1. Instruments patterned after the AUL's model legislation and policy guide tend to see a resurgence at the beginning of each new legislative assembly. Thus, if an instrument dies in committee or is withdrawn in a particular legislative assembly, it is likely to be reintroduced into the House and Senate or as a ballot initiative. For instance,Oklahoma SB 1433, which would redefine “personhood” as beginning at the moment of conception, failed in the legislature on April 19, 2012 but was reintroduced as a ballot initiative later that month (Bassett2012b). On April 30, 2012, that ballot initiative was vetoed by the Oklahoma Supreme Court, which ruled it “clearly unconstitutional” because it would deny a woman's legal right to abortion (ibid.).
2. For example, the following bills are, as of March 2013, sitting in committee, where they may be held up indefinitely:Michigan HB 4187;Illinois HB 2683; andNew York A06566. These bills are identical to bills originally introduced in these states in 2012, when they were also held up in committee.
3. At the state level, the titles of the instruments vary, from the Right to Know and See Act (Alabama SB 12), the Women's Right to Know Act (Pennsylvania HB 1077), and the Woman's Right to Know Act (Georgia SB 954). In the interest of clarity, I will refer to the AUL's model legislation as theWoman's Ultrasound Right to Know Actand I will refer to state-level iterations generally as “Right to Know” Acts.
4. WhileVirginia HB 462originally mandated that a transvaginal ultrasound should be performed if an abdominal ultrasound cannot generate an accurate image of the fetus, this provision was amended after vehement, vocal opposition that called it “state-sanctioned rape” and “forced vaginal penetration” (Carmon2012). In its current form,HB 462allows women to decline to undergo a transvaginal ultrasound; however, they cannot opt out of an abdominal ultrasound. At that time, the proliferation of discourse aroundHB 462overshadowed amendments to Texas's ultrasound bill, which mandates transvaginal ultrasound in cases where abdominal ultrasound cannot produce an accurate image of the fetus.
5. According to OklahomaSB 1274(2012), following AUL's model legislation, “‘medical emergency’ means a condition that, in reasonable medical judgment, so complicates the medical condition of the pregnant woman that it necessitates the immediate abortion of her pregnancy to avert her death or for which the delay will create serious risk of substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function, not including psychological or emotional conditions” (3). It is worth noting thatOklahoma SB 1274does not contain an exception for self-induced “medical emergency,” writing that “no condition shall be deemed a medical emergency if based on a claim or diagnosis that the woman will engage in conduct which she intends to result in her death or in substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function” (ibid.).