House concurs with Senate amendments to reinstate viability-era abortion statutes as a contingency

The House considered a concurrence request on Senate amendments to House Bill 126 (the "heartbeat" bill). The amendments would restore several prior statutes that had been repealed or altered following a court decision (discussed as the Johnson decision on the floor) and add factual findings the courts had asked the Legislature to provide. The package referenced specific statute numbers to be reinstated, including provisions on definitions, viability, parental‑consent procedures for minors, informational requirements, penalties, and applicability (floor citations listed statutes beginning at 35‑6‑6501 and continuing through 35‑6‑6510).

Supporters described the concurrence as a safety net: if the heartbeat measure is enjoined by courts, the reinstated statutes would return to law and preserve a viability standard. Opponents, including the minority floor leader, urged colleagues to reject concurrence on the grounds that the need for a backstop suggests constitutional risk for the underlying bill and that the package embeds policy findings into statute. After debate, the House adopted the concurrence by voice/roll call: 47 ayes, 7 no, and 8 excused.

The floor record includes recitations of the specific statute numbers and explicit explanations that the language was developed in consultation with attorneys to address questions raised by the courts. Several members urged caution about the trigger nature of the approach; others said restoring the statutes protects the state's stated public policy in the event of judicial action.