Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Abortion Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate hears bill to create private-funded account to defend future abortion restrictions
Summary
House Bill 114 would let private individuals or entities deposit money into a state-held account to fund legal defense of laws passed after Jan. 1, 2009, that challenge the constitutional right to abortion or restrict it; sponsor said the account avoids using general funds for litigation.
House Bill 114, introduced in the Senate by Senator Madsen, would create an account to receive private deposits to defend future legislation that limits abortion or challenges the constitutional right to an abortion. Senator Madsen described the bill as a response to fiscal and legal concerns should such legislation be enacted.
Explaining the bill, Senator Madsen said the account would be “held by the state until it amasses an amount sufficient to defend the state” in litigation over laws passed between Jan. 1, 2009 and July 1, 2014, and noted an amended version extends the covered laws to those passed on or after Jan. 1, 2009 (SEG 651–663). She said: “this account is in place so that we can cover those costs without having to dip into the general funds of the state.” (SEG 683–684).
Senators questioned whether the legislature would appropriate money to the account and whether the Attorney General's existing duty to defend state law would render a separate appropriation unnecessary. The sponsor noted that related language in an amendment had been stricken and that the measure places no obligation on those with contrary views to contribute (SEG 699–718; SEG 728–736).
After discussion and a motion to read the bill for a third time, the record shows House Bill 114 later recorded passage by the Senate and placement on the third-reading calendar (SEG 758–760). Sponsors said they would pursue further discussion of particulars before final actions.
The bill's text and amendments include dates and scope language that the Senate debated in committee and on the floor; the record indicates members asked for clarity on appropriation lines and how the account would interact with the Attorney General's duties.
