The Florida Senate
BILL ANALYSIS AND FISCAL IMPACT STATEMENT
(This document is based on the provisions contained in the legislation as of the latest date listed below.)
Prepared By: The Professional Staff of the Committee on Fiscal Policy
BILL: SB 300
INTRODUCER: Senator Grall and others
SUBJECT: Pregnancy and Parenting Support
DATE: March 27, 2023 REVISED:
ANALYST STAFF DIRECTOR REFERENCE ACTION
1. Looke Brown HP Favorable
2. Looke Yeatman FP Favorable
I. Summary:
SB 300 amends and creates multiple provisions of law related to pregnancy support and wellness
services, the state's Family Planning Program, and the termination of pregnancies.
The bill prohibits abortion after six weeks of gestation unless an exception is met. Current-law
exceptions to abortion time frames are maintained and a new exception is established for cases in
which the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest. This new exception is available until the 15th
week of gestation under the bill.
The bill specifies that abortions, including medical abortions,1 may not be provided through
telehealth and that medication intended for the use in a medical abortion may only be dispensed
by a physician and may not be dispensed via the U.S. Postal Service or by any other carrier. The
bill also prohibits any person, educational institution, and governmental entity from expending
state funds for a person to travel to another state to receive services that are intended to support
an abortion, unless such expenditure is required by federal law or there is a legitimate medical
emergency.
SB 300 also amends the pregnancy support and wellness services network established in s.
381.96, F.S., to expand eligibility for such services to women who have given birth in the past 12
months and to parents or guardians of children under the age of three for up to 12 months. The
bill adds new services and assistance which the network is required to provide, including
counseling, mentoring, educational materials, and classes as well as material assistance including
clothing, car seats, cribs formula, and diapers. The bill also requires that the Department of
Health (DOH) report to the Governor and the Legislature annually on the types, amount, and
costs of services provided as well as demographic information on persons who receive such
services.
1
Section 390.011(9), F.S., provides that “medical abortion” means the administration or use of an abortion-inducing drug to
induce an abortion.
BILL: SB 300 Page 2
The bill appropriates $25 million in recurring general revenue for the expanded network and
specifies that contracted organizations in the network must spend at least 85 percent of the funds
received on providing services and maintaining a hotline.
The bill also appropriates $5 million in recurring general revenue, above what is currently
appropriated in the General Appropriations Act (GAA), for family planning services provided by
the Department of Health pursuant to s. 381.0051, F.S.
The bill makes other technical and clean-up changes, including repealing s. 390.01112, F.S.,
which is unused; clarifying that the current-law exception for fatal fetal anomalies is available
until the third trimester of pregnancy, rather than until fetal viability; and repealing rulemaking
language that is no longer applicable.
The provisions of the bill, other than the expansion of the pregnancy support network and the
appropriations which are effective upon becoming law, are effective 30 days after one of several
events occurs. These events include a Florida Supreme court ruling overturning In re T.W.,2 or
one of several other related cases; a Florida Supreme court ruling stating that the privacy clause
in the Florida Constitution does not protect the right to abortion; or an amendment to the Florida
Constitution which provides the same.
II. Present Situation:
Federal Case Law on Abortion
Roe v. Wade
In 1973, the U.S. Supreme Court issued the landmark Roe v. Wade decision.3 Using the strict
scrutiny standard, the Court determined that a woman’s right to terminate a pregnancy is
protected by a fundamental right to privacy guaranteed under the Due Process Clause of the
Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Further, the Court reasoned that state
regulations limiting the exercise of this right must be justified by a compelling state interest and
must be narrowly drawn.
Casey
In 1992, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on the constitutionality of a Pennsylvania statute
involving a 24-hour waiting period between the provision of information to a woman and the
performance of an abortion. In that decision, Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania
v. Casey (a.k.a. “Casey”),4 the Court upheld the statute and relaxed the standard of review in
abortion cases involving adult women from “strict scrutiny” to “unduly burdensome.” Under
Casey, an undue burden exists and makes a statute invalid if the statute’s purpose or effect is to
place a substantial obstacle in the way of a woman seeking an abortion before the fetus is viable.
2
The seminal case on abortion, discussed in the present situation.
