In the wake of a Teton County court striking down Wyoming’s two abortion bans, Republican and Democratic lawmakers both say they’ll bring bills in the 2025 general session to either restrict or enshrine abortion access in state law.
The state’s near-total ban on abortion and a prohibition against abortion medications violated the state’s constitution, District Court Judge Melissa Owens concluded in her Nov. 18 ruling. The Wyoming Attorney General’s office is appealing the ruling to the Wyoming Supreme Court. Until the state’s high court weighs in, Republicans say they’ll focus on enacting new abortion regulations.
“We’ll let the [judicial] process work, and we’ll see where we are at that point. But I do feel that we have a real lack of regulation in the area of surgical [abortion], and we should address that,” Rep. Martha Lawley (R-Worland) told WyoFile. “And that’s what my bill tries to do.”
Lawley’s bill mirrors legislation she brought in 2024, but without the amendments Gov. Mark Gordon pointed to as part of his decision to veto the bill. One of those amendments — an ultrasound requirement for medication abortions — will return in a separate bill from House Speaker-elect Rep. Chip Neiman (R-Hulett).
While the basis of Judge Owens’ decision rested on a section of the state constitution that protects individuals’ rights to make their own health care decisions, Republicans don’t yet appear to have an appetite for a new constitutional amendment to change or clarify that language.
“That may ultimately happen, but I don’t expect a decision to be made on that until the Supreme Court of Wyoming rules,” said Lawley, a retired attorney.
Rep. Mike Yin (D-Jackson) said there’s another reason Republicans are holding off.
“The freedom of health care access is broadly important to most of Wyoming,” Yin said. “A constitutional amendment would fail, and they know that, which is why they don’t bring one.”
Polling by the University of Wyoming has repeatedly found that Wyomingites are divided on abortion restrictions. The latest survey, which was released just before last month’s election, showed that about 10% of Wyomingities would prefer a total ban, while another 31% favored abortion restrictions with exceptions for rape, incest or when a woman’s life is in danger. Another 20% preferred those exemptions and others once the need for an abortion had been clearly established. About 39% said abortion should remain a personal choice.
The Wyoming Democratic Caucus announced plans to bring legislation to enshrine abortion access in state statute.
“The Caucus remains concerned with lawmakers’ continuing efforts interfering in healthcare that will drive medical professionals out of Wyoming, making it difficult for the state to retain young families,” a press release states.
Regulations and ultrasounds
Lawley’s bill would add requirements for any clinic that provides a certain number of what the legislation calls “surgical abortions” — or what the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists refers to as a “procedural abortion” since abortions do not involve surgery.
Wellspring Health Access in Casper is the only reproductive care clinic in Wyoming to offer procedural abortions. The clinic is also among the plaintiffs who sued the state over its abortion bans.
House Bill 42 – Regulation of surgical abortions would mandate clinics like Wellspring be licensed as ambulatory surgical centers, which is a classification that comes with Department of Health inspections, rules and regulations.
The bill would also require clinic doctors performing procedural abortions to have admitting privileges at a hospital not more than 10 miles away.
“As long as abortion is legal in Wyoming, we need to have some regulation of it, because we really have not done a lot of regulation of abortion in Wyoming,” Lawley said.
The bill also comes with exceptions. More specifically, it defines abortion to exclude “any use, prescription or means” in the event of a miscarriage or ectopic pregnancy, “to save or preserve the health of the unborn baby” or “to save or preserve the life of the pregnant woman”
Lawley said she’s confident about her bill since both the House and the Senate passed it by wide margins earlier this year. Gordon, however, rejected the legislation in an effort to “keep our current court case on track for a speedy resolution,” he wrote in his veto letter.
“If you want to save lives, let the Courts finally do their job and let’s keep future legislation focused on regulatory oversight related to the current operations of abortion in Wyoming,” Gordon wrote in his letter.
Gordon also heaped blame on the bill’s amendments — which included an ultrasound requirement that was originally part of a Neiman-sponsored bill that died — and praised Lawley’s original bill as a “simple and elegant solution.”
“So he’s going to get a chance to prove that,” Lawley said.
Neiman confirmed to WyoFile in a text that he will bring a bill to require ultrasounds for abortion medications for consideration in the upcoming legislative session. The measure had not been published on the Wyoming Legislature’s website by press time.
Abortion access
The Democrat’s Wyoming Reproductive Freedom Act had not been published by press time, but Yin told WyoFile it would mirror 2024 legislation.
The bill would enshrine several rights, including “the right to freedom from governmental interference with respect to personal reproductive decisions” and “the right to choose or refuse” birth control or to have an abortion.
“Pregnancy is complicated, and women need to be free to make health care choices without the interference of the government,” Rep. Karlee Provenza (D-Laramie) said in the caucus’ press release.
The legislation would also prohibit “unauthorized abortions,” such as those performed by someone other than a medical professional, as well as certain regulations, like those not “medically necessary to protect the life or health of the person seeking an abortion,” or those not “consistent with established medical practice.”
The general session begins Jan. 14.
Nope. Again. I will make my own health care decisions, even if I have to leave Wyoming to do it. We must vote these religious zealots out!!! Count me in for that.
A new session is coming up, which means it’s time once again Martha Lawley to butt into people’s private lives
So what they are saying is that if they can’t deprive women of their fundamental rights to health care and freedom of religion, they will put in TRAP laws. TRAP laws are state regulations that single out abortion providers for medically unnecessary and politically motivated requirements that can prevent them from providing life saving medical care.
Wyoming is already becoming a maternity and women’s health care desert. You can’t find an OB-GYN nearby or if you can you wait weeks or months for an appointment. These legislators want to harm women and deprive us of our freedom of religion and our right to make health care choices, purely so they can enforce their fundamentalist religious beliefs on us. That’s an unconstitutional violation of our civil rights. We have to vote this Anti-Freedom Caucus out now!
Why do Republicans want more Democrat babies? Since only Democrats and Liberals are obviously the only ones having abortions. Seems the Republicans should be all about not adding more Democrats to society.
The ” too much burdensome government regulation” party is now out there saying “we don’t have enough burdensome government regulation”?
Amazing.
These anti freedom politicians have term limits, but YOU have to apply them.
The difference between the two parties is starkly defined by this single issue. Republicans shout ‘freedom’ – except for women, while Democrats work to ensure that women actually have freedom to make decisions for themselves.
That a single party remains so intensely focused on removing reproductive freedom from women – more than 1/2 of our population – while ignoring the truly critical issue of our time is more than troubling.
Amen Marci
Enshrine abortion access in state statute and keep out of decisions by women and their physicians.
And then make the wealthy and corporations pay their required income taxes so the US can give our citizens access to universal health care.
They need to stop thinking they have any brains or qualifications in the medical field and leave medical decisions to the doctors and patents.
Let’s take a break from passing any new laws. All go home. Save time and money. We have enough laws.
Required ultrasound?! For what reason, the woman already knows she’s pregnant most likely from either a urine or blood test. This is only for control, billing and monetory purposes, provides no additional medical information. Stupid, a waste of time and money.
Admitting privileges for the sole purpose to leverage hospitals to reject those said privileges to close down the facility i.e. backdoor leveraged politics. Furthermore, no women have died in this state because the law didn’t exist. Again stupid.
Get off the wedge politics and out of every woman’s uterus!