UPDATE, 8/11/26: Massachusetts Governor Maura Healey has signed H.5595 into law, which means abortion will now be permitted through birth in Massachusetts, as long as a doctor signs off on it. In a press release, she promoted the false narrative that late-term abortions are necessary, and mostly committed for medical reasons:

I've heard heartbreaking stories from women and families who were preparing to welcome a healthy baby into their family, only to receive devastating news later in their pregnancy. Instead of being able to rely on the doctors they knew and trusted at home, they were forced to travel hundreds of miles and pay out of their pockets while navigating unimaginable grief. That should never happen in Massachusetts. This law continues our efforts to have the strongest abortion protections in the country because in Massachusetts, we believe health care decisions should be made between women and their doctors.

Footage from the signing ceremony showed Healey surrounded by women, most of them smiling enthusiastically, as she signed the legislation.

Massachusetts Citizens for Life criticized the decision in a statement from president Myrna Maloney Flynn.

We encourage those celebrating Governor Healey’s politically-motivated signature to learn not only about late-term and ‘dismemberment’ abortions, many of which Massachusetts taxpayers will fund, but also about perinatal hospice, palliative care options and other resources available to women faced with devastating, but never hopeless, fetal diagnoses.

Legalizing elective abortion up to birth on healthy moms and healthy, pain-capable infants is not about a doctor-patient relationship but rather abortionists normalizing infant death and pressuring vulnerable women to permit their unborn children to die in heinous acts of violence, which are among the most severe human rights assaults allowed in only a few places, among them China and North Korea.

What the new law says

H.5595 has three sections, which largely wipe out Massachusetts General Laws Section 12N of chapter 112, which protected some children from abortion. It will take effect on November 8.

Section 1 strikes out lines one through nine of Section 12N of chapter 112 of the General Laws, which refers to babies who are 24 weeks gestation or more. That portion of the law allowed abortion to be carried out after 24 weeks only if they qualified as an 'exception.'

The stricken section stated, “[N]o abortion may be performed except by a physician, and only if in the best medical judgement of the physician it is: (i) necessary to preserve the life of the patient; (ii) necessary to preserve the patient’s physical or mental health; (iii) warranted because of a lethal fetal anomaly or diagnosis; or (iv) warranted because of a grave fetal diagnosis that indicates that the fetus is incompatible with sustained life outside of the uterus without extraordinary medical interventions.”

The new law replaces it with, "[A]n abortion may be performed by a physician based upon the professional judgment of the physician."

In other words, a physician can commit an abortion at 24 weeks and beyond for any reason.

Section 2 strikes out section 12N 1/2 of Chapter 112, which stated, "(a) Each circumstance permitting an abortion for a pregnancy that has existed for 24 weeks or more under section 12N shall be considered independently by a treating physician and a patient or the patient's health care proxy. ...

"(b) Annually, not later than September 1, every facility authorized to perform health care services under section 12N shall submit to the department of public health a written report that includes the facility's procedures and processes for providing services consistent with said section 12N and this section."

This means that such a report is no longer required.

Section 2 leaves intact only one portion of the previous section 12N 1/2, which states ,"No medical review process shall override the professional judgment of a treating physician and a patient or the patient’s health care proxy to provide an abortion consistent with section 12N."

In other words, the physician's decision to allow an abortion stands and no "medical review process" can override his or her judgement.

Section 3 of H.5595 strikes out the second paragraph of 12P, which stated, "Except in an emergency requiring immediate action, an abortion shall not be performed under section 12N unless performed in a hospital duly authorized to provide facilities for obstetrical services."

This means that abortions after 24 weeks are no longer required to be committed in a hospital setting.

8/4/26: A Massachusetts bill that would radically expand abortion, allowing the intentional killing of preborn children all the way up to birth for any reason, has passed both the House and the Senate and next heads to the desk of Governor Maura Healey for her signature.

Key Takeaways:

• The Massachusetts Senate passed H.5595 on July 31, allowing abortion up to birth for any reason as long as a doctor (including the doctor who stands to profit from the abortion) approves.

