COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) - The South Carolina Senate debated Thursday whether to ban nearly all abortions in the state, a surprise move suggested by a Democrat who has long fought abortion restrictions.

Sen. Brad Hutto told Republicans if the bill passed he was going to give them what they wanted - the most direct way to challenge the 1973 U.S. Supreme Court decision that overturned state bans on abortions. No other state would have such a broad abortion ban.

"I've heard all along that y'all want a challenge to Roe v. Wade. This is a straight up challenge," the Orangeburg Democrat said.

But there may have been more local political considerations too. The ban was placed on a bill that originally made illegal just a rare procedure called dismemberment abortion. And senators on Thursday narrowly failed to force a vote on the new proposal.

Lawmakers had just three days left in a session set to end May 10 and hadn't dealt with several pressing issues including bills dealing with a $9 billion debacle after two utilities abandoned 10 years of planning and construction of two nuclear reactors.

If the abortion bill passes the Senate, it would head to the more conservative House, but a leader of the chamber said he doesn't think his colleagues will support the full ban - at least until the U.S. Supreme Court takes up another state's case.

"Unless Roe v. Wade is overturned, the General Assembly must work within existing legal parameters to increase protections for the life of the unborn rather than knowingly pass unconstitutional legislation," said House Majority Leader Gary Simrill of Rock Hill.

Several other states have further restricted abortions this year. Mississippi currently has the most restrictive law in the country banning abortions after 15 weeks, although that law was immediately challenged in court. Louisiana lawmakers are considering a similar proposal.

Iowa's Legislature just passed a bill banning all abortions after a fetal heartbeat is detected around five weeks after conception. It is heading to the governor's desk.

The three states would allow officials to revoke medical licenses for doctors who perform illegal abortions, and do not rule out criminal prosecution. But those states all provide immunity for a woman who has an abortion.

South Carolina's measure provides no protection for mothers or doctors.

Democrats also suggested it could even ban the use of birth control pills or intrauterine devices.

The South Carolina proposal began as a bill outlawing a type of abortion in which a doctor pulls a fetus apart before removing it from the womb. That procedure was performed 22 times in 2016, out of in 5,736 abortions in South Carolina. Doctors say it is only done on fetuses who can't live outside the womb, or if the mother's life is in danger.

The leader of Republicans in the Senate welcomed the chance to challenge the 1973 abortion ruling.

"It's a guaranteed court action," Senate Majority leader Shane Massey of Edgefield said. "I think everybody really recognizes what we're getting to is a judicial determination of the constitutionality of it."

And if the bill ended up on his desk, South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster said he would sign it.

"Sometimes you have to fight for what you believe in," said McMaster, who is seeking re-election this year and has four challengers in the Republican primary. "Any bill that reduces abortions in South Carolina, I am for, and I will sign - including that one."

Copyright 2018 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.</s>COLUMBIA, S.C. — The South Carolina Senate debated Thursday whether to ban nearly all abortions in the state, a surprise move suggested by a Democrat who has long fought abortion restrictions.

Sen. Brad Hutto told Republicans if the bill passed he was going to give them what they wanted — the most direct way to challenge the 1973 U.S. Supreme Court decision that overturned state bans on abortions. No other state would have such a broad abortion ban.

"I've heard all along that y'all want a challenge to Roe v. Wade. This is a straight up challenge," the Orangeburg Democrat said.

But there may have been more local political considerations too. The ban was placed on a bill that originally made illegal just a rare procedure called dismemberment abortion. And senators on Thursday narrowly failed to force a vote on the new proposal.

With just three regular days left in a session set to end May 10, senators voted to meet in a rare Friday session instead of taking their typical four-day weekend. They haven't dealt with several pressing issues including bills dealing with a $9 billion debacle after two utilities abandoned 10 years of planning and construction of two nuclear reactors.

If the abortion bill passes the Senate, it would head to the more conservative House, but a leader of the chamber said he doesn't think his colleagues will support the full ban — at least until the U.S. Supreme Court takes up another state's case.

