Abortion restriction based on environmental impacts fails in Montana
Bill included felony charges, penalties up to $10,000 for providers, $20,000 for manufacturers, prison time
By Keila Szpaller for the Daily Montanan
A bill to curtail abortion based on environmental effects of medication failed on a tied vote last week after legislators on both sides of the issue presented graphic and emotional testimony.
Sponsor Senator Theresa Manzella, R-Hamilton, said medicine used in chemical abortions pollutes the water supply, and in doing so, infringes on the constitutional rights of Montanans to a clean and healthful environment.
A researcher who examines pharmaceuticals in the environment told the Daily Montanan environmental scientists state there is no evidence that mifepristone pollution harms people, animals or ecosystems.
Senate Bill 479, part of a national trend to attempt to restrict abortion based on environmental effects, also sought to restrict chemical abortions based on interstate commerce.
Seven Republicans joined all Democrats to oppose the bill last Thursday.
The bill would have required health care providers to give patients a “catch kit” and a “medical waste bag,” the latter with the container or warning labels in fluorescent orange or orange-red. The medical waste bag would be labeled “BIOHAZARD.”
Providers who violated the law would have been subject to a felony and fine of up to $10,000 and three years in prison. The bill made exceptions for abortions necessary to preserve the life of a mother and for treatments of “verified” ectopic pregnancies.
The bill also aimed to regulate manufacturers of abortion drugs and would have subjected them to fines of up to $20,000.
It required manufacturers to properly dispose of the drugs and mitigate environmental effects of “endocrine-disrupting chemical byproducts” in public waste systems “due to the disposal of tainted human remains entering the wastewater system as a result of at-home abortions.”
Democrats stood up to harshly criticize the legislation as hypocritical and having potentially fatal effects.
Republicans, however, said drugs in the water supply are a problem for humans and the environment, and Manzella invoked the Montana Supreme Court’s order in the historic youth climate trial, Held vs. State of Montana.
In that case, she said, the youth plaintiffs argued the state’s actions could cause them future harm, and as such, a prohibition on the Montana Environmental Policy Act was declared unconstitutional.
In November 2024, voters approved Constitutional Initiative 128, which made abortion a constitutional right in Montana.
“These constitutional rights are both fundamental, so they must be balanced,” Manzella said. “We don’t place abortion over all other rights.”
In the Held order in 2024, the Montana Supreme Court said a law that limited analysis of greenhouse gas emissions violated the right to a clean and healthful environment. The justices said plaintiffs showed “without dispute” that climate change is already harming the environment.
In an email to the Daily Montanan, Jack Vanden Heuvel, a researcher and professor of molecular toxicology with Pennsylvania State University, said experts in his field argue the focus on mifepristone’s environmental impact is being used as a political tool rather than a genuine environmental concern.
“While trace amounts may be flushed into wastewater, the drug tends to bind to solid waste and is effectively removed by most wastewater treatment plants,” said Vanden Heuvel, who examines pharmaceuticals in the environment and knows the health effects of contaminants found in water. “Concerns about pharmaceuticals in the environment are more significant for antibiotics and other drugs that contribute to antimicrobial resistance.
“Additionally, research indicates that hormonal birth control medications detected in waterways primarily originate from untreated agricultural runoff rather than human excretion.”
On the Senate floor, Senator Laura Smith, D-Helena, said the bill puts women’s lives in danger.
Smith said when she was pregnant, she lived next door to a hospital in Missoula for two months because the doctors were concerned she would not survive the birth.
“The bill bans — it criminalizes — two medications, one of which I personally know about, because it prevented my daughter from not having a mother,” Smith said. “It prevents postpartum hemorrhaging.”
Smith said the drugs are “pro-life” — “they save women’s lives.”
Democrats also said the goal of the legislation was not a clean environment at all but to restrict abortion — and Senator Cora Neumann, D-Bozeman, said she appreciated the sponsor acknowledging that fact to her.
Neumann said 21 Republicans represent districts that “overwhelmingly” voted for CI-128 to protect privacy and protect the right to abortion.
Neumann, who has a background in public health, said the bill targets mifepristone and misoprostol, “critical tools in obstetric care,” also used for miscarriage management, labor induction and postpartum hemorrhage.
She said when women or girls have an abortion, the bill would have them go to the doctor’s office, obtain “a bright red or orange catch kit,” and then collect the fetal remains.
“You need to imagine a woman or a girl having to squat over a catch kit,” Neumann said. “This is gruesome. This is cruel.
“Is this how we treat the women that we hope will reproduce and have your babies? It’s unreal.”
Manzella retorted in her close.
“If it’s gruesome to see what’s expelled, maybe it should be gruesome to see what’s expelled,” Manzella said. “Your right to an abortion does not trump my right to a clean and healthful environment.”
Senator Jonathan Windy Boy, D-Box Elder, said he is a pro-life Democrat, and he might be called a hypocrite, but he’s starting to oppose pro-life bills.
He said that’s because the steep fines, prison time and felony charges bother him and reveal a purpose that’s not about water quality.
“We’ve become more of a policing state anymore, increasing penalties and all of that,” Windy Boy said.
Other legislators spoke in favor of the bill as a step toward environmental protection.
Senator Barry Usher, R-Billings, said he would encourage other legislators to bring bills to address some of the other toxic drugs polluting the environment.
He said “Big Pharma” is ultimately responsible, and science can find better solutions, but the industry will need to be forced into action.
“Although it may save lives in some situations, the toxicity in our water tables is not good for anybody,” Usher said. “So Big Pharma can find good solutions if we force them to, but it’s about the money. It’s always about the money.”
Senator Jeremy Trebas, R-Great Falls, said he didn’t want drugs going into his body that he hadn’t chosen himself, at least as much as possible.
“Overall, we should better regulate all drugs going into our water supply,” Trebas said.
Senator Ellie Boldman, D-Missoula, compared the abortion pill with another drug she said goes into the water supply.
“This pill that we have access to is 10 times safer than Viagra, which is also a pill — a pill men can take. That pill also goes into our public water supply. That bill is affecting our environment. It is a hormone with residual effects.
“So I pledge to my colleagues in this body that when you amend this bill to include Viagra, I will vote for this bill, and you can squat your residual effects into a bag.”
But Boldman said she feared both parties would be wrong because the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously rejected another state’s effort to curtail women’s access to the pill in June 2024.
The bill failed to pass second reading 25-25, and it failed a motion to reconsider 23-27.
Simply put, Manzella is a moron. Or she thinks the people of Montana are morons. What a stupid bill.