Dems Revolt After Massasschusetts Governor Signs ‘Extreme’ Abortion Bill
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.
BREAKING: Dolly Parton’s Cause Of Death Revealed: ‘Brief Battle’
Dolly Parton’s death came after a brief battle with cancer, her representatives revealed Tuesday.
The country music legend died Aug. 25 at Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center in Nashville. She was 80.
Parton had been admitted to the cancer center Friday, four days before her death. Her representatives confirmed the cancer diagnosis in a statement to PEOPLE but did not disclose what type she had.
“Our beloved Dolly Parton spent her life and career bringing joy, laughter, hope and integrity into everything she touched. Her unmatched generosity reached the lives of countless people whom she would never meet, yet she was always there to offer a helping hand,” the statement read.
“Whether it be the hundreds of millions of books donated through her invaluable Imagination Library or funding research that helped create a lifesaving vaccine used around the world, Dolly’s unconditional love for all people was the guiding force for her lasting impact. After bravely facing a brief battle with cancer, Dolly departed her Earthly life today at the Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center surrounded by loved ones,” the statement concluded.
The “Jolene” singer had also been dealing with kidney and autoimmune issues before her death, PEOPLE previously reported.
Just days earlier, Dolly Parton opened up about her declining health and acknowledged that she had put off addressing some medical issues while caring for her husband, Carl.
“As I’ve shared in video messages throughout the past year, I am dealing with some health issues that I just didn’t pay attention to when I was watching over [my husband] Carl. You know, this isn’t the first time I’ve had to manage something like this. Back in the early ’80s, I was down for several months with female issues, and I was struggling with my weight at the time too, so it’s not like I haven’t been through hard times with my health,” Parton told PEOPLE.
Her nephew, Bryan Seaver, announced her death in an Instagram video Tuesday on behalf of the Parton and Owens family.
“My name is Bryan Seaver, son of Cassie Parton, and I’m representing the Parton and Owens family today announcing the passing of my aunt, Dolly Rebecca Parton Dean, Sister, Sis and Granny to one generation and Gigi to the next,” he says in the video.
Seaver, who served as Parton’s head of security for more than two decades, said she had asked him years earlier to deliver the announcement.
“This video announcement is something Dolly asked of me years ago, before I fully absorbed it as a future reality,” he continued. “As her head of security for more than two decades, a role my father Larry held before me, I have imagined the heaviness of this moment but haven’t truly felt it until now.”
Seaver said the moment brought immense pride and heartbreak, but he took comfort in his faith that Parton had been reunited with Carl and other loved ones.
Seaver added: “It is an honor, an honor that is mixed with absolute pride and great sadness. But sadness lies with us, not with Dolly. Dolly has lived in the light and is in the arms of Jesus, surely met by Carl, her parents and countless othe
Shocking 'truth' behind Prince Harry's decision to quit major role
Prince Harry should have "resigned in disgrace" from the board of a controversial African wildlife charity, a commentator says. James Walker makes the bombshell remark in Wednesday's episode of this publication's podcast, Daily Expresso.
He and the show's host, JJ Anisiobi, delve into the Duke of Sussex's dramatic decision to step down from African Parks. James, commenting on the controversy, said: "When you hear about this stuff and how long it's been going on for, you should be resigning in disgrace. [Harry] should be saying: 'I'm not touching that with a barge pole. That is a failed entity. We're going nowhere near it'.
"But no. He's still saying he's going to 'support their mission'. And again this Caroline Pearce, executive director of Survival International, goes on to say: 'His departure doesn't undo that record'.
"She alleged that African Parks was aware of the abuses for years, but it was only after Survival complained to Harry that the charity finally commissioned an investigation."
James added: "Well, she's got a point."
It emerged on Monday (August 24) that Harry was no longer a board member of the wildlife charity.
The conservation organisation has admitted that human rights abuses were committed by its rangers against members of the semi-nomadic Baka group in Congo-Brazzaville.
African Parks has said since that it has improved its safeguarding processes both in the Odzala-Kokoua National Park and institutionally.
Its admission followed an independent human rights investigation into allegations guards managed and paid by the charity had beaten, raped and tortured indigenous people in Odzala-Kokoua National Park.
Harry was president of the charity for six years before he became a member of its board of directors in 2023.
A spokesman for the Duke said he remains an active and avid supporter of African Parks. He added: "The Duke is proud of his 10 years with African Parks and fully supports the ongoing strengthening of its board.
"His commitment to conservation in Africa continues and he remains a supporter of African Parks’ mission."
Human rights organisation, Survival International, said it had been calling on Harry to step down from African Parks for years.
The group's director, Caroline Pearce, said in a statement: "It’s outrageous that for 10 years Prince Harry has served African Parks while the organisation has been responsible for abuse and violence against Indigenous people.
"His departure doesn't undo that record — African Parks itself must now be held accountable, and must abandon this model of fortress conservation for good."
Survival International said indigenous peoples know how best to manage their land and the idea outsiders know better is racist and colonial.
