat who opposed the measure, put his objection more starkly. “We go to extraordinary lengths as a society to protect vulnerable life, saving whales and saving strays,” Silvia said, “yet when it comes to an unborn child, that same sense of protection too often seems to disappear.”

Supporters describe the legislation very differently.

Healey’s office says the law is intended to prevent Massachusetts patients confronting serious pregnancy complications from being forced to leave the state for medically appropriate care. The administration argues that rigid statutory rules cannot anticipate every complex medical circumstance arising late in pregnancy.

Bill sponsor Rep. Lindsay Sabadosa made essentially that argument, saying patients should be able to rely on doctors rather than legal restrictions “that can fail to account for the complexity of individual medical circumstances.”

Massachusetts has increasingly positioned itself as an abortion-access destination since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade. State data reported by the Boston Globe earlier this year showed that abortions obtained by out-of-state residents had risen sharply, with 27,836 abortions involving non-Massachusetts residents in 2024 compared with 21,407 involving Massachusetts residents.

The state has also enacted extensive legal protections for providers serving patients from states with stricter abortion laws. So, this isn’t an isolated bill.

DBS WIRE SOURCES:

today’s hot news