In a major win for pro-life advocates and a decisive affirmation of legislative intent, the South Carolina Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that the state’s 2023 Fetal Heartbeat and Protection From Abortion Act can be enforced starting at around six weeks of pregnancy. The decision marks a sharp legal defeat for Planned Parenthood, which had challenged the law in an attempt to push fetal protection back to approximately nine weeks—an argument the court firmly rejected.
At the heart of the case was a straightforward but critical legal question: When does a “fetal heartbeat” occur, as defined by the state’s 2023 heartbeat law? Planned Parenthood argued that a fetus does not truly exhibit a heartbeat until closer to nine weeks, based on their interpretation of fetal cardiac development.
The state, backed by scientific and legislative evidence, asserted that “cardiac activity” detectable via transvaginal ultrasound typically emerges around six weeks—precisely the point the law is designed to target.
In its opinion, the South Carolina Supreme Court upheld the legislative definition, noting that “the biologically identifiable moment in time we hold is the ‘fetal heartbeat’ under the 2023 Act occurs in most instances at approximately six weeks of pregnancy.” The court defined a fetal heartbeat in terms of electrical impulses producing sounds through diagnostic medical technology, aligning its interpretation with current clinical standards.
Governor Henry McMaster responded to the decision with strong approval, declaring it another milestone in the state's ongoing efforts to protect life. “Today’s ruling is another clear and decisive victory that will ensure the lives of countless unborn children remain protected,” he said.
Attorney General Alan Wilson echoed this, emphasizing the court’s affirmation of legislative power over out-of-state advocacy groups. “Our elected legislators, not out-of-state interest groups, hold the power to shape South Carolina’s policies in accordance with the values of its people,” Wilson stated.
This sentiment captures a broader dynamic at play: the tension between state autonomy in crafting abortion laws and nationwide advocacy efforts by organizations like Planned Parenthood, whose influence often extends beyond state lines.
For pro-life groups, the ruling is more than just a courtroom triumph—it’s a validation of their scientific and moral position. Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America hailed the outcome, calling it a win not just for unborn children but also for truth in science. Caitlin Connors, the organization’s political director, took direct aim at Planned Parenthood’s arguments, saying, “The level of science denial from this abortion giant…should astound South Carolinians.”
The ruling also stands as a benchmark for other states navigating post-Dobbs legislation. By clearly defining fetal heartbeat as a medically observable marker at around six weeks, South Carolina’s Supreme Court has established a framework that other courts may look to as they handle similar challenges.