April 20, 2023 - Introduced by Representatives Subeck, Emerson, C. Anderson, J. Anderson, Andraca, Baldeh, Bare, Billings, Cabrera, Clancy, Conley, Considine, Doyle, Drake, Goyke, Haywood, Hong, Jacobson, Joers, Madison, McGuire, Moore Omokunde, Myers, Neubauer, Ohnstad, Ortiz-Velez, Palmeri, Ratcliff, Riemer, Shankland, Shelton, Sinicki, Snodgrass, Stubbs and Vining, cosponsored by Senators Roys, Agard, Carpenter, Hesselbein, L. Johnson, Larson, Pfaff, Smith, Spreitzer, Taylor and Wirch. Referred to Committee on Health, Aging and Long-Term Care.
AB218,,22An Act to repeal 940.04; and to amend 939.75 (2) (b) 1. and 968.26 (1b) (a) 2. a. of the statutes; relating to: eliminating certain abortion prohibitions. AB218,,33Analysis by the Legislative Reference Bureau This bill repeals a statute that provides that any person, other than the mother, who intentionally destroys the life of an unborn child is guilty of a Class H felony. “Unborn child” is defined in the statute as a human being from the time of conception until born alive. The statute also provides that any person, other than the mother, who intentionally destroys the life of an unborn quick child or causes the mother’s death by an act done with intent to destroy the life of an unborn child is guilty of a Class E felony. None of these penalties apply to a therapeutic abortion that is performed by a physician; is necessary, or advised by two other physicians as necessary, to save the life of the mother; and, unless an emergency prevents, is performed in a licensed maternity hospital.
This statute was previously held to be unenforceable. It was cited in Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973), as similar to a Texas statute that was held to violate the due process clause of the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The unenforceability of the statute following the Roe v. Wade decision was noted in a subsequent decision by a federal district court, Larkin v. McCann, 368 F. Supp. 1352 (E.D. Wis. 1974). In June 2022, the United States Supreme Court overturned the Roe v. Wade decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Org., 142 S. Ct. 2228 (2022). Litigation concerning the status of the statute is currently pending in state court. Kaul v. Urmanski, No. 22-CV-1594 (Wis. Dane Cty. Cir. Ct. 2022).
AB218,,44The people of the state of Wisconsin, represented in senate and assembly, do enact as follows: AB218,15Section 1. 939.75 (2) (b) 1. of the statutes is amended to read: AB218,,66939.75 (2) (b) 1. An act committed during an induced abortion. This subdivision does not limit the applicability of ss. 940.04, 940.13, 940.15 and 940.16 to an induced abortion. AB218,27Section 2. 940.04 of the statutes is repealed. AB218,38Section 3. 968.26 (1b) (a) 2. a. of the statutes is amended to read: AB218,,99968.26 (1b) (a) 2. a. Section 940.04, 940.11, 940.19 (2), (4), (5), or (6), 940.195 (2), (4), (5), or (6), 940.198 (2) (b) or (c) or (3), 940.20, 940.201, 940.203, 940.204, 940.205, 940.207, 940.208, 940.22 (2), 940.225 (3), 940.29, 940.302 (2) (c), 940.32, 941.32, 941.38 (2), 942.09 (2), 943.10, 943.205, 943.32 (1), 946.43, 946.44, 946.47, 946.48, 948.02 (3), 948.03 (2) (b) or (c), (3), or (4), 948.04, 948.055, 948.095, 948.10 (1) (a), 948.11, 948.13 (2) (a), 948.14, 948.20, 948.23 (1), (2), or (3) (c) 2. or 3., or 948.30 (1).
