Montana Bill Would Charge Women With 'Abortion Trafficking' For Going Out Of State

A controversial Montana bill proposes to charge women seeking abortions in other states with abortion trafficking.

Legislators debated House Bill 609, which opponents called “extremist” Wednesday. Emotionally charged testimony included tears and stories about women seeking reproductive health care—sometimes out of state. 

The bill is under review by the House Judiciary Committee.

Language in the bill states, “A person commits the offense of abortion trafficking if the person purposely or knowingly transports or aids or assists another person … to a location outside of this state with the intent to obtain an abortion that is illegal in this state.”

One opponent expressed alarm about using the word “trafficking” to describe anything related to the legal right of Montanans to seek an abortion. 

“This has nothing to do with some kind of criminal underworld,” said David Wall, an opponent who testified remotely from Missoula. “This is about a very small group of people trying to impose their sense of right and wrong onto the people of Montana.”

Rep. Kerri Seekins-Crowe, R-Billings, presented HB 609 at the hearing, insisting Montana must do something to stop, “Bad actors from exploring legal loopholes to transfer minors across the state lines for an abortion without their parent's knowledge.”

Abortion is legal in Montana, something several opponents mentioned in their testimony, noting the right to access abortion was just enshrined in the Montana Constitution. On election day, 2024, Montanans passed Constitutional Initiative 128 by a 14-point margin of 58% to 42%. 

The initative expressly protects a woman’s “right to make and carry out decisions about one’s own pregnancy, including the right to abortion.”

When questioned by committee member Rep. Ed Staffman, D-Bozeman, Seekins-Crowe could not provide any statistical evidence of “abortion trafficking.”

“So you can’t tell us just precisely how many women will be in prison from this bill, or what the cost will be?” Staffman asked.

“These account for less than 1% of abortions,” Dr. Talia Sopp told the committee, describing the rare circumstances that lead women from Montana to seek an abortion out of state. Sopp went on to describe the relief her patients feel when they, according to Sopp, make a compassionate choice and abort their child because it succumbed to an unsurvivable medical condition in the womb. 

“Some people find that this unbearable situation becomes slightly less unbearable if they are able to say goodbye,” said Sopp. 

Politics At Play

“This bill isn't about protecting anyone,” said Erin Leonard, who testified remotely from Virginia City. “It's about pushing a political agenda. Montanans have already voted to protect abortion access, and this bill goes directly against that.”

“In Montana, we value our freedom,” added fellow opponent Alissabeth Sutton, speaking on behalf of Montanans For Choice Take Action. 

“We are people of movement and exploration. We are united by our shared love for adventure across the Big Sky state,” said Sutton. “This bill is an egregious violation of the commitment we make to be good neighbors to one another. We will not stand by and let our people be surveyed, policed, or criminalized for accessing the health care that they need.”

Other opponents of the bill repeated this point, wondering if a woman’s pregnant belly might become probable cause for law enforcement to stop and question any woman who is expecting. 

“We are not a pawn to be used by national hate groups, which seek to control us and take away our rights,” continued Sutton. “This bill is testing the limits to see how far the anti-abortion extremists can go.”

‘Extremist’ Label Called ‘Offensive’

“This is a dangerous bill. It's also a degrading bill,” said Tess Fields, executive director of Blue Mountain Clinic in Missoula. Fields took swings at what she described as threats to Montana women accessing health care. 

“They want to deny abortion care to rape victims and girls who were sexually assaulted by a family member,” said Fields. “They want to criminalize the most common forms of birth control that 99% of American women rely on. They want to put women in prison and even seek the death penalty for women who need abortion care.”

As for the alleged problems of “abortion tourism” and “abortion trafficking,” Fields said, “I find that kind of extremist language really, really offensive and unnecessary because it's not accurate.”

This upset committee member Rep. Jedediah Hinkle, R-Belgrade, who objected. 

“She just used the word extremist, and I think that's offensive,” said Hinkle.  

While no one offered detailed evidence of an “abortion tourism” problem in Montana, a pro-life motivational speaker with the group Montanans For Life told the committee it happens. 

“I witnessed in reality the abortion tourism in Minnesota,” said Robin Sertell. “Children are picked up by escorts wearing safety vests, taking them to abortion appointments without their parent's knowledge or consent, and then dropping them off to recover alone in a hotel room, all at taxpayer expense.” 

HB 609 continues to attract attention from reproductive rights advocates across the country. A Feb. 25 press release from the Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee described the legislation as “first of its kind.”

“Republicans are focused on prosecuting women,” said DLCC Communication Director Lauren Chou. “Beyond attacking Montana voters who voted decisively to protect abortion rights, state Republicans are once again abusing state legislatures as a testing ground for their most extreme policies.”

The Montana House Judiciary Committee did not vote on HB 609 after Wednesday’s hearing. 

David Madison can be reached at david@cowboystatedaily.com.