"Unless Roe v. Wade is overturned, the General Assembly must work within existing legal parameters to increase protections for the life of the unborn rather than knowingly pass unconstitutional legislation," said House Majority Leader Gary Simrill of Rock Hill.

Several other states have further restricted abortions this year. Mississippi currently has the most restrictive law in the country banning abortions after 15 weeks, although that law was immediately challenged in court. Louisiana lawmakers are considering a similar proposal.

Iowa's Legislature just passed a bill banning all abortions after a fetal heartbeat is detected around five weeks after conception. It is heading to the governor's desk.

The three states would allow officials to revoke medical licenses for doctors who perform illegal abortions, and do not rule out criminal prosecution. But those states all provide immunity for a woman who has an abortion.

South Carolina's measure provides no protection for mothers or doctors.

Democrats also suggested it could even ban the use of birth control pills or intrauterine devices.

The South Carolina proposal began as a bill outlawing a type of abortion in which a doctor pulls a fetus apart before removing it from the womb. That procedure was performed 22 times in 2016, out of in 5,736 abortions in South Carolina. Doctors say it is only done on fetuses who can't live outside the womb, or if the mother's life is in danger.

The leader of Republicans in the Senate welcomed the chance to challenge the 1973 abortion ruling.

"It's a guaranteed court action," Senate Majority leader Shane Massey of Edgefield said. "I think everybody really recognizes what we're getting to is a judicial determination of the constitutionality of it."

And if the bill ended up on his desk, South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster said he would sign it.

"Sometimes you have to fight for what you believe in," said McMaster, who is seeking re-election this year and has four challengers in the Republican primary. "Any bill that reduces abortions in South Carolina, I am for, and I will sign — including that one."</s>Image copyright Getty Images Image caption The struggle over abortion rights, always an impassioned affair in the US, has intensified since Donald Trump came into the White House

The US state of Iowa has approved an abortion law banning most abortions once a foetal heartbeat is detected.

Republican lawmakers passed the bill in back-to-back votes, sending it to the governor's desk to sign into law.

If it comes into effect the bill will ban most abortions after six weeks of pregnancy, and rights groups say it will be the country's most restrictive.

Critics argue it will make having an abortion illegal before most women even realise they are pregnant.

Iowa's Republican Governor Kim Reynolds has not said if she will sign the bill.

Last year, Iowa Republicans successfully banned abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy.

What new restrictions have been approved?

The so-called "heartbeat" bill would require any woman seeking an abortion to have an ultrasound to screen for a foetal heartbeat. If one is detected, she will be barred from obtaining a termination.

Some exceptions have been introduced - in cases of rape and incest, where it has been reported to authorities, and to save the woman's life.

"We're in the majority for a reason and that includes advancing the pro-life cause," Republican Representative Shannon Lundgren told the Waterloo-Cedar Falls Courier.

"We are alive when our hearts start beating and our life is over when it stops," Dawn Pettengil, another Republican Representative from Iowa, told CBS News.

What do opponents say?

Democratic Representative Beth Wessel-Kroeschell spoke against the legislation on the floor of the Iowa House of Representatives on Tuesday.

"All women, regardless of age, income or race, should be able to obtain reproductive health services, including abortion, free from political and economic barriers," Ms Wessel-Kroeschell said.

Iowa's Planned Parenthood and the American Civil Liberties Union groups have also spoken out against the bill.

"These extreme attempts to ban abortion fly in the face of both medical and legal standards, as well as common sense and public opinion among Iowans," said Erin Davison-Rippey, Planned Parenthood of the Heartland's director of public affairs in an online statement released in February, when the bill was first introduced.

"So-called 'heartbeat protection' bills are actually bans on safe, legal abortion, and they threaten to set reproductive rights back by decades."

Elizabeth Nash, of the sexual and reproductive health policy group the Guttmacher Institute, told the BBC this was "the most restrictive abortion ban in the country".

