Photo illustration by Getty Images.
Just four months ago, Montanans overwhelmingly supported a state constitutional amendment that enshrined the right to an abortion in Montana’s foundational document.
Even though voters seemed to decisively settle the issue, that has not stopped some lawmakers from proposing more restrictions on the medical procedure. It did not stop the Montana House Judiciary Committee from overwhelmingly tabling a bill to prohibit some pregnant women from traveling for an abortion on Thursday, by a 16-to-4 margin, after emotional testimony on Tuesday and concerns ranging from domestic violence to criminalizing doctors and violating the federal Constitution’s right to travel.
House Bill 609 would have made it a criminal act a criminal act for Montanans to travel out of state for an abortion without a doctor’s recommendation, if the fetus was “viable.”
Kerri Seekins-Crowe, R-Billings, who is sponsoring the measure tried to reassure fellow lawmakers that her bill was tailored narrowly so that it only would be applicable if the pregnancy was beyond 24 weeks, often considered the point of fetal viability, and only if a doctor didn’t determine abortion was medically necessary.
While supporters of the bill were pilloried for “treating women as property,” Seekins-Crowe pushed back and said she will not make apologies for standing up for the unborn.
“There are some Montanans whose voices are not being heard and that’s what I want you to hear,” Seekins-Crowe said. “I want you to hear my passion for those Montanans who could have never chosen to vote for CI-128 (which codified abortion as a right in the state’s constitution), or not vote. They will never drive, or play basketball. They will never see the marvelous Montana sunsets or sunrises. While I do respect women who have life-threatening conditions, that is truly not what this bill is about.”
She gave her own example of a pregnancy she had where the child was not expected to survive.
“He is now a 32-year-old man and a father,” she said. “Those are the ones I am standing up for and if I am called an extremist because I speak for those who don’t have a voice, then I will accept that.”
HB 609 would have made Montana an oddity: A place where abortion was protected by the state’s Constitution, and yet state law would have among the strictest travel laws in the nation, where any person who traveled out of state for an abortion when the fetus is viable, open to possible criminal prosecution, as well as anyone who aids or helps them travel. Similar bills proposed in other states are often call “abortion travel,” but supporters of Seekins-Crowe’s proposal called it “abortion tourism,” a term which others derided.
Anyone who helped a pregnant woman travel for an abortion could have also be found guilty, and those guilty of violating HB 609 could have faced as long as 40 years in prison.
“Montana women and their unborn children deserve better than an abortion industry that prioritizes profit over protection, secrecy over safety and convenience over care,” Seekins-Crowe said at the beginning of her testimony.
She said the measure was necessary because she feared for young women who would be taken out of state to have an abortion, without parental consent or support.
“Abortion may be legal, but that doesn’t mean we allow an unchecked abortion industry to operate in the shadows,” she said.
Only two proponents, including the Montana Family Foundation, spoke in favor of the bill.
Medical providers and professionals pushed back on the measure, reporting that less than 1% of abortions are in the third trimester, and the vast majority of those are because of medical conditions or problems that arise during the pregnancy.
During an hour-long hearing in front of the Montana House Judiciary Tuesday, opponents of the measure told harrowing stories of wanted pregnancies gone wrong, medical complications, and fear of criminalization.
Tearful testimony and intimate medical details were used as examples and pleas to lawmakers to stop HB 609. On Thursday, only four Republicans remained supporting the bill: Lee Deming of Laurel, Jedediah Hinkle of Belgrade, Caleb Hinkle of Belgrade, and chairwoman Amy Regier of Kalispell.
Tuesday’s tear-filled testimony
Ann Angus of Bozeman told about a pregnancy in 2022 where the child she was carrying “was not compatible” with life. Because she was 24 weeks along, she had to travel out-of-state to end the pregnancy that would have ended with death or possibly life-threatening complications.
“I wouldn’t be a grieving mother, I’d be a felon,” she said.
