The House's revisions of  SB 2391 are still on the Senate agenda for concurrence/nonconcurrence.  Should Senator Nunnelee (Chairman of the Public Health and Welfare Committee) decide to concur with the House's changes, SB 2391 will go to a floor vote in the Senate.  If it passes there, it goes to the governor's office for signing into law.  If Nunnelee doesn't concur, he has the option of inviting the House Public Health and Welfare Committee to conference, where they can attempt to write a bill that pleases both the House and Senate.

What's At Stake

Tom Head, Public Outreach coordinator and secretary of Jackson Area NOW has written a fantastic review of what SB 2391 entails:

"The Holland bill before consideration, SB 2391, would do three things:

1. Reaffirm the 1949 code criminalizing abortion, but only in the event that Roe v. Wade is overturned.  Please note that, unlike the Nunnelee version of the bill passed by the Senate, this legislation does not directly challenge Roe v. Wade.  It is a "trigger ban" that would come into effect if and only if the U.S. Supreme Court rules that women do not have the right to an abortion, which would be a catastrophic national event.  The original Nunnelee proposal, SB 2795 (which is now dead), would have resulted in an immediate injunction and protracted court case.
2. Require the Jackson Women's Health Organization to provide documentation that they allow women to see sonograms before having abortions.  I have been told that JWHO already conducts sonograms to determine how far along the pregnancy is, and already offers to let patients see the sonograms, but requiring this additional piece of paperwork is just one more way for the Health Department to harass the clinic.  Please note, though, that unlike the original version of the sonogram bill--SB 2801 (which is now dead)--the Holland bill does not require JWHO to unnecessarily pay for expensive upgrades to its sonogram equipment.
3. Establish that minors seeking judicial waivers so that they do not need parental consent to have an abortion must show "clear and compelling evidence" that they are either mature enough to make the decision, or that the abortion would be in their best interests.  Please note, though, that unlike the original version of SB 2391--which was later revised to become the combined bill--the Holland bill still allows minors to get automatic permission if a judge fails to rule within 72 hours.  The original version of SB 2391 passed by the Senate would have issued an automatic denial after 72 hours instead, which would have constituted a de facto ban on judicial waivers in most of the state. "
   

What's Next

While this version of the proposed legislation is much milder than the Senate's original language, it's imnportant to remember that this is the sort of quiet gnawing at the laws guaranteeing access to safe, legal abortion in Mississippi that has left us with a solitary, constantly harangued clinic.  Each consecutive year, legislators are spurred into writing bills that are more restrictive by their constituents’ implied compliance with even mild restrictions or theoretical bans.  It's also important to remember the anti-abortion rights movement is tenacious and well-networked. There might not be throngs of them flooding the capitol like last year, but it's a fair bet they're calling their representatives often.  It's simply a matter of our side maintaining constant pressure.

If you haven't sent email, NARAL Pro-Choice America has an excellent mail wizard set up for exactly this purpose, but it is far more effective to call or visit your Senate representative, as well as Senator Nunnelee.  They need to hear that voters in their district don't support SB 2391, that illegal abortion is a dark note in our nation's past, and that we could drastically reduce the number of abortions in Mississippi if they'd pursue realistic pregnancy prevention and sex education as passionately as they pursue restricting abortion.

Thanks again for your continued action.