3
Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, 93 S. Ct. 705, 35 L. Ed. 2d 147 (1973)
4
Planned Parenthood of Se. Pennsylvania v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833, 112 S. Ct. 2791, 120 L. Ed. 2d 674 (1992)
BILL: SB 300 Page 3
The Court held that the undue burden standard is an appropriate means of reconciling a state’s
interest in human life with the woman’s constitutionally protected liberty to decide whether to
terminate a pregnancy. The Court determined that, prior to fetal viability, a woman has the right
to an abortion without being unduly burdened by government interference. Before viability, a
state’s interests are not strong enough under Casey to support prohibiting an abortion or the
imposition of a substantial obstacle to the woman’s right to select the procedure. However, once
viability occurs, a state has the power to restrict abortions if the law contains exceptions for
pregnancies that endanger a woman’s life or health.
Dobbs
On June 24, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Jackson Women's Health Org. v. Dobbs
(a.k.a. “Dobbs”),5 a case involving Mississippi’s Gestational Age Act. The Gestational Age Act
prohibited all abortions after 15 weeks of gestational age and was permanently enjoined by the
lower courts in 2019. In Dobbs, the U.S. Supreme Court explicitly and entirely overruled Roe v.
Wade and Casey, returning all abortion regulation decisions back to state control. The Court
stated:
[Roe v. Wade] was…egregiously wrong and on a collision course with the Constitution
from the day it was decided. Casey perpetuated its errors, calling both sides of the
national controversy to resolve their debate, but in doing so, Casey necessarily declared a
winning side. Those on the losing side—those who sought to advance the State's interest
in fetal life—could no longer seek to persuade their elected representatives to adopt
policies consistent with their views. The Court short-circuited the democratic process by
closing it to the large number of Americans who disagreed with Roe.6
The Court’s final holding was that “the Constitution does not confer a right to abortion; Roe and
Casey are overruled; and the authority to regulate abortion is returned to the people and their
elected representatives.”7
In Florida, however, abortion restrictions established under Florida Statutes are still held to the
stricter standard established in In re T.W. (discussed below) unless the Florida Supreme Court
eventually overturns the decision in that case.
Abortion Law in Florida
Under Florida law, abortion is defined as the termination of a human pregnancy with an intention
other than to produce a live birth or remove a dead fetus.8 The termination of a pregnancy must
be performed by a physician9 licensed under ch. 458, F.S., or ch. 459, F.S., or a physician
practicing medicine or osteopathic medicine in the employment of the United States.10 The
5
Jackson Women's Health Org. v. Currier, 349 F. Supp. 3d 536 (S.D. Miss. 2018), aff'd sub nom. Jackson Women's Health
Org. v. Dobbs, 945 F.3d 265 (5th Cir. 2019)
6
Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Org., No. 19-1392, 2022 WL 2276808 (U.S. June 24, 2022).
7
Id.
8
Section 390.011(1), F.S.
9
Section 390.0111(2), F.S.
10
Section 390.011(8), F.S.
BILL: SB 300 Page 4
Agency for Health Care Administration (AHCA) is responsible for licensing abortion clinics
pursuant to ch. 390, F.S.
The termination of a pregnancy may not be performed after 15 weeks gestation11 unless there is a
medical necessity or the fetus has a fatal fetal abnormality. Specifically, an abortion may not be
performed after 15 weeks unless two physicians certify in writing that, in reasonable medical
judgment, the termination of the pregnancy is necessary to save the pregnant woman’s life or
avert a serious risk of substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function
of the pregnant woman, other than a psychological condition. If a second physician is not
available, one physician may certify in writing to the medical necessity for legitimate emergency
medical procedures for the termination of the pregnancy.12 Additionally, an abortion may not be
performed on a minor under the age of 18 without the consent of the minor’s parent or guardian
or without the minor obtaining authorization for the abortion from a court.13
Sections 390.0111(4) and 390.01112(3), F.S., provide that if a termination of pregnancy is
performed during the third trimester or during viability, the physician who performs or induces
the termination of pregnancy must use that degree of professional skill, care, and diligence to
preserve the life and health of the fetus, which the physician would be required to exercise in
order to preserve the life and health of any fetus intended to be born and not aborted. However,
the woman’s life and health constitute an overriding and superior consideration to the concern
for the life and health of the fetus when the concerns are in conflict. A termination of pregnancy
after viability in an emergency situation must be performed in a hospital.14
Legal Challenge of the 15-Week Time Frame
The portions of ch. 2022-69, L.O.F., related to abortion were challenged by Planned Parenthood
(Planned Parenthood v. the State of Florida), and the Second Judicial Circuit Court issued a
temporary injunction preventing the law from being enforced, stating that the law does not meet
the constitutional standards established under Florida case law in In re T.W., (551 So. 2d 1186
(Fla. 1989)). However, upon appeal, the injunction was automatically stayed and the First
District Court of Appeal declined to reverse the automatic stay.
