WASHINGTON — Massachusetts Governor Maura Healey has signed H.5595, deceptively titled the “Prioritizing Patient Access to Care Act,” eliminating the state’s remaining statutory limits on abortions performed after 24 weeks of pregnancy.

Previously, Massachusetts law permitted abortions after 24 weeks only when necessary to preserve the life or physical or mental health of the mother, or in cases involving a lethal or severe fetal diagnosis. The new law replaces those statutory conditions with the “professional judgment” of the physician performing the abortion—effectively allowing abortion for any reason throughout pregnancy, including when both mother and unborn child are healthy.

The legislation also eliminates the requirement that abortions after 24 weeks be performed in a hospital, removing an important safeguard for women undergoing dangerous late-term procedures.

“Governor Healey and the Massachusetts Legislature have erased the final protections for unborn children who can feel pain and who could survive outside the womb,” said Carol Tobias, president of National Right to Life. “At the very stage when premature babies are receiving lifesaving care in neonatal intensive care units, Massachusetts will permit abortionists to end the lives of children of the same age—and even older. That is not compassion, and it is not health care.”

Supporters claim the law protects the doctor-patient relationship, but it places the decision entirely in the hands of the abortion provider while denying any legal protection to the unborn child.

“Legalizing elective abortion up to birth on healthy mothers and healthy, pain-capable unborn children is not about protecting the doctor-patient relationship,” said Myrna Maloney Flynn, president of Massachusetts Citizens for Life, National Right to Life’s state affiliate. “It is about abortionists normalizing the deaths of fully developed infants and pressuring vulnerable women to permit their unborn children to die in heinous acts of violence. These abortions represent among the most severe human rights abuses permitted in only a few places around the world, including China and North Korea.”

The Massachusetts House passed H.5595 on July 22 by a vote of 119–33. The Senate approved the measure on July 31 and sent it to Governor Healey.

“This law exposes the dishonesty behind the claim that no one supports abortion until birth,” Tobias continued. “When lawmakers remove every objective limitation and authorize an abortion provider to decide whether an abortion may be performed at any point in pregnancy, abortion until birth is precisely what the law allows.”

National Right to Life and Massachusetts Citizens for Life remain committed to protecting mothers and their unborn children from an abortion industry that profits when vulnerable women believe they have no better choice.

Founded in 1968, the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC), the federation of affiliates in each of the 50 states, is the nation’s oldest and largest grassroots pro-life organization. National Right to Life works through legislation and education to protect innocent human life from abortion, infanticide, assisted suicide, and euthanasia.

WASHINGTON — National Right to Life today welcomed a federal district court decision declaring unconstitutional, as applied to Oregon Right to Life, an Oregon law that would have required the organization to provide abortion coverage in its employee health insurance plan despite its deeply held religious objections to abortion.

“This decision is an important affirmation that the government cannot force pro-life organizations to choose between remaining faithful to their deeply held convictions and providing for their employees,” said Carol Tobias, president of National Right to Life. “This liberty is not reserved for organizations the government happens to favor. The First Amendment protects every American’s right to live and work according to sincerely held beliefs.”

“We congratulate Oregon Right to Life, James Bopp, Jr., and his legal team for their steadfast defense of these fundamental constitutional principles,” Tobias continued. “This ruling strengthens protections not only for Oregon Right to Life, but also for other faith-based and pro-life organizations that should never be compelled by the government to violate their conscience.”

The ruling follows litigation brought by Oregon Right to Life challenging Oregon’s abortion insurance mandate. The organization was represented by James Bopp, Jr., National Right to Life’s General Counsel and lead counsel in the case. The court concluded that Oregon’s law violated the First Amendment by favoring certain religious organizations over others through its system of exemptions, relying in part on the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision in Catholic Charities Bureau, Inc. v. Wisconsin Labor and Industry Review Commission.

The following statement was released by James Bopp, Jr., lead counsel for Oregon Right to Life:

_________________________________________________________

Federal Court Declares Oregon Law Requiring Employers to Provide Abortion Insurance Unconstitutional as Applied to Oregon Right to Life

On Wednesday, Oregon’s federal district court issued an order that declared unconstitutional an Oregon law that would have forced Oregon Right to Life (“ORTL”), a pro-life organization that objects to abortion on religious grounds, to pay for abortion coverage in its employee health insurance plans. This comes after a long-fought legal battle in which ORTL originally challenged the Oregon law (the “Abortion Mandate”) in September 2023.

