The House passed two bills on Friday meant to protect abortion access in the wake of the Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade, including by ensuring people are able to travel across state lines to access care. But both bills are almost certainly doomed in the Senate, thanks to filibuster rules and Republican opposition.
The House passed the Women’s Health Protection Act, legislation that aims to codify the Roe decision’s protections, in a 219 to 210 vote. It also passed the Ensuring Access to Abortion Act, a bill that seeks to protect people who are forced to travel out of state to receive abortion care, in a 223 to 205 vote.
As Republicans at the state-level act quickly to ban and severely restrict abortion, activists have urged federal lawmakers to take steps to protect access. And although the bills are likely doomed to die by filibuster in the Senate, the House passage lays the groundwork for future steps ― and sets the stage for more intense pressure on Democratic senators and the Biden administration to do something.
Pelosi, along with many of her Democratic colleagues, wore green to show their support for abortion rights. The symbolic use of the color originated in the reproductive rights movement that took place in Argentina nearly two decades ago.
“This bill respects our right to make our own decisions about our bodies,” Rep. Judy Chu (D-Calif.), the sponsor of the Women’s Health Protection Act, said on the House floor. “It’s time to put control of our bodies back in our hands. Now is the time to pass The Women’s Health Protection Act.”
The Ensuring Women’s Right to Reproductive Freedom Act, introduced by Rep. Lizzie Fletcher (D-Texas), would protect people traveling across state lines for reproductive health services including abortion. It would also allow lawsuits against people who restricted or impeded the ability to travel across state lines for obtaining an abortion in a state where it’s legal.
“No state has banned interstate travel for adult women seeking to obtain an abortion. This seems to be just trying to inflame, to raise what-ifs,” Lankford, who supports a nationwide abortion ban, said on the Senate floor.
“As I see it, some of the other abortion-related legal questions raised by today’s decision are not especially difficult as a constitutional matter,” he wrote. “For example, may a state bar a resident of that state from traveling to another state to obtain an abortion? In my view, the answer is no, based on the constitutional right to interstate travel.”
“It’s unconscionable, but frankly not surprising, that anti-abortion rights lawmakers continue to defy their constituents’ will and oppose legislation that would help safeguard their access to essential health care,” McGill Johnson continued. “Each person ― not politicians ― should have the power to decide if and when to start or expand their family. The members of Congress who voted against these bills are standing on the wrong side of the American people and history. This November, voters will remember.”
This content was originally published here.
