Will abortion, gun bill vetoes change Wyoming’s political landscape?

Does Gordon no longer care about shoring up his conservative credentials? Did he view the bills — under which state government would have demanded an invasive medical procedure and taken away local control on gun laws — as straying from conservative principles? Or did he listen to constituents who asked him to preserve a constitutionally protected state right to make their own health care decisions, and choose school safety over right-wing ideology?

The governor vetoed the pair with a heavy dose of political opportunism, stressing he’s still strongly “pro-life” and pro-Second Amendment, but calling the bills too extreme.

The Freedom Caucus’ hysterical reaction to losing on issues it considered slam-dunks is a welcome bonus.

Let’s examine what happened to radical lawmakers’ bids to turn the tide their way, and how Gordon’s respective vetoes might change the political landscape. Would the Freedom Caucus ditch calling for a special session if it could get more mileage by making the moderate Gordon the villain of the next election?

That could backfire if voters decide they prefer Gordon’s positions to the far-right caucus.

When a lawsuit filed by abortion providers, pro-choice groups and women stalled an abortion ban passed in 2023, last year the Legislature approved the “Life Is a Human Right Act” and the nation’s first prohibition of all abortion medications. Both legal issues are on hold pending another constitutional challenge.

Last week, Gordon vetoed House Bill 148, stating its passage would likely be subject to a lawsuit that would tie up the courts and further delay enacting the bans.

House Bill 148 targeted Wellspring Health Access in Casper, the state’s only surgical abortion provider, by requiring the clinic to be licensed as an ambulatory surgical center. Cost-prohibitive major renovations to meet that mandate could have resulted in its closure, and women’s loss of abortion access, even if the bans are overturned.

Opponents of HB 148 made an excellent case that it’s medically unnecessary, despite backers’ claims it would improve women’s safety. Doctors testified that transvaginal ultrasounds would be needed for early-term pregnancies — a dramatic example of government intrusion into the doctor-patient relationship.

The caucus should blame itself for dooming the bill by adding at least a two-day waiting period that would force low-income women to take more time off work and pay for travel, food, child care and other expenses — all for an unnecessary, invasive procedure.

Its biggest blunder was language directly counter to the state’s claim abortion isn’t health care. The attorney general’s office was forced to make that argument when plaintiffs claimed a 2012 constitutional amendment protects the right of adults to make their own health care decisions.

The bill required anyone doing a surgical abortion to be a licensed physician with admitting privileges at a nearby hospital. If abortion isn’t health care, why must it be performed by a licensed physician? If abortion isn’t health care, why is the Department of Health responsible for promulgating rules needed to implement it?

Meanwhile, on the firearms issue, the Legislature tried for many years to repeal gun-free zones at schools, university and college campuses, and government buildings, including the Capitol.

House Bill 125 passed the House by a wide margin, then was defeated by a 3-2 vote in a Senate committee. But a motion to reconsider it by the full chamber passed by one vote, and it went on to a lopsided Senate victory.

The Freedom Caucus denounced Gordon, as did Wyoming Gun Owners, which noted he supported the idea during his first gubernatorial campaign in 2018.

But Gordon had a valid reason for his veto. He said HB 125 “erodes historic local control norms by giving sole authority to the Legislature to micromanage a constitutionally protected right.”

I know gun owners whose main objection to this year’s session by far was passage of HB 125. They believe in the Second Amendment, but know guns don’t belong anywhere near kids at schools, and view carrying weapons at government meetings as a far-right intimidation tactic.

The Wyoming Education Association issued a statement of gratitude after Gordon’s veto, which prioritized school safety over political ideology.

Gordon also should have vetoed an education measure he criticized, but still signed into state law, although it’s certain to be challenged in court — an action he predicted, but conveniently ignored.

House Bill 166 allows public money to be spent on private and parochial schools, despite the state constitution clearly prohibiting it. Gordon said it would be “unfortunate” to expose the program to legal challenges that undermine its viability and legitimacy, then incredulously did exactly that.

Gordon’s nuanced opposition to what the Freedom Caucus considers its most popular issues could change Wyoming’s political landscape and convince more moderate Republican voters to object to extreme views on abortion and gun rights.