Republican lawmakers in Montana wield a supermajority that gives them the power to ask voters to approve a constitutional amendment that would break the link between abortion rights and the right to privacy in the state\u2019s constitution.<\/p>\n

But so far, they haven\u2019t sought to ask voters to make the change, a rewrite that would allow lawmakers to ban or further restrict abortion after the U.S. Supreme Court gave that power back to the states last year.<\/p>\n

While 14 states have near-total bans on abortion since Roe v. Wade<\/em> was overturned last year, Montana is one example of how, in some Republican-controlled states, the abortion policy battle will likely play out for a while.<\/p>\n

\u201cThis takes time,\u201d said Montana House Speaker Matt Regier<\/a>, a Republican. \u201cIt took years to overturn the wrong decision of Roe v. Wade<\/em>.\u201d<\/p>\n

Montana is one of 11 states<\/a> \u2014 most recently joined by South Carolina \u2014 where courts have ruled that abortion access is a constitutional right, and legal battles to dismiss or entrench those rights are picking up. In Florida, reproductive health providers are challenging a 15-week total ban<\/a> on abortion in the state Supreme Court, citing its long-standing interpretation that the state\u2019s right to privacy extends to abortion. Legislation is pending <\/a>over what standards Iowa will adopt after the state Supreme Court reversed its 2018 decision<\/a> that due process and equal protections secured abortion access.<\/p>\n

Meanwhile, in January, Minnesota \u2014 which already had a court ruling that abortion is a constitutional right \u2014 built that protection into state law<\/a> and expanded the right to reproductive health care. The same month, the South Carolina Supreme Court<\/a> struck down a ban on abortions after six weeks, joining states that defined abortion as a right. There, abortion opponents and advocates alike expect more attempts by the Republican-controlled legislature to whittle away access.<\/p>\n

In Montana, Republican Gov. Greg Gianforte\u2019s administration wants to reverse<\/a> a 1999 state Supreme Court ruling<\/a> that said the state\u2019s constitutional right to privacy extends to abortions. Republicans could bypass the courts and go straight to the state\u2019s voters to make that change without the support of Democratic legislators. That\u2019s after Republican lawmakers clinched a supermajority \u2014 two-thirds of the legislative seats, allowing the GOP to overturn vetoes and forward constitutional amendments to the ballot.<\/p>\n

Republican lawmakers have introduced at least four constitutional amendment bills<\/a> so far in the legislative session that began in January, but none has dealt with abortion. That may be due to the uncertainty over how Montanans and even Republican lawmakers would react to such a proposal after voters in other states sided with abortion rights advocates on ballot issues in last year\u2019s elections.<\/p>\n

Kansas and Kentucky voters rejected constitutional amendments that would have declared there is no right to an abortion. Michigan, Vermont, and California voters codified abortion rights in their constitutions. And Montana voters rejected a \u201cborn-alive\u201d initiative<\/a> that would have created criminal penalties for health workers who do not attempt to save the life of a baby, embryo, or fetus after a botched abortion or other birth.<\/p>\n

Jessi Bennion<\/a>, a political scientist who teaches at Montana State University and Carroll College, said Republicans, unsure of where voters stand, are likely hesitant to strike at the state constitution.<\/p>\n

\u201cWhat Republicans are doing right now is they are testing the waters,\u201d Bennion said. \u201cThe midterms scared a lot of Republicans.\u201d<\/p>\n

There are also signs of division within the party\u2019s ranks. The state Senate recently debated a bill that would add to state law a declaration that the right to privacy<\/a> does not extend to abortion. The bill passed the Senate 28-21, and is now being considered in the House, but six of the 34 Senate Republicans voted against it.<\/p>\n

Republicans hold 102 of Montana\u2019s 150 state legislative seats, and, although they can pass laws with a simple majority, they need a 100-member supermajority to put a proposed constitutional amendment on the ballot. And since the state\u2019s Democrats have pushed back against new abortion restrictions, Republicans can\u2019t afford too many people splitting from ranks if they propose a referendum.<\/p>\n

Some Republicans who voted against the bill said the issue to them wasn\u2019t abortion, but the potential encroachment on medical privacy. Sen. Bruce Gillespie<\/a> has supported bills in past legislative sessions that would limit how far into a pregnancy someone can have an abortion, but he said he couldn\u2019t vote for the recent bill.<\/p>\n

\u201cI\u2019m not for abortion, but I\u2019m not really for trying to dictate people\u2019s rights either,\u201d Gillespie said.<\/p>\n