Thomas Daschle: “The alternative does not prohibit a State that already has a postviability ban from retaining its State law. Especially…”

“The alternative does not prohibit a State that already has a postviability ban from retaining its State law. Especially in a State such as Maryland, where the people decided that the health definition you outlined was the most appropriate way to deal with women's health, States should be allowed to either retain their own laws, or enact this alternative. We believe we have provided an appropriately clear and tight definition. States with even more restrictive laws may disagree, and we do not preempt their laws, either. The alternative would not displace any comprehensive State postviability abortion bans, in whole or in part, currently in effect. The bipartisan alternative would not displace any procedure-specific restrictions or any other abortion-related State statutes. However, if a State has no comprehensive postviability ban in effect--either because none has been enacted or because a ban has been repealed or invalidated by the courts--the bipartisan alternative would take effect in that State. The effect of the bipartisan alternative is to ensure that there is a postviability abortion ban in effect in every State.”