• The bill next heads to the desk of Governor Maura Healey.

• Though abortion supporters called the legislation caring and medically necessary, it is never caring or necessary to kill a preborn child in the womb.

The Details:

HB H.5595, 'An Act Prioritizing Patient Access to Care,' passed the state's Senate on Friday, nine days after clearing the House. The bill radically expands upon the state's current law, which allows abortion after 24 weeks to protect the mother's physical or mental health or in cases of a fetal diagnosis, by allowing abortion at any point in the pregnancy for any reason, as long as a doctor approves.

If Healey signs the legislation, Massachusetts would become the 11th state to have no gestational limits on abortion.

The bill's sponsor, Rep. Lindsay N. Sabadosa, called abortion 'medically appropriate care.'

"The goal of passing this legislation is simple. Medical decisions should be made by a patient and their doctor. Massachusetts has one of the best health care systems in the country, and patients should be able to rely on their providers to deliver medically appropriate care without restrictions that can fail to account for the complexity of individual medical circumstances," she said. "By removing those barriers, we can ensure that no one has to leave Massachusetts to receive the care they need."

3rd Trimester Late-Term Abortion | Induction Abortion | What Is Abortion?

Reality Check:

Supporters of the bill paint a picture of women needing late abortions due to cases of prenatal diagnoses and fetal conditions. But in reality, data has shown that most women seeking late abortions are not doing so due to a prenatal diagnosis.

A 2013 study published by the pro-abortion Guttmacher Institute said, “[D]ata suggest that most women seeking later terminations are not doing so for reasons of fetal anomaly or life endangerment.”

This was also shown in a 2010 paper from Julia Steinberg, of the pro-abortion Bixby Center for Global Reproductive Health, in which she said, “Research suggests that the overwhelming majority of women having later abortions do so for reasons other than fetal anomaly."

What We're Hearing:

The bill has drawn harsh criticism from pro-life groups, both within and outside of the state.

“‘An Act Prioritizing Patient Access to Care’ endangers one patient and completely overlooks another in a gruesome and violent assault on human rights,” said Myrna Maloney Flynn, president of Massachusetts Citizens for Life. She continued:

“Not one legislator who voted for this has been brave enough to acknowledge the truth, the inconvenient fact that this bill allows heinous dismemberment abortions on perfectly healthy and viable babies. It is accepted science that an unborn baby’s nervous system is developed enough at 24 weeks of pregnancy so that the baby can feel pain. By passing this bill, Massachusetts lawmakers have decided that an abortionist can crush the skull of any infant, then tear that baby apart, limb by limb.”

2nd Trimester Abortion | Dilation and Evacuation (D&E) | What Is Abortion?

SBA Pro-Life America President Marjorie Dannenfelser said:

“Massachusetts already allows abortion in the first 24 weeks, but that isn’t enough for Democrats whose party holds the position of no limits on abortion whatsoever.

If Gov. Healey signs this bill into law, Massachusetts will join 10 states and Washington, D.C. with an all-trimester abortion policy where babies are killed after the point they can survive outside of the womb.

These extreme laws that only 10% of Americans support are enabled by the ‘states-only’ philosophy on abortion. The GOP must abandon the failed ‘leave it to the states’ position and move the country toward a national protection for unborn children across this nation.”

The state's Catholic bishops also issued a statement ahead of the Senate's July 31 passage, in which they called the bill "a radical measure which is gravely immoral" and exhorted the faithful to "pray for a renewal of reverence for all human life."

"We reaffirm the Church’s call to its own community and to civil society to provide the resources to welcome and cherish the gift of life, as well as to accompany women and families who have known the tragedy of abortion," the bishops wrote. "Let there be room in our hearts for the most vulnerable among us. May we recall and live the Lord's own word 'whatsoever you do to the least of these you do to me.'"

The Bottom Line:

Notably, a January 2026 poll showed that even less than a third of those who consider themselves "pro-choice" approve of abortion to birth.