Lindsey Graham to Sponsor 20-Week Abortion Ban in Senate


Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) will sponsor a Senate bill to ban abortions after 20 weeks in all 50 states, the Washington Times reported Thursday night.

Graham is expected to introduce the bill, which is similar to the House’s HR 1797, next week. HR 1797, the “Pain-Capable Infant Protection Act,” was based on model legislation drawn up by the National Right to Life Committee. It passed the House in June, but has no chance of passing the Senate.

HR 1797 contained no exceptions for protecting the woman’s health or for fetal anomalies, and its rape and incest exceptions put the burden on women to report their assault to the authorities, as RH Reality Check reported in June.

The idea that fetuses can feel pain at 20 weeks has been medically disproven; one researcher compared it to trying to make a land-line phone call with no telephone poles, since nerves don’t reach the brain until the 26th week of pregnancy.

Any legislation banning abortion at 20 weeks would be a direct challenge to Roe v. Wade, which allows abortion up until viability, at roughly 24 weeks.

Anti-choice groups are cheering the bill, which also likely has no chance of passing the majority-Democrat Senate, and would be vetoed by President Obama if it ever came to his desk.

The Washington Times reported that even some of Graham’s Republican colleagues have reservations about the bill, citing concerns about whether using the commerce clause to regulate abortion in this way is constitutional.

Graham may be sponsoring this legislation to endear himself to the Tea Party in South Carolina, which views Graham unfavorably and may try to mount a primary challenge against him. While Graham is still ahead in the polls, his advisers fear his chances could be hurt by a long, drawn-out runoff.

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) announced plans to sponsor similar legislation this summer, but he has not yet done so. Like Graham, Rubio faces opposition from the right-wing Republican base over issues like immigration, and may try to placate the Tea Party by advocating for restrictions on reproductive health.

Like this story? Your $10 tax-deductible contribution helps support our research, reporting, and analysis.

To schedule an interview with Emily Crockett please contact Communications Director Rachel Perrone at rachel@rhrealitycheck.org.

  • Joe.02

    EVEN IF there was some chance fetuses felt pain, why couldn’t the bill merely require anesthesia to be provided? Why is there a need for a ban?

    • osiote

      In a late term abortion the woman receives anesthesia which also anesthetizes the fetus so…yeah.

  • OGalaxy

    Oh, so now Republicans are NOT for state rights and smaller government.

    • Joe.02

      They are not libertarians — they just pretend to be at times.

  • stootch

    purely guilt-inspired baloney. he must’ve mistakenly aborted, flushed, and wiped away a jellybaby holding great sentimental value at some point in his
    closeted youth. clean up your act, senator. it’s time to come out,
    you woman-loathing creep.

  • osiote

    They want to create obstacles at both ends so that eventually women cannot get an abortion at any point along the continuum.

    This is one reason why they are working hard to make it nearly impossible to attain telemed and medicinal abortions.

  • Corey

    I’m gay, so I just say it everytime I see a pic of LimpWrist Graham….closet cases make the worse kind of people!

    • Arekushieru

      Although, I don’t begrudge anyone who does stay in the closet. Albeit, I’m not homosexual, but asexual.