At one point during the decades-long debate over abortion, most Democrats supported reasonable restrictions on the procedure such as limiting it to very early in a woman’s pregnancy.
But over the years, many in the party began to adopt more extreme positions, even supporting abortion in later months.
Now, a Democratic governor has signed what has become the most extreme abortion law in the country – right up to just before birth – and it has ignited a civil war of sorts within her party.
Massachusetts Gov. Maura Healey signed legislation Monday eliminating the state’s previous gestational limits on abortion, triggering a rare split among Democrats as several lawmakers in the governor’s own party voted against the measure.
The Prioritizing Patient Access to Care Act removes the state’s statutory restrictions that generally limited abortions after 24 weeks except in certain circumstances.
Under the new law, physicians will have broader authority to determine whether later abortions are medically appropriate, while receiving additional legal protections from penalties that previously applied.
The bill includes allowing an abortion right up to moments before natural birth, a position way too extreme for many Democrats in the state and around the country.
“This new law represents an extremist and dangerous position,” Rep. Jeffrey Turco, a Democrat representing Winthrop, told Fox News.
“To be clear, it allows abortion anytime, unrestricted, and in many cases, publicly funded until the moment of birth,” he continued.
He went on to call the law “barbaric,” adding that it was “rushed through the legislative process in two weeks, without an opportunity for the public to weigh in” and was “out of step with the views of the average person in Massachusetts.”
Rep. Chris Markey, a Democrat from Dartmouth, echoed Turco, but from a different perspective, focusing on what the law means for physicians and existing legal standards.
“I am deeply disappointed in the passage of this bill. This bill creates a very slippery slope,” Markey said.
Markey argued that the new law creates uncertainty for doctors by requiring them to balance the expanded protections under the statute with what he described as conflicting criminal case law that remains in effect.
“I believe this law puts doctors in a very difficult ethical dilemma, as well as conflicts with long-standing criminal case law,” he said.
“This law, I believe, is not consistent with the beliefs of the vast majority of my constituents,” Markey added.
“While many are pro-choice, you can still be pro-choice and see this law as going beyond the norms of acceptability.”
The legislation passed the Massachusetts House of Representatives on July 22 by a vote of 119-33, largely along party lines. However, nine House Democrats joined Republicans in opposing the bill, marking an unusual break within the state’s Democratic majority.
Several Democratic opponents publicly criticized the legislation, arguing that it went too far. One Democratic lawmaker described the measure as “barbaric,” while others raised concerns about removing existing restrictions on later-term abortions.
Supporters of the law argued it strengthens protections for patients facing complicated pregnancies, including situations involving serious health risks or severe fetal diagnoses.
Healey defended the legislation by saying medical decisions should be made by patients and doctors rather than politicians.
Opponents, however, argued the law represents one of the broadest expansions of abortion access in the country and warned that eliminating gestational limits places Massachusetts outside the mainstream views of many voters.
The divide among Massachusetts Democrats highlights growing tensions within the party over how far abortion policy should extend following the Supreme Court’s 2022 decision overturning Roe v. Wade.
While Democratic leaders in the state have largely embraced expanded abortion protections, the vote showed that opposition remains even within heavily Democratic districts.
Healey’s signing also places abortion policy at the center of the governor’s political agenda heading into the next election cycle, with supporters framing the issue as a defense of reproductive rights and opponents using the law as evidence of what they describe as an increasingly extreme position on abortion.
