LEXINGTON, Ky. — In the two years since federal abortion protections were overturned and a near-total ban on the procedure was enacted in Kentucky, lawmakers have filed six bills to add exceptions to the state’s strict abortion ban.

But nearly all of them have floundered — the fate of the two bills proposed this session remains to be seen — including those filed by Republicans, who maintain a commanding supermajority in Frankfort with 80% of the legislative seats.

With the 30-day General Assembly now underway, the GOP is facing mounting pressure from some inside the party to broaden the parameters of the state’s ban, which doesn’t allow for legal abortion in cases of rape or incest. The session, which convened in early January, is in recess until Feb. 4.

Dozens of bills were filed in the first week, including two to add exceptions — one from a Democrat and one from a Republican. But whether that pressure is enough to buckle long-held stances on an issue many view as a moral one is unclear.

Though it did not take effect until Roe v. Wade was overturned in 2022 Kentucky’s trigger ban was passed in 2019 under former Republican Gov. Matt Bevin. The votes were mostly along party lines — a few of Democrats supported its passage — as they did the fetal heartbeat bill, which was also passed into law that year.

Kentucky doctors have criticized the law’s exceptions as too narrow, compromising the standard of care for patients with nonviable pregnancies. The current trigger law only allows health care providers to lawfully terminate a pregnancy in cases of medical emergencies.

Planned Parenthood Alliance Advocates Kentucky State Director Tamarra Wieder said broadening the parameters of the law is needed — but so is reducing the criminal penalty hanging over doctor’s heads.

“My fear is they won’t make an exemption policy that would be usable for hospitals and providers,” Wieder said. “Exemptions when you have criminal liability still on the books makes it almost impossible for hospital systems to move forward, because there’s so much liability on providers.”

House Minority Whip Lindsey Burke, D-Lexington, who plans to re-file three abortion rights-related bills, including one first filed in the 2023 session, said she sees most Democrats supporting a Republican bill to add exceptions, but she knows her own proposals will not see the light of day.

But any exception bill’s real-world effectiveness will be blunted without also reducing the criminal penalty, Burke said.

“If criminal penalties are still in place, it won’t matter what exceptions there are, because doctors and their attorneys will continue to be fearful,” Burke said. “But if it’s a meaningful exceptions bill that eliminates some of the barriers, then I do think we would get behind it, if it could actually make a difference.”

On the campaign trail, Republican President-elect Donald Trump said he supports rape and incest exceptions to state abortion bans, as well as exceptions that protect the life of a pregnant person. Some Kentucky Republicans made similar statements in their reelection bids in the 2024 election cycle.

Louisville Republicans Rep. Susan Witten and Rep. Ken Fleming, who has now twice filed bills to add exceptions — the current one has two GOP co-sponsors — since the abortion ban became law, both mentioned adding exceptions to the state’s abortion bans on the campaign trail. In one flyer from Witten, she said she was “fighting for exceptions to Kentucky’s abortion ban.”

Both were reelected in their politically purple districts. Neither responded to a Herald-Leader interview request for this story.

Republican Attorney General Russell Coleman shared a similar sentiment in November after a pregnant woman sued Kentucky, arguing the bans infringe on her constitutional right to privacy and self-determination by blocking her from legally getting an abortion. Coleman vowed to “zealously work to uphold these laws in court,” which he is statutorily obligated to do, but also said the near-total ban should be broadened to include more exceptions.

Some Republicans said they would be amenable to considering exceptions, but Senate Majority Floor Leader Max Wise of Campbellsville said he’s not sure it’s an issue that matters much to constituents.

“In terms of abortion exceptions, I think what we saw in 2022 in the national and even the state election, it was an issue on the minds of voters,” Wise said, referencing the rejection of GOP-backed Constitutional Amendment 2, which sought to add explicit provisions to the state constitution revoking the inherent right to abortion.

“I don’t know if in 2024 what we saw with the election of President Trump, though a lot of states had (abortion rights) on their ballot initiatives, I’m not sure how much of that was a constituent-motivated issue,” Wise added.

Rep. Nancy Tate, R-Brandenburg, a longtime proponent of the state’s abortion restrictions, said she thinks there already are adequate safeguards in the law to account for all medical scenarios. She believes the law “reflects the state’s commitment to valuing all human life equally” by “encouraging physicians to provide medical care that protects both the life of the mother and the baby, if possible.”

Tate said she doesn’t want the law “to interfere with high-risk pregnancies and with those doctors to use their best medical judgment,” and she thinks, under the current law, it doesn’t.

“From my perspective, I believe our law clearly states the physician has the opportunity to determine if the mother’s life is at substantial risk or if there is potential harm,” she added. “I’m not a doctor or a medical provider, but I am confident the medical community has identified what circumstances are considered to be life-threatening.”

