Statements on Introduced Bills and Joint Resolutions

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I rise today to join in the introduction of the Reproductive Freedom for All Act, a bipartisan bill that would ensure the right of women to make certain reproductive choices without undue government interference.

I support a woman's right to have an abortion, and I believe that the threshold question of whether or not abortion is legal needs to be consistent at the national level. States can account for regional differences with regulations like parental notification requirements, but the basic right needs to be the same regardless of the State in which a woman happens to reside.

In its decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, the U.S. Supreme Court abandoned a nearly 50-year precedent that had been reaffirmed and on which women had relied for decades. The Dobbs ruling was, as the Chief Justice described it, a ``jolt'' to our legal system. This action has further divided the country at a moment when now, more than ever in modern times, we need the Court to demonstrate consistency, predictability, and restraint.

Prior to the Court's decision in Dobbs, I introduced, with Senator Murkowski, the Reproductive Choice Act to enact in to Federal law the abortion rights established by Roe v. Wade and affirmed by Planned Parenthood v. Casey.

In the wake of the Dobbs decision, I have worked with my colleagues Senator Kaine, Senator Murkowski, and Senator Sinema in drafting a more comprehensive, bipartisan bill that would codify the abortion rights articulated by the Supreme Court in Roe, Casey and Whole Women's Health v. Hellerstedt, as well as the contraception rights first articulated in Griswold v. Connecticut and later clarified in Eisenstadt v. Baird and Carey v. Population Services International.

Our legislation would enshrine important abortion and contraception rights into Federal law without undercutting basic conscience protections that have been in place for decade and that are relied upon by healthcare practitioners who have religious objections.

Our goal with this legislation is to do what the Court should have done--provide consistency in our laws that Americans have relied upon for five decades regarding the ability to make certain reproductive choices.

Mr. President, this bill maintains the pre-Dobbs status quo. In other words, it would ensure that the legal framework in place before Dobbs remains the law of the land. Our bill accomplishes this goal by tracking the Supreme Court's language in the seminal cases I mentioned.

Specifically consistent with decades of Supreme Court jurisprudence, the Reproductive Freedom for All Act provides that a State may not impose an undue burden on the ability of a woman to choose whether or not to ternate a pregnancy before fetal viability.

During this time Sates may enact reasonable regulations to further the health or safety of a woman seeking to terminate a pregnancy, unless such regulations impose an undue burden.

After fetal viability, a State may regulate or even proscribe the ability of a woman to terminate her pregnancy but not when such a termination is necessary to preserve the life or health of the woman.

Moreover, by codifying Griswold, Eisenstadt, and Carey, the bill makes clear that a State cannot prohibit an individual from obtaining or using contraceptives.

Finally the legislation specifically protects conscience protections that have been relied upon by healthcare providers who have religious objections.

Mr. President, the best path forward for our country is to maintain the same legal framework that was in place just weeks ago before the Supreme Court issued its ruling in Dobbs. Our bill would enshrine into law the important protections articulated in the Supreme Court cases that I mentioned without undercutting statutes that also have been in place for decades.

I urge all of my Senate colleagues to join me in supporting this legislation.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source