Will abortion, gun bill vetoes change Wyoming’s political landscape?

Gov. Mark Gordon vetoed two radical bills last Friday that earlier in his political career he probably would have signed or let become law without his signature. 

But in his sixth year as the state’s chief executive, with term limits preventing him from running for governor again in 2026, the Wyoming Republican surprisingly vetoed an anti-abortion bill and another to eliminate most gun-free zones. 

I don’t claim to know the motivation for two of the best actions he’s taken as governor. Does Gordon no longer care about shoring up his conservative credentials? Did he view the bills — under which state government would have demanded an invasive medical procedure and taken away local control on gun laws — as straying from conservative principles? Or did he listen to constituents who asked him to preserve a constitutionally protected state right to make their own health care decisions, and choose school safety over right-wing ideology?

The governor vetoed the pair with a heavy dose of political opportunism, stressing he’s still strongly “pro-life” and pro-Second Amendment but calling the bills too extreme.

And the Freedom Caucus’ hysterical reaction to losing on issues it considered slam-dunks is a welcome bonus, but it does come with the possibility of a special session to override several Gordon vetoes if a simple majority in both chambers asks leadership to call one. (Legislative leadership on Monday released a statement arguing against returning for a special session.) 

Let’s examine what happened to radical lawmakers’ bids to turn the tide their way after suffering previous defeats on these signature issues, and how Gordon’s respective vetoes might change the political landscape. Would the Freedom Caucus ditch calling for a special session if it could get more mileage by making the moderate Gordon the villain of the next election?

Beginning in 1990, the Legislature didn’t pass a single anti-abortion bill for nearly three decades. In 1994, voters rejected a constitutional amendment to ban abortion.

In 2017, the Legislature passed two largely meaningless measures: one prohibiting the sale of fetal tissue, and another requiring abortion providers to give women an ultrasound. But the former wasn’t even happening in the state, and the latter didn’t have an enforcement mechanism.

Since then, anti-abortion lawmakers have sponsored numerous bills every session. A “trigger law” went into effect in 2022 before the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, making most abortions illegal in Wyoming. 

When a lawsuit filed by abortion providers, pro-choice groups and women stalled the ban, last year the Legislature passed the “Life Is a Human Right Act” and the nation’s first prohibition of all abortion medications. Both legal issues are on hold pending another constitutional challenge.

Last week Gordon vetoed House Bill 148 – Regulation of abortions, stating its passage would likely be subject to a lawsuit that would tie up the courts and further delay enacting the bans.

House Bill 148 targeted Wellspring Health Access in Casper, the state’s only surgical abortion provider, by requiring the clinic to be licensed as an ambulatory surgical center. Cost-prohibitive major renovations to meet that mandate could have resulted in its closure, and women’s loss of abortion access, even if the bans are overturned.

Opponents of HB 148 made an excellent case that it’s medically unnecessary despite backers’ claims it would improve women’s safety. Gordon wants to add the burdensome requirements here that Texas and other states used to close abortion clinics, but drew the line at the minimum 48-hour waiting period for a mandatory ultrasound. Doctors testified that transvaginal ultrasounds would be needed for early-term pregnancies — a dramatic example of government intrusion into the doctor-patient relationship.

To no one’s surprise, the Freedom Caucus blasted Gordon for standing “shoulder to shoulder with the abortion industry.”

The caucus should blame itself for dooming the bill by adding at least a two-day waiting period that would force low-income women to take more time off work and pay for travel, food, childcare and other expenses — all for an unnecessary, invasive procedure. (And what happened to conservative skepticism toward government involvement in medicine?) Without the amendment, Gordon might have signed the bill.

But the biggest blunder of all by supporters was language that’s directly counter to the state’s claim that abortion isn’t health care. The attorney general’s office was forced to make that argument when plaintiffs claimed a 2012 constitutional amendment protects the right of adults to make their own healthcare decisions.

The bill required anyone doing a surgical abortion to be a licensed physician with admitting privileges at a hospital within 10 miles of the clinic. If abortion isn’t health care, why must it be performed by a licensed physician? If abortion isn’t health care, why is the Department of Health responsible for promulgating rules needed to implement it?

Meanwhile, on the firearms issue, the Legislature tried for many years to repeal gun-free zones at schools, university and college campuses, and government buildings, including the Capitol. The efforts failed or were vetoed, except for a bill passed in 2017 allowing school districts to decide if officials could conceal carry on school property. Only four of Wyoming’s 48 school districts did so.

This year House Bill 125 – Repeal gun-free zones passed the House by a wide margin, then was defeated by a 3-2 vote in a Senate committee. But a motion to reconsider it by the full chamber passed by one vote, and it went on to a lopsided Senate victory. Even Sen. Bill Landen (R-Casper), who cast the deciding vote in committee to kill the bill and also rejected reconsideration, eventually voted in favor. His last-minute support demonstrated the heavy political pressure behind its passage.

The Freedom Caucus again denounced Gordon, as did Wyoming Gun Owners, which noted he supported the idea during his first gubernatorial campaign in 2018.

But Gordon had a valid reason for his veto. He said HB 125 “erodes historic local control norms by giving sole authority to the Legislature to micromanage a constitutionally protected right.” The governor added that the measure exceeded the separation of powers embodied in the Wyoming Constitution’s Article 2, so he had to veto it. 

I know gun owners whose main objection to this year’s session by far was passage of HB 125. They believe in the Second Amendment, but know guns don’t belong anywhere near kids at schools, and view carrying weapons at government meetings as a far-right intimidation tactic. They also realize the so-called “God-given right” to own a gun is a fantasy preached by gun manufacturers, lobbyists and Christian nationalists who blithely excuse mass murders due to gun violence by offering a few “thoughts and prayers” for victims.

I stand with organizations like the Wyoming Education Association and its president, Grady Hutcherson, who released a statement of gratitude after Gordon’s veto, which prioritized school safety over political ideology.

“Our members expressed grave concerns about the danger it would pose to students to legalize the concealed carry of deadly firearms in our public schools,” Hutcherson said. “Guns have no place in Wyoming schools. Period.”

For all of Gordon’s vetoes, he should have blocked an education measure he criticized but still signed into state law, although it is certain to be challenged in court — an action he predicted but conveniently ignored.

House Bill 166 – Education savings accounts-1 allows public money to be spent on private and parochial schools, despite the state constitution clearly prohibiting it, after he narrowed eligibility for “education savings accounts” to only lower-income families. Gordon said it would be “unfortunate” to expose the program to legal challenges that undermine its viability and legitimacy, then incredulously did precisely that.

Hutcherson correctly described HB 166 as “a massive blow to our public education system” that eats away at the already-limited resources available to support 93% of students in public schools. After Gordon surprised supporters and detractors of the anti-abortion bill and repeal of gun-free zones with his vetoes, signing a blatantly unconstitutional education funding bill was easily the biggest head-scratcher of the 2024 session.

By vetoing two high-profile bills for which he’s been attacked by the Freedom Caucus, Gordon is carving out a more adversarial relationship with the group. His nuanced opposition to what the caucus considers its most popular issues could change Wyoming’s political landscape and convince more moderate Republican voters to object to extreme views on abortion and gun rights.