The US abortion debate: Both sides speak

Media playback is unsupported on your device Media caption Why one woman decided to terminate her pregnancy - and defends Planned Parenthood

Media playback is unsupported on your device Media caption Jeanne Mancini organises March for Life, a major anti-abortion rally in the US

She and Iowa Democrats have suggested the bill is intentionally unconstitutional.

If Ms Reynolds signs the bill into law, it will likely be challenged in court for possibly violating Roe v Wade, the US Supreme Court ruling that legalised abortion in 1973.

The ruling states some women have a right to terminate pregnancies until a foetus is viable.

Isn't that a problem for the bill's supporters?

No, in fact some Republican lawmakers welcomed the challenge.

"I would love for the United States Supreme Court to look at this bill and have this as a vehicle to overturn Roe v. Wade," Republican Senator Jake Chapman said.

Media playback is unsupported on your device Media caption The Pink House: The last abortion clinic in Mississippi

A string of US states have enacted abortion bans or stringent restrictions over recent decades only to have them overturned by the courts, prompting some conservatives to take aim at the landmark ruling.

"We created an opportunity to take a run at Roe v Wade," Republican state Senator Rick Bertrand acknowledged.

Iowa is among a number of states, including Mississippi and Kentucky, that have triggered court challenges by imposing tight restrictions on abortion.

President Donald Trump supports an abortion ban and has indicated that this is a priority, and Republicans are seizing the opportunity that creates, say commentators.</s>The Iowa senate has approved a law that if approved by the state’s Republican governor, would be the most restrictive in the country.</s>The US state of Iowa has approved an abortion law banning most abortions once a foetal heartbeat is detected.

Republican lawmakers passed the bill in back-to-back votes, sending it to the governor’s desk to sign into law.

If it comes into effect the bill will ban most abortions after six weeks of pregnancy, and rights groups say it will be the country’s most restrictive.

Critics argue it will make having an abortion illegal before most women even realise they are pregnant.

Iowa’s Republican Governor Kim Reynolds has not said if she will sign the bill.

Last year, Iowa Republicans successfully banned abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy.

The past and future of US abortion debate

 What new restrictions have been approved?

 The so-called “heartbeat” bill would require any woman seeking an abortion to have an ultrasound to screen for a foetal heartbeat. If one is detected, she will be barred from obtaining a termination.

Some exceptions have been introduced – in cases of rape and incest, where it has been reported to authorities, and to save the woman’s life.

“We’re in the majority for a reason and that includes advancing the pro-life cause,” Republican Representative Shannon Lundgren told the Waterloo-Cedar Falls Courier.

“We are alive when our hearts start beating and our life is over when it stops,” Dawn Pettengil, another Republican Representative from Iowa, told CBS News.

What do opponents say?

 Democratic Representative Beth Wessel-Kroeschell spoke against the legislation on the floor of the Iowa House of Representatives on Tuesday.

“All women, regardless of age, income or race, should be able to obtain reproductive health services, including abortion, free from political and economic barriers,” Ms Wessel-Kroeschell said.

Iowa’s Planned Parenthood and the American Civil Liberties Union groups have also spoken out against the bill.

“These extreme attempts to ban abortion fly in the face of both medical and legal standards, as well as common sense and public opinion among Iowans,” said Erin Davison-Rippey, Planned Parenthood of the Heartland’s director of public affairs

 in an online statement released in February, when the bill was first introduced .

“So-called ‘heartbeat protection’ bills are actually bans on safe, legal abortion, and they threaten to set reproductive rights back by decades.”

Elizabeth Nash, of the sexual and reproductive health policy group the Guttmacher Institute, told the BBC this was “the most restrictive abortion ban in the country”.

The US abortion debate: Both sides speak

 She and Iowa Democrats have suggested the bill is intentionally unconstitutional.

If Ms Reynolds signs the bill into law, it will likely be challenged in court for possibly violating Roe v Wade, the US Supreme Court ruling that legalised abortion in 1973.