Matt Ferrell of Helena worried that the enforcement mechanism would encourage neighbors to spy on neighbors and report them to authorities, something he said was decidedly not in line with the character of the state.
Hailey McKnight told the committee that she is at a high risk for miscarriage, and doesn’t want to take the risk if HB 609 becomes law.
“If I sought medical care, I could come home as a felon,” she said. “I would love to have kids in Montana, but I am so afraid to have kids in Montana.”
Tess Fields of Blue Mountain Clinic, one of the providers in the state that provides abortion care described the proposal as “dangerous, draconian and degrading.”
She reminded the lawmakers that in 2021 when she testified that some states would continue to restrict access to birth control, ban travel and not make exceptions for cases of rape or incest that people laughed at her, only to watch many of those same things happen.
“How many women need to die,” she asked, challenging the lawmakers that if HB 619 passed, it will lead to the same types of court challenges which have been a part of Montana courts for years.
“We will see you in court,” she said.
Jean Branscum, the Executive Director of the Montana Medical Association, which represents the state’s healthcare providers, said that her organization is concerned because of the potential to criminalize doctors by simply giving advice.
“Doctors need to have open and transparent communication for all matters,” she said.
She said that by recommending some patients leave the state for care, they could risk becoming “traffickers.”
“I don’t think this will help recruit or retain physicians in our state,” Branscum said.
A similar concern was raised by the Montana Coalition Against Sexual and Domestic Violence. Beth Brenneman said that her organization, spread throughout the state, often is called upon to take victims of violence to the hospitals or for medical care. That could include victims who have been raped. She said that domestic violence is 2.5 times more likely when the woman is pregnant.
“We don’t ask, but we don’t know when some of our people if they’re pregnant,” she said. “We bring people to medical care when they need it most. We suspect you want us to continue to provide those services, so please don’t make us felons.”
Katherine Harmon, a nurse in Billings, had a daughter who was having complications with pregnancy, and lives in the state, but the nearby medical facilities are in North Dakota. She said healthcare providers there refused to deal with it because of the strict prohibitions on abortion. Harmon scheduled an appointment in Billings, and about a week later, her daughter started the journey to state’s largest medical corridor in Billings, only to suffer complications and a miscarriage.
“In a rest stop, she bled and completed her miscarriage,” Harmon said. “And all I felt was rage.”
Sarah Kries received news that devastated her during her first pregnancy. Tests after the 20th week revealed a rare condition in which her child would be born, but not able to live, gasping for air until the infant died.
“I made the decision to have my child die with me, her mother rather than gasping for air,” Kries said.
She and her husband traveled to Portland where the procedure could be completed, and she went through abortion-clinic protestors who taunted her.
“That was devastating and traumatizing but to be criminalized would have been unfathomable,” said the mother of two living daughters.
Sophie Moon, a Mont-PIRG member who represents college-age students and lives in Missoula, brought up concerns about HB 609 criminalizing families.
She told the committee that if a parent of a student who isn’t from Montana comes to get them to take them home for medical care and an abortion, the parent could be considered trafficking the child under the law.
“It would directly negate parental rights,” she said.
Lydia Trom, a mother of three adult children who lives in Bozeman said she was standing up for women and families.
“I value our reproductive rights and the attempt to label our citizens and women as criminals is not OK,” she said.
She said that she was traveling out of state when she experienced a miscarriage.
“If this bill was legal at the time and I was further along, I would have been considered a felon,” she said.
Dennis Webber of Missoula said that he had concerns about the bill violating the U.S. Constitution.
“The Dobbs decision made abortion a state’s issue, but Montana stops at the state line. And Montana cannot stop another state from banning late-term abortions and Montana cannot stop a Montana resident from traveling, or using that state’s law when they cross the border there,” he said. “This takes an already painful choice and makes it more isolating, traumatic and cruel. If the goal is to reduce abortion, this isn’t the answer. We need comprehensive sex ed., access to contraception, affordable healthcare and the support of survivors for abuse.”