Support WBUR
Boston's Morning Newsletter
Why are Mass. lawmakers moving on another abortion shield law?
Editor's Note: This is an excerpt from WBUR's daily morning newsletter, WBUR Today. If you like what you read and want it in your inbox, sign up here.
We have dueling public dance parties tonight. Boston's 11th annual Donna Summer Disco Party rolls from 5 p.m. to 9 pm. at City Hall Plaza, while Cambridge's illuminated dance block party floods the street in front of its own City Hall from 6 p.m. to 11 p.m. for the 25th year. (Drivers take note: There'll be street closures today around Central Square.) The two annual events are both free to attend.
But first, the news:
Shields up: In the summer of 2022, after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, Massachusetts lawmakers moved quickly to pass a shield law to protect people in the state who get abortions or transgender medical care — and those who provide it. Fast forward three years, and Democrats in the state Senate voted yesterday to pass a new shield bill, as part of their plan to fend off changes by the Trump administration. "Rights for women's reproductive rights and gender-affirming care are just being stripped away," state Sen. Cindy Friedman, who wrote the bill, told WBUR's Walter Wuthmann at the State House. "We saw it in 2022, and now we are seeing it again in 2025." So, how is this new bill different? Here are the highlights:
- Out-of-state investigations: The bill expands prohibitions on helping or sharing medical information with out-of-state investigations into legal reproductive and transgender care in Massachusetts. While the 2022 law applied the ban to local police, the Senate's bill expands it to all state agencies. The bill would also restrict businesses that manage medical records from sharing information about reproductive or transgender care with any out-of-state entities.
- Protecting prescribers: While the 2022 law included language to protect local doctors from out-of-state lawsuits or criminal charges over locally legal care, the Senate's bill seeks to make it difficult for them to be individually identified in the first place. To do that, it would allow prescriptions for abortion pills or gender-affirming medication like puberty blockers to be issued with the name of a health care practice, rather than an individual practitioner.
- Emergency abortions: The bill would also require hospitals to provide emergency abortions when medically necessary, after the Trump administration's recent decision to stop enforcing a similar federal requirement. That decision has mostly raised concern among abortion rights advocates about women being denied care in states with anti-abortion laws. But even in Massachusetts, Friedman says there's been some issues. "This is just saying, 'Look, if you present in an emergency room and you are truly in an emergency, that emergency room has to do everything they can to stabilize you,' " she said.
- What's next: The bill now goes to the House, which has also generally been supportive of the cause. " They've never shown anything but a commitment to women's health and transgender care," Friedman told Walter.
In related news: Massachusetts leaders say yesterday's Supreme Court Planned Parenthood ruling shouldn't impact local health centers. The court ruled that states can block Planned Parenthood from receiving Medicaid money for non-abortion services. While there's already a federal law against using Medicaid funds on abortion services, South Carolina's Republican governor argued that the reimbursements for cancer screenings and other unrelated care basically subsidized the abortion provider.
- What they're saying: "This will not happen in Massachusetts," Gov. Maura Healey tweeted. "We’ll protect your right to get the care you need from the providers you trust." Dominique Lee, the head of Planned Parenthood's local branch, said the decision undermines patient choice, while Attorney General Andrea Campbell said it allows states to "discriminate" against certain health care providers.
- Heads up: The Supreme Court is expected to rule on this term's six remaining cases, including birthright citizenship, today at 10 a.m.
In Cambridge: While administrators at Harvard make contingency plans for students, some faculty and staff are already feeling the consequences of the university's battle with the Trump administration. WBUR's Emily Piper-Vallillo reports that both the Harvard Kennedy School of Government and the Chan School of Public Health are laying off an unspecified number of employees due to the financial uncertainty.
- In an email to employees, Harvard Kennedy School Dean Jeremy Weinstein cited “massive” federal funding cuts to research, a possible increase to the endowment tax and threats to international student enrollment as the main reason for the layoffs.
P.S. — Why is Bank of America suing hundreds of Massachusetts homeowners? Take our Boston News Quiz and test your knowledge of this week's stories.