The ruling states some women have a right to terminate pregnancies until a foetus is viable.

Isn’t that a problem for the bill’s supporters?

No, in fact some Republican lawmakers welcomed the challenge.

“I would love for the United States Supreme Court to look at this bill and have this as a vehicle to overturn Roe v. Wade,” Republican Senator Jake Chapman said.

A string of US states have enacted abortion bans or stringent restrictions over recent decades only to have them overturned by the courts, prompting some conservatives to take aim at the landmark ruling.

“We created an opportunity to take a run at Roe v Wade,” Republican state Senator Rick Bertrand acknowledged.

How US abortion debate got to this point

 Iowa is among a number of states, including Mississippi and Kentucky, that have triggered court challenges by imposing tight restrictions on abortion.

President Donald Trump supports an abortion ban and has indicated that this is a priority, and Republicans are seizing the opportunity that creates, say commentators.</s>Iowa lawmakers have given preliminary approval to prohibiting Planned Parenthood from receiving federal funding for sex education.

GOP-led legislative committees approved budget legislation Thursday that would add disqualifying language for federal grants aimed at sexual health education to Iowa youth.

The state administers the grants, and the proposed language says recipients of the money can’t provide abortions, maintain or operate a facility where abortions are performed, or regularly make referrals to entities linked to abortions.

Planned Parenthood of the Heartland, the local affiliate, says it’s been awarded these grants repeatedly.

The federal money isn’t used for abortions.

It comes one day after the Republican-controlled Legislature passed a bill that would ban most abortions around six weeks of pregnancy.</s>COLUMBIA, S.C. — The South Carolina Senate debated Thursday whether to ban nearly all abortions in the state, a surprise move suggested by a Democrat who has long fought abortion restrictions.

Sen. Brad Hutto told Republicans if the bill passed he was going to give them what they wanted — the most direct way to challenge the 1973 U.S. Supreme Court decision that overturned state bans on abortions. No other state would have such a broad abortion ban.

“I’ve heard all along that y’all want a challenge to Roe v. Wade. This is a straight up challenge,” the Orangeburg Democrat said.

But there may have been more local political considerations too. The ban was placed on a bill that originally made illegal just a rare procedure called dismemberment abortion. And senators on Thursday narrowly failed to force a vote on the new proposal.

Lawmakers had just three days left in a session set to end May 10 and hadn’t dealt with several pressing issues including bills dealing with a $9 billion debacle after two utilities abandoned 10 years of planning and construction of two nuclear reactors.

If the abortion bill passes the Senate, it would head to the more conservative House, but a leader of the chamber said he doesn’t think his colleagues will support the full ban — at least until the U.S. Supreme Court takes up another state’s case.

“Unless Roe v. Wade is overturned, the General Assembly must work within existing legal parameters to increase protections for the life of the unborn rather than knowingly pass unconstitutional legislation,” said House Majority Leader Gary Simrill of Rock Hill.

Several other states have further restricted abortions this year. Mississippi currently has the most restrictive law in the country banning abortions after 15 weeks, although that law was immediately challenged in court. Louisiana lawmakers are considering a similar proposal.

Iowa’s Legislature just passed a bill banning all abortions after a fetal heartbeat is detected around five weeks after conception. It is heading to the governor’s desk.

The three states would allow officials to revoke medical licenses for doctors who perform illegal abortions, and do not rule out criminal prosecution. But those states all provide immunity for a woman who has an abortion.

South Carolina’s measure provides no protection for mothers or doctors.

Democrats also suggested it could even ban the use of birth control pills or intrauterine devices.

The South Carolina proposal began as a bill outlawing a type of abortion in which a doctor pulls a fetus apart before removing it from the womb. That procedure was performed 22 times in 2016, out of in 5,736 abortions in South Carolina. Doctors say it is only done on fetuses who can’t live outside the womb, or if the mother’s life is in danger.

