What defines a heartbeat? Judge hears arguments in South Carolina abortion case

COLUMBIA, S.C. — South Carolina’s ban on abortions, about six weeks before many women know they are pregnant, was back in court Thursday, with Planned Parenthood and the state feuding over what could be two different ways to get a heartbeat to be defined in law.

Even the state Supreme Court justices who upheld the new law in August noted that there appeared to be two definitions of “fetal heartbeat,” ending the window in which someone could request an abortion. They wrote that the question would be “for another day.”

That day arrived Thursday, when Circuit Judge Daniel Coble considered Planned Parenthood’s request to block the new law until the courts in their lawsuit could rule on the definitions and the state’s request to dismiss the lawsuit. He said he will try to rule in a few weeks. Whatever Coble decides, his ruling will be appealed for months, if not years.

Planned Parenthood said in court filings that in the first five months of the new law, three-quarters of women seeking abortions were turned away because their pregnancies were too long, and that 86% of those three-quarters could have undergone the procedure if the law allowed abortions up to nine weeks.

The state claims that the fetal heart rate is when an ultrasound detects heart activity, usually about six weeks after fertilization. But the law also specifies when the major parts of the heart come together and “repeated rhythmic contraction” begins, which often lasts around nine weeks.

Attorneys for the state turned Planned Parenthood’s argument on its head, saying the organization has said more than 300 times that the law bans abortions after six weeks, during a successful challenge that led the General Assembly to change the law and direct until the second failed challenge. . They said the group only changed their minds after losing the second time.

Grayson Lambert, an attorney for South Carolina’s governor, said established law in the state has long said that when there are disagreements over the interpretation of the law, judges should give the most weight to lawmakers’ intentions. The only thing discussed during the General Assembly’s abortion debate, he said, was six weeks.

“The electrical impulses that make that familiar buzzing sound on the ultrasound — that’s what the General Assembly is talking about,” Lambert said.

But Planned Parenthood attorney Kyla Eastling said criminal penalties meant the organization had to interpret the new law as conservatively as possible to protect doctors from criminal penalties.

“Physicians are not the ones who make the law,” Easterling said. “They’re just trying to understand.”

South Carolina’s law is written slightly differently than other states with bans at the same time, and slight differences in punctuation mean the ban doesn’t take effect until the heart’s chambers and valves come together, Eastling argued.

“To put it simply, you can’t have a heartbeat until you have a heart,” Easterling said.

Since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022, ending a nationwide right to abortion, most Republican-controlled states have begun imposing new bans or restrictions, and most Democratic-dominated states have attempted to protect access to abortion.

Currently, fourteen states maintain bans on abortion at all stages of pregnancy, with limited exceptions. South Carolina and two others have bans that take effect from about six weeks of pregnancy. This week, Arizona passed a law that repealed a Civil War-era ban on nearly all abortions.

In the South Carolina courtroom Thursday was Taylor Shelton, the woman who filed the lawsuit with Planned Parenthood. She said her gynecologist was dismissive when she first approached the office about the options of terminating her unplanned pregnancy in September. Healthcare providers risked a prison sentence of up to two years for violating the ban.

Shelton’s body had bent her IUD, causing pain, and she was stunned to discover she was pregnant two days after missing her period, which she was regularly tracking.

Because doctors in South Carolina weren’t sure how to define a heartbeat, she ended up in North Carolina, where she had to drive for hours to two appointments to have an abortion.

“The lack of clarity in this law leaves people like me scrambling to navigate a complicated system that does not prioritize our well-being and autonomy,” Shelton said, reading a statement outside the court with her hands trembled slightly.

Shelton said she only had about 12 days left to meet the deadline under South Carolina law, even though she realized almost immediately that she might be pregnant. She also had the resources and time to seek help from the state.

“Today I stand before you angry – angry at a system that seeks to control our bodies and dictate our choices,” Shelton said. “But I also remain determined, fueled by the belief that no one should put up with what I went through. We deserve better. We deserve clear, unambiguous laws.”