Subcommittee gives favorable report to bill adding abortion drugs to Schedule IV after heated testimony

The Constitutional Law Subcommittee on [date not specified] voted to give House Bill H4760 a favorable report after a day of divided testimony.

Chairman Weston Newton introduced H4760 as a measure to add certain abortion‑inducing medications to Schedule IV of controlled substances and to create felony penalties for knowingly causing an abortion with those drugs. Representative Mitchell moved to call the question and the committee approved the bill’s favorable report by roll call, with Representatives Jordan, Mitchell and Newton voting yes and Representatives Bamberg and Wetmore voting no.

The hearing featured repeated clashes between supporters who said the bill would help enforce South Carolina law against out‑of‑state providers and opponents who warned of clinical harms. Former Representative Gary Smith, supporting the measure, told the panel that out‑of‑state telemedicine and mail distribution of abortion drugs have “put up barriers in their state to prevent you from going after citizens in their state” and said H4760 would give South Carolina “another arrow in your quiver” for enforcement.

Opponents included medical experts who described concrete clinical consequences. Dr. Patricia Seal, a board‑certified obstetrician‑gynecologist and chair of the South Carolina section of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, said the medications at issue are used routinely for miscarriage management, second‑trimester induction and to prepare the cervix for gynecologic procedures and that reclassifying them as Schedule IV would impede timely care. "This proposed legislation will not only impede access to these critical medications by changing their DEA schedule, but it will have a chilling effect on their use, which will negatively impact the health of women in South Carolina," she testified.

Senator Gustafson, speaking against the bill, argued that banning or criminalizing access to the drugs would force women experiencing late miscarriage into surgery and could drive OB‑GYNs out of state. "Banning a safe, reliable drug that has been FDA‑approved for decades ... is wrong," she said, warning of harm to patients and providers.

Advocacy groups were split. Tony Bean, representing the South Carolina Baptist Convention, and Holly Gatlin of South Carolina Citizens for Life urged passage, citing concerns about online and mail‑order distribution of abortion drugs and urging enforcement of state protections. By contrast, Amalia Luxardo, CEO of the Women’s Rights and Empowerment Network (WREN), and Vicky Ringer of Planned Parenthood South Atlantic urged rejection of the bill, saying medication abortion is FDA‑approved, widely used in miscarriage care and that similar laws in other states produced dangerous delays.

The committee also heard testimony from residents and physicians about the bill’s wider effects on maternal health and the health‑care workforce. Dr. Rebecca Haskell, an OBGYN resident and officer of the state ACOG section, warned the restrictions would worsen physician shortages and reduce training opportunities.

The committee’s roll call on the bill recorded the following: Representative Jordan — Aye; Representative Bamberg — No; Representative Mitchell — Aye; Representative Newton — Aye; Representative Wetmore — No. The clerk announced that the bill "receives a favorable report with 3 in favor and 2 against." The favorable report sends the measure out of subcommittee, but future floor or committee action was not part of this meeting.

What happens next: The favorable report moves H4760 to the next stage in the legislative process; supporters said it will strengthen enforcement options against out‑of‑state providers, while opponents said the bill will require further clarification to prevent unintended impacts on standard obstetric care.