The leader of Republicans in the Senate welcomed the chance to challenge the 1973 abortion ruling.

“It’s a guaranteed court action,” Senate Majority leader Shane Massey of Edgefield said. “I think everybody really recognizes what we’re getting to is a judicial determination of the constitutionality of it.”

And if the bill ended up on his desk, South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster said he would sign it.

“Sometimes you have to fight for what you believe in,” said McMaster, who is seeking re-election this year and has four challengers in the Republican primary. “Any bill that reduces abortions in South Carolina, I am for, and I will sign — including that one.”</s>DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) – Republican lawmakers have given preliminary approval to prohibiting Planned Parenthood from receiving federal funding for sex education.

GOP-led legislative committees approved budget legislation Thursday that would add disqualifying language for federal grants aimed at sexual health education to Iowa youth.

The state administers the grants, and the proposed language says recipients of the money can’t provide abortions, maintain or operate a facility where abortions are performed, or regularly make referrals to entities linked to abortions.

Planned Parenthood of the Heartland, the local affiliate, says it’s been awarded these grants repeatedly. The federal money isn’t used for abortions.

A Planned Parenthood spokeswoman called the move a “targeted attack.” It comes one day after the Republican-controlled Legislature passed a bill that would ban most abortions around six weeks of pregnancy. The abortion ban will likely be challenged in court if signed into law by anti-abortion GOP Gov. Kim Reynolds.</s>Iowa 'Fetal Heartbeat' Bill To Ban Abortions After 6 Weeks Poised For Passage

Iowa's Republican-dominated Senate early Wednesday fast-tracked a bill that would make most abortions illegal once a fetal heartbeat can be detected.

The measure, which would effectively ban abortions after about six weeks of pregnancy, was passed earlier in the day by Iowa's GOP-controlled House. Republican Gov. Kim Reynolds has not said whether she would sign the bill.

If it becomes law, the measure would make Iowa one of the most restrictive states in the country when it comes to abortion. Critics argue that it would prohibit abortions until after many women even realize they are pregnant. Current law in Iowa allows most abortions up to 20 weeks.

Republican state Rep. Shannon Lundgren said earlier this week that she believes the bill will pass.

"We're in the majority for a reason and that includes advancing the pro-life cause," she was quoted in The Waterloo-Cedar Falls Courier as saying.

"Republicans who debated Senate File 359 late into the night Tuesday said they hope their law will face a legal challenge so it can advance to the U.S. Supreme Court. Their goal is to overturn the 1973 landmark case Roe v. Wade, which established that women have a constitutional right to an abortion. The Supreme Court has declined to hear similar cases in recent years. But as states continue to pass legislation restricting abortions and President Donald Trump appoints more conservative federal judges, such as Justice Neil Gorsuch, abortion opponents are increasingly optimistic."

Groups such as Planned Parenthood of the Heartland and the American Civil Liberties Union of Iowa, have come out against the bill.

Initially, the bill did not contain exceptions in cases of rape or incest, but amendments put forward by Republicans included them, according to the Register.</s>(DES MOINES, Iowa) — Iowa lawmakers have paved the way for the nation’s most restrictive abortion legislation in the country.

The Republican-majority Iowa Senate fast-tracked a vote early Wednesday morning on a so-called “heartbeat” bill that seeks to ban most abortions once a fetal heartbeat is detected. The GOP-controlled Iowa House approved the bill hours earlier.

The legislation effectively would ban most abortions around six weeks of pregnancy. Critics say that would ban the medical procedure before some women know they’re pregnant.

Republican Gov. Kim Reynolds hasn’t indicated whether she’ll sign the bill into law. If enacted, the legislation is expected to be challenged in court over whether it violates U.S. Supreme Court rulings, including the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion.

Iowa Republicans passed legislation last year that banned most abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy.
Iowa's House of Representatives approves a bill restricting abortions in the state. If approved by Republican Governor Kim Reynolds, abortions after six weeks of pregnancy will be banned.