Abortion extremism in Minnesota
Minnesota's abortion policy is now as extreme as any in the world.
In 2023, Minnesota lawmakers and Gov. Tim Walz enacted legislation making abortion legal for any reason and at any time throughout pregnancy (HF 1). They also repealed a requirement that born-alive infants receive medically appropriate care that would save their lives (SF 2995).
Some legislators and advocates now want to permanently enshrine Minnesota's extreme abortion policy in the state Constitution. If they succeed, future lawmakers would be unable to protect unborn children—even viable babies late in pregnancy who can feel pain.
A proposed constitutional amendment (the so-called “Equal Rights Amendment”) was introduced in 2024, but it failed to pass the legislature after Minnesotans all across the state urged their lawmakers to reject it. A KSTP/SurveyUSA poll found that 64 percent of Minnesotans didn’t want abortion included in the amendment.
In 2025, lawmakers are considering legislation to return protection to born-alive infants (HF 24). The House failed to pass the bill on March 13.
Did lawmakers and Walz really repeal protection for born-alive infants? Here's point-by-point documentation of what actually happened.
Who are they leaving out, and why? Learn how Minnesota lawmakers are excluding vulnerable members of the human family.
Minnesota isn't so "nice" anymore: Watch and share the video about Minnesota's extreme policy.
How we got here
A 1995 Minnesota Supreme Court decision, Doe v. Gomez, asserted a right to abortion in the state Constitution and required taxpayer funding of abortion through Minnesota’s Medicaid program. Even though the U.S. Supreme Court no longer requires abortion-on-demand nationwide (as it did under Roe v. Wade), state courts still impose it here in Minnesota.
In 2023, DFL legislative majorities and Gov. Tim Walz went even further. They enacted legislation enshrining a “fundamental right” to abortion up to birth in Minnesota statute (HF 1). They also repealed most of Minnesota’s longstanding abortion laws (SF 2995), including laws ensuring informed consent for women and preventing non-physicians from performing abortions. They even repealed Minnesota’s Positive Alternatives Act that provided support and alternatives to abortion for pregnant women who want to carry their babies to term.
Newborns denied protection
Minnesota law used to guarantee lifesaving care for infants who survive abortion. In 2023, though, the legislature and Gov. Walz repealed the requirement that “reasonable measures consistent with good medical practice” be taken “to preserve the life and health of the born alive infant.” They replaced the requirement for lifesaving measures with a requirement for only “care” (which lawmakers described as mere “comfort" care). Moreover, the new law no longer applies specifically to babies who survive abortion, but rather to all babies who are born alive.
Under the new language, then, any viable infant, whether born as a result of abortion or not, could be denied lifesaving care and allowed to die. Babies born with disabilities, whose lives are often devalued, could be especially at risk.
In addition, Minnesota law used to require that cases in which babies survive abortion be reported to the Department of Health along with other abortion data. (Abortion facilities reported five born-alive infants in 2021, for example.) But the legislature and Walz repealed that requirement. The public will no longer know how many babies survive abortion—or what care they do or do not receive.
Frequently asked questions: Minnesota's extreme abortion policy
Does Minnesota law really allow abortion for any reason—all the way up to birth?
Yes. In 2023, lawmakers enacted a “fundamental right” to abortion (HF 1) with no limitations at any stage in pregnancy (legislators rejected dozens of amendments that would have made the law more moderate, including amendments to prevent elective abortions in the third trimester). Lawmakers in 2023 also repealed a 1974 law that had limited abortion after viability, leaving no gestational limit remaining in Minnesota statute (SF 2995).
Aren’t late abortions extremely rare or non-existent?
Although most abortions occur earlier in pregnancy, 294 Minnesota abortions took place at 20 weeks or later in 2022 alone, according to the Department of Health. And the numbers are likely to increase following the 2023 legal changes, which included repeal of the law limiting abortion after viability. (Prior to its repeal, the legal status of the viability law had been unclear, but abortion practitioners still “adhered to it in practice,” according to an analysis in Minnesota Reformer.)
Now, no legal obstacle remains to prevent practitioners who focus on abortions late in pregnancy (like Warren Hern and the late LeRoy Carhart) from setting up shop in Minnesota—or to prevent existing abortion facilities from expanding the window during which they perform abortions. Passage of the proposed constitutional amendment would be a further invitation to anyone who wants to practice late abortion in Minnesota.
In fact, a former practitioner of third-trimester abortions in Kansas and New Mexico told the Sahan Journal that she “would not feel comfortable opening a third-trimester practice in Minnesota” when the viability law remained on the books, but that she would be open to it after the law’s repeal. “If I could find a hospital that would provide backup without regard to gestational age, then I would consider setting up a clinic in Minnesota,” she said. “Being surrounded by anti-abortion states, Minnesota would be a good location for a clinic.”
Don't late abortions only happen for health reasons?
Evidence actually shows that late abortions are usually elective. “Data suggest that most women seeking later terminations are not doing so for reasons of fetal anomaly or life endangerment,” explains a study published in Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health. Arizona has collected data on health reasons for abortion at different stages of pregnancy, and the data indicate that about 80 percent of abortions at 21 weeks or later are not related to health at all (whether fetal health or maternal health). In any case, Minnesota’s extreme policy allows late abortions for any reason and is not limited to reasons of fetal or maternal health.
Does the public support Minnesota’s policy?
No polling shows that Minnesotans favor a no-limits abortion policy. Instead, polls show the opposite. Two polls in late 2022—a Star Tribune/MPR News/KARE 11 poll and a KSTP/SurveyUSA poll—both found that just 30 percent of Minnesotans favor abortion without limits (Minnesota's policy). DFL lawmakers are decisively out of step with most Minnesotans (and with most of the country and most of the world).
Wasn't the recently repealed law protecting born-alive infants unnecessary and burdensome?
Data from the Minnesota Department of Health show that most years some babies are born alive in the context of abortion. Those babies deserve a right to appropriate lifesaving care. Lawmakers who voted to repeal that right in 2023 claimed that the repealed language required inappropriate or futile attempts to save pre-viable infants’ lives. That’s false. In truth, the repealed law simply required “reasonable measures consistent with good medical practice.” After the recent actions of the legislature, newborns are no longer guaranteed treatment that would save their lives. (Read more about the repeal of born-alive protections.)
More:
Download this information as a flier