ORTL argued that the Abortion Mandate violated core First Amendment principles of religious neutrality. While the Abortion Mandate purported to generally require employers in Oregon to provide such insurance coverage, it contained a slew of exemptions. Those exemptions included both some secular employers and some religious employers favored by the state. The district court agreed with ORTL that because Oregon thereby explicitly provided preferential treatment for certain religious organizations over others, it violated the First Amendment.

The court noted the striking similarity between ORTL’s challenge and a case recently decided by the Supreme Court, Catholic Charities Bureau, Inc. v. Wisconsin Labor and Industry Review Commission. In Catholic Charities, the Supreme Court analyzed a Wisconsin law containing an exemption that had the same effect as the “religious employer” exemption contained in the Abortion Mandate, granting an exception to religious entities favored by the state. In that case, the Supreme Court found that the Wisconsin law was subject to the most stringent form of judicial scrutiny due to its explicit differentiation between religions.

Oregon’s district court found that the same was true of the Abortion Mandate. In turn, because Oregon did not explain how the Abortion Mandate’s exemption could satisfy the requisite high level of judicial scrutiny, the court declared that it was unconstitutional as applied to ORTL.

The district court’s order makes clear that ORTL was entitled to judicial relief because of its particular characteristics—an entity with a religiously motivated purpose that is directly at odds with the Abortion Mandate. Accordingly, the order provides a basis for entities with similar characteristics to seek an exemption—and, if necessary, further judicial relief—from the Abortion Mandate.

James Bopp, Jr., of The Bopp Law Firm, PC, lead counsel for ORTL, stated, “The district court correctly recognized what the United States Supreme Court has said repeatedly: states may not favor certain religious practices over others. The United States Supreme Court in Catholic Charities made it clear that states may not play fast-and-loose with that rule and avoid its grasp by simply adopting an arcane or hyper-specific redefinition of what it means to be religious. The First Amendment means what it says, regardless of how state bureaucrats may attempt to change its meaning.”

Lois Anderson, ORTL’s Executive Director, said, “Oregon’s federal district court made the right decision. On its face, the attempt to force a pro-life organization to fund abortion is as ridiculous as it is unconstitutional. In his written opinion, Judge Kasubhai affirmed that our religious freedom to carry out our pro-life convictions is protected under the First Amendment. This decision is a huge win for our organization and for all our volunteers and supporters across the state. It also sets a powerful precedent for other pro-life people and organizations here in Oregon, helping them stand up for their rights to live out their pro-life beliefs without state interference.”

Read the court’s opinion here.

Founded in 1968, the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC), the federation of affiliates in each of the 50 states, is the nation’s oldest and largest grassroots pro-life organization. National Right to Life works through legislation and education to protect innocent human life from abortion, infanticide, assisted suicide, and euthanasia.

WASHINGTON — As the one-year prohibition on certain federal Medicaid payments to abortion providers expires on July 4, National Right to Life expressed deep concern that taxpayer dollars will once again be available to subsidize organizations whose business depends on abortion, including Planned Parenthood, the nation’s largest abortion provider.

“The resumption of taxpayer funding for the abortion industry is alarming,” said Carol Tobias, president of National Right to Life. “For decades, Americans have objected to being forced to subsidize organizations that profit from abortion. Taxpayer dollars should support health care providers that respect the lives of both mothers and their unborn children—not organizations whose business model depends upon ending innocent human lives.”

The temporary prohibition demonstrated that Congress has the authority to prevent taxpayer dollars from flowing to the abortion industry. National Right to Life called on lawmakers to continue working toward permanent protections that ensure federal funds are directed to medical providers that offer comprehensive health care without performing or promoting abortion.

“We are grateful to the Administration and to the many pro-life leaders in Congress who fought to prevent taxpayer dollars from subsidizing the abortion industry,” Tobias said. “Their efforts produced an important, though temporary, victory for unborn children and taxpayers alike. While federal funding is now set to resume, National Right to Life remains committed to working alongside these leaders to permanently end taxpayer subsidization of abortion providers.” 

For years, efforts to end taxpayer subsidization of abortion providers have faced unified opposition from pro-abortion members of Congress, who continue to insist that organizations such as Planned Parenthood receive federal support despite their central role in performing and promoting abortion.

“Congress should never force taxpayers to subsidize the abortion industry,” Tobias said. “Taxpayer dollars belong in programs that provide life-affirming care for women, children, and families—not in organizations that profit from abortion. National Right to Life will continue working with lawmakers to permanently end taxpayer subsidization of the abortion industry.”

Founded in 1968, the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC), the federation of affiliates in each of the 50 states, is the nation’s oldest and largest grassroots pro-life organization. National Right to Life works through legislation and education to protect innocent human life from abortion, infanticide, assisted suicide, and euthanasia.