The bill, which would alter the so-called judicial bypass process ( read more about that here ), underwent some notable changes in the Senate earlier this week before heading back to the House for a final vote. One amendment axed what opponents had called an "abortion ID" provision, which would have required any woman seeking an abortion to present a valid government ID to a physician to prove she’s not a minor. Charles Perry, the bill's Senate sponsor, now allows that, if a woman is not able to present some form of acceptable ID showing her age, the doctor can still perform an abortion and report it to the Department of Health and Human Services later. Among other major changes in the bill is what happens if a judge fails to rule on a minor's bypass application. Kirk Watson, D-Austin, pointed out earlier this week when the bill was heard on the Senate floor, could be just as problematic as denying applications when judges let the clock run out. “In essence, the judge can bypass the judicial bypass by simply not ruling,” Watson said. Some Democrats wondered whether changes to the bill – like extending timeline for judges to rule from two to five days, making a bypass a lengthy process if the case has to be appealed – could landed Texas on the wrong side of the U. S. Supreme... The SCOTUS ruling that instructed states on how to develop bypass laws requires that states set up a.
houston texans desk clockREAD MORE