Planned Parenthood of Southwest and Central Florida appealed the order declining to reverse the
stay to the Florida Supreme Court. Additionally, Planned Parenthood asked the Supreme Court
to accept jurisdiction over the case. On Jan. 23, 2023, the Court both accepted jurisdiction of the
case and denied the motion to vacate the automatic stay of the temporary injunction. Currently,
the case resides at the Supreme Court. The Petitioner’s initial brief on the merits of the case was
served on Feb. 27, 2023, and the response to the brief is due 30 days from then.15
11
In the 2022 session the Florida Legislature passed HB 5, a ban on abortions after 15 weeks of gestation with exceptions for
emergencies, substantial physical impairment of a major bodily function, and genetic conditions incompatible with life
outside of the womb and that will result in death upon birth or imminently thereafter. The law took effect on July 1, 2022.
12
Sections 390.0111(1) and 390.01112(1), F.S.
13
Section 390.01114, F.S.
14
Section 797.03(3), F.S.
15
PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF SOUTHWEST & CENTRAL FLORIDA, ET AL. vs. STATE OF FLORIDA, ET
AL. 1st DCA case no. 1D22-2034 and Supreme Court case number SC22-1050.
BILL: SB 300 Page 5
Florida Case Law on Abortion: In re T.W.
In the 1989 case In re T.W., a Minor,16 the Florida Supreme Court upheld a lower court ruling
striking the requirement that a minor obtain parental consent prior to obtaining an abortion. This
ruling is the controlling case law for abortion law in Florida and is of consequence because,
rather than standing the ruling upon the established federal case law of Roe v. Wade and Casey,
the Florida Supreme Court determined that:
To be held constitutional, the instant statute must pass muster under both the federal and
state constitutions. Were we to examine it solely under the federal Constitution, our
analysis necessarily would track the decisions noted above. However, Florida is unusual
in that it is one of at least four states having its own express constitutional provision
guaranteeing an independent right to privacy,… and we opt to examine the statute first
under the Florida Constitution. If it fails here, then no further analysis under federal law
is required.
The Court determined that the right to privacy enshrined in Art. I, S. 23 of the Florida
Constitution “is clearly implicated in a woman's decision of whether or not to continue her
pregnancy.” Therefore, unlike under the Federal Constitution which requires a state only to show
that a restriction on abortion is not “unduly burdensome,” in Florida the state must show that the
abortion restriction “furthers a compelling state interest through the least intrusive means.”
The court further determined that “Under our Florida Constitution, the state's interest becomes
compelling upon viability, as defined below. Until this point, the fetus is a highly specialized set
of cells that is entirely dependent upon the mother for sustenance. No other member of society
can provide this nourishment. The mother and fetus are so inextricably intertwined that their
interests can be said to coincide. Upon viability, however, society becomes capable of sustaining
the fetus, and its interest in preserving its potential for life thus becomes compelling.”
Florida Pregnancy Support and Services Network
Section 381.96, F.S., establishes the Florida Pregnancy Care Network (Network) defined as a
“not-for-profit statewide alliance of pregnancy support organizations that provide pregnancy
support and wellness services through a comprehensive system of care to women and their
families.” The statute requires the DOH to contract with the network for the management and
delivery of pregnancy support and wellness services to eligible clients and draws a distinction
between pregnancy support services and wellness services. Pregnancy support services are
services that promote and encourage childbirth, including:
 Direct client services, such as pregnancy testing, counseling, referral, training, and education
for pregnant women and their families. A woman and her family shall continue to be eligible
to receive direct client services for up to 12 months after the birth of the child.
 Program awareness activities, including a promotional campaign to educate the public about
the pregnancy support services offered by the network and a website that provides
information on the location of providers in the user’s area and other available community
resources.
16
In re T.W., 551 So. 2d 1186 (Fla. 1989)
BILL: SB 300 Page 6
 Communication activities, including the operation and maintenance of a hotline or call center
with a single statewide toll-free number that is available 24 hours a day for an eligible client
to obtain the location and contact information for a pregnancy center located in the client’s
area.
Wellness services are services or activities intended to maintain and improve health or prevent
illness and injury, including, but not limited to, high blood pressure screening, anemia testing,
thyroid screening, cholesterol screening, diabetes screening, and assistance with smoking
cessation.
Pregnancy support services are available to a pregnant woman or woman who s