In a unanimous decision on Wednesday, the South Carolina Supreme Court upheld the state’s abortion law that bans most procedures after a fetal heartbeat is detected.

The ruling came in response to a challenge from Planned Parenthood and reinforces a 2023 law that bans abortions at roughly six weeks of pregnancy, with limited exceptions, as Breitbart reports.

The court addressed a lawsuit brought by Planned Parenthood, which argued that the law effectively prohibited abortions after nine weeks instead of the stated six. This legal challenge questioned the interpretation and enforcement timeline of the law passed by the South Carolina General Assembly in 2023.

In rejecting the plaintiffs' argument, the court concluded that lawmakers intended to ban abortions around six weeks of pregnancy, when cardiac activity is typically detectable by ultrasound. The law defines this point as the moment a steady and rhythmic contraction of the fetal heart is observed within the gestational sac.

Associate Justice John Few pointed out discrepancies in how Planned Parenthood had previously referred to the law, noting that the organization had described it as a six-week ban more than 300 times in earlier legal briefs. Only more recently, Justice Few explained, did Planned Parenthood describe the legislation as effectively a nine-week abortion ban.

Legislative history affirmed by court

The court found no evidence in the legislative record that supported Planned Parenthood’s recent interpretation. Justice Few commented that throughout the entire 2023 legislative session, no one connected with the South Carolina General Assembly described the law as imposing a ban after nine weeks of pregnancy.

Planned Parenthood had argued that the law’s language made the actual enforcement occur closer to nine weeks. However, the justices concluded that the phrase “cardiac activity” was intended to mean an embryonic heartbeat detectable as early as six weeks.

As a result, the court upheld the law in full, supporting the position of lawmakers who said limiting abortion access once cardiac activity begins was the central aim of the legislation. The law does not introduce broad new definitions but rather relies on the specific biological benchmark of detectable heart activity.

Challenges to law remain

The six-week restriction carries legal penalties for medical providers who fail to comply. Doctors who perform abortions after a fetal heartbeat is detected can be prosecuted as felons and face up to two years in prison, along with fines up to $10,000.

The law includes several exceptions accounting for exceptional medical circumstances. These include instances of rape or incest, provided the procedure occurs within the first 12 weeks of pregnancy. Exceptions also exist for medical emergencies and diagnoses of fatal fetal anomalies.

Despite the ruling, the South Carolina law still faces challenges in other courts. Notably, five OB-GYNs have filed a separate suit claiming the law’s wording is too vague and could lead to unjust prosecutions of doctors trying to adhere to medical best practices.

Reactions pour in

In response to the court’s decision, Gov. Henry McMaster praised the ruling. He said it affirmatively protected unborn lives and positioned South Carolina as a defender of what he described as the sanctity of life.

“Today’s ruling is another clear and decisive victory,” said McMaster, “that will ensure the lives of countless unborn children remain protected and that South Carolina continues to lead the charge in defending the sanctity of life.”

Planned Parenthood responded with criticism, asserting that the decision harms patients and restricts access to essential health care. In a written statement, representatives of the organization said that the law has already forced unwilling pregnancies, led to serious infections, and contributed to deaths stemming from restricted care.

Next developments awaited

Planned Parenthood emphasized that it would maintain its opposition in court and continue legal efforts to stop enforcement of the law. The organization has not yet disclosed the timeline or specific strategy for these future legal actions.

The court’s ruling is the second time in recent years that South Carolina’s high court has weighed in on abortion access. In January 2023, the justices struck down a previous six-week ban, citing concerns about privacy protections under the state Constitution. The revised legislation considered in Wednesday’s ruling addressed those earlier legal flaws, leading justices to now uphold the measure.

While some opponents of the law argue that access to abortion is one of the most personal medical decisions an individual can make, proponents contend that life begins with a heartbeat and that states have a legitimate role in protecting unborn life at that early stage.

Legal, political repercussions considered

The decision could have far-reaching implications for similar legislation in other states across the South. It may also shape the ongoing legal battles being fought nationwide over reproductive rights following the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2022 decision to overturn Roe v. Wade.

In South Carolina, the ruling further sharpens the divide over abortion policy, with lawmakers, physicians, advocacy groups, and citizens continuing to voice sharply differing views. Wednesday’s court decision appears to have validated the General Assembly’s legislative intent, but the broader legal contest is far from over.

As additional challenges move through the courts, legal analysts expect the debates over interpretation, enforcement, and medical discretion to remain front and center. For now, the six-week law stays in effect, continuing to shape the landscape of reproductive health care across the state.