But doctors around the state have repeatedly told the Herald-Leader the current blanket ban, with its narrow avenue of exceptions and criminal penalty for violators, does compromise patient care, particularly with patients experiencing complications that require ending their pregnancy early.

Five OB-GYNs and high-risk maternal fetal medicine doctors said the ban, as is, is tying the hands of doctors and putting patients with pregnancy complications at “unnecessary risk.”

“We have language in the statute that says you can proceed with a termination of a pregnancy if it’s to save the life of the mother or save a major bodily organ,” said Dr. Jeffrey Goldberg, a gynecologic oncologist in Louisville. “To a layperson, that may sound straightforward.

“But to a doctor, it’s far from straightforward,” he said. “Many people think, based on the dramatization on TV, that doctors know if we don’t take a certain action then somebody will die. But it’s very rarely that black and white.”

Under Kentucky’s ban, “it’s so unclear as to when abortion would be legally permissible in these situations,” Goldberg said.

“And the penalties for getting it wrong are so draconian.”

An anti-abortion “home-run”

Despite the piecemeal shift, the Republican caucus, as a whole, likely isn’t ready for such a step, according to interviews with sitting lawmakers.

A strong swath of the party remains steadfast in its position not to add exceptions.

Rep. Felicia Rabourn, R-Pendleton, said Kentucky’s abortion ban “already includes provisions to protect the life of the mother, and I do not support eroding the statutory safeguards that my colleagues and I have passed to protect unborn life in the commonwealth.”

Rep. Savannah Maddox, R-Dry Ridge, agreed.

“I do not support making changes to Kentucky’s Pro-Life law, which allows for protecting the mother in the event of a life-threatening circumstance,” she said.

Tate said her hope is that her colleagues choose not to support an exceptions bill.

“Your question is, are we likely to pass language this year that would support adding rape and incest exceptions: I’m going to strongly encourage my fellow legislators not to do that,” Tate said.

“From a pro-life perspective, we’ve hit a home run,” she said. “We’ve hit a point where there are no legal abortions in Kentucky.”

Still, there are some in the caucus who have voiced support for broadening the law.

In an interview with WKYT’s Bill Bryant less than a week after she was elected, Georgetown Republican Rep. Vanessa Grossl, who unseated Democratic House Caucus Chair Cherlynn Stevenson, said she supports adding exceptions.

“It’s an issue where I feel like we have to have options for Kentuckians who are in really dire circumstances that we can’t even imagine,” said Grossl. She added that she doesn’t plan to join the Right to Life caucus because it’s “very divisive,” “not helpful,” and serves to represent more “religious and moral” beliefs.

In an interview with the Herald-Leader, Grossl said even though she is “pro-life and will always pray the choice is life,” to her, she views adding exceptions as a “liberty issue.”

“To me, this is individual liberty to do with your body what you think is best,” she said. “I just don’t want to take people’s freedoms away from pursuing happiness in whatever way makes sense for them.”

It’s perspectives like Grossl’s, and the fact that considerably fewer Republicans sought endorsement as candidates from Kentucky Right to Life last year, that Burke said may “signal” a moving of the needle.

Kentucky Right to Life is a staunch advocate of the state’s ban as-is and does not favor adding exceptions. Party-wide in last year’s election, more Republicans declined to fill out the organization’s endorsement survey.

David Walls, executive director of the Family Foundation, which is closely aligned with Kentucky Right to Life, said in a statement that his organization “remains committed to defending the right to life of every pre-born baby, regardless of the circumstances of a baby’s conception.”

“We do not support any effort to re-legalize the killing of pre-born children that would move Kentucky backwards in building a culture of life,” Walls said.

‘I get the nervousness’

Rep. Kim Moser, R-Taylor Mill, said she understands the argument from some of her colleagues “who feel like even clarification of medical exceptions aren’t necessary because we trust a doctor to use their best medical judgment.”

But, she pointed out, “we also have that it’s a felony to perform an abortion” in violation of the law.

Moser, a former neonatal intensive care unit nurse and chair of the House Standing Committee on Health Services, was the lead sponsor of the “momnibus” bill in 2024, named for its many components supporting pregnant women and new moms.

“I get the nervousness” on the part of doctors, she said. “I don’t know if there’s some clarification that perhaps needs to happen on the medical side. That’s a possibility.”

Another aspect of the law’s provisions that may require clarification is whether a mental health emergency qualifies as a “medical emergency” under the ban.

“I consider mental health emergencies to be medical emergencies,” Moser said. “If somebody’s raped and she’s having a mental health crisis, should that be allowed as an exception? I think there’s an argument for that.”

Still, speaking on the other side of the House Republican’s caucus retreat in December, where members outlined their priorities for the upcoming session, Tate said she was “cautiously optimistic that there is not enough support in the House or Senate.”

“I’m hoping and praying we don’t move on this issue,” she added.

©2025 Lexington Herald-Leader. Visit at kentucky.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.