UPDATE: BREAKING: Mass. abortion law repeal backed by Catholic bishops hits nearly 100K signatures to get on 2028 ballot
Massachusetts pro-life advocates have gathered 99,962 certified signatures to challenge the state's expanded abortion law, exceeding the threshold needed to suspend it and seek a 2028 ballot measure. The Repeal188 initiative aims to overturn a law signed by Gov. Maura Healey in August that removed previous restrictions on late-term abortion. Boston Archbishop Richard G. Henning and the other three Massachusetts bishops support the repeal effort, saying the law is unjust and every human life deserves protection. The campaign was launched by the Compassionate Care Coalition and is supported by several state and national pro-life organizations.
5 hours ago
Massachusetts’ Catholic bishops and a coalition of anti-abortion groups are backing a referendum effort to overturn a state law that changed late-term abortion rules. The campaign announced 99,962 certified signatures—more than the 49,716 needed to suspend the law—while seeking to put the question before voters in 2028. 1
The initiative, called Repeal188, was launched in September by the Compassionate Care Coalition. It targets a law signed by Gov. Maura Healey in August that removed prior restrictions on late-term abortions, leaving the decision to “the professional judgment of the physician.” 1
The threshold signature total was announced at an Oct. 29 Statehouse news conference hosted by Massachusetts Citizens for Life. Coalition chair Sam Miele said additional signatures were still being counted and presented; volunteers delivered boxes of certified petitions to the secretary of state after the event. 1
Miele said Healey could issue an emergency preamble to put the law into effect immediately, overriding the suspension triggered by the petition. He urged the governor to let voters decide. 1
Boston Archbishop Richard G. Henning and the bishops of Springfield, Fall River and Worcester supported the initiative. In a message to Catholics, the four bishops said they had opposed the law and supported the petition, describing children as gifts and saying every person deserves a chance to live. 1
Henning said most Massachusetts parishes took part in signature-gathering over several weekends, following state rules for petitions. He said the bishops wanted to signal to political leaders that pro-life voices remained in the state. Bishop William D. Byrne described the parishioners’ response as strong and grassroots. 1
The campaign is also supported by Massachusetts Family Action, Massachusetts Citizens for Life, Massachusetts Family Institute, Democrats for Life of America and the Cape Cod Pro-Life Alliance. Miele said Protestant churches also participated. 1
Healey and supporters of the law have said it is intended to help women facing serious late-term pregnancy complications, including those who might otherwise need to travel out of state. Henning disputed that characterization, arguing that the law was not necessary to address those cases and suggesting it was driven by election-year politics. 1
The bishops criticized the absence of limits in the new law. Henning argued that care should be sought for both the pregnant woman and the fetus, while Bishop Edgar M. da Cunha said the law could permit later abortions for any reason. Bishop Robert J. McManus called it “horribly immoral,” and Byrne said it had no limitations or safeguards. 1
The next procedural question is whether Healey will use the emergency-preamble authority described by Miele. If the petition proceeds, the effort aims to bring repeal of the law to Massachusetts voters in 2028. 1
Catholic ethics and legal protection of unborn human dignity
Catholic teaching holds that unborn human life possesses inherent dignity and a right to life from conception—not because the state grants those rights, but because they belong to the human being. It therefore calls both individuals and civil authorities to protect unborn life. This moral principle does not mean that law can solve every ethical problem or that every wrong must be prohibited by statute; Catholic teaching also recognizes limits on civil law and the possibility that lawmakers may tolerate some evils to avoid a greater harm.
The Catholic argument begins with the identity and continuity of the developing human being. The embryo does not become human only after reaching a particular stage of development or acquiring particular abilities. The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith points to the continuity of human development and argues that there is no change in nature or gradation in moral value between the stages before and after birth. It therefore teaches that the human embryo has “from the very beginning, the dignity proper to a person.”
This claim is not presented as a laboratory measurement of the soul or as a demand that biology alone settle every philosophical question. The same instruction says that the spiritual soul cannot be observed experimentally, while arguing that scientific knowledge of the embryo gives reason grounds for recognizing a personal presence from the beginning of human life. It also notes that an earlier instruction avoided making an explicitly philosophical definition of the embryo as a person, while still affirming the connection between the embryo’s human existence and its moral worth.
The ethical conclusion is that respect is due to the unborn child regardless of dependence, vulnerability, or stage of development. John Paul II summarized this principle by saying that the human being must be respected and treated as a person from conception, and that the right to life of every innocent human being must be recognized from that same moment.
The right to life is foundational because other rights cannot be exercised without life itself. The Pontifical Academy for Life describes it as the primary right and says that every human being—especially one who is weak or not self-sufficient—should receive social protection against serious violations of bodily and mental integrity. This means that dependence on another person does not make an unborn child’s life less worthy of protection.
In practice, the principle rules out intentionally killing the unborn child and treating embryos as disposable material. The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith states that embryos must not be destroyed, mutilated, or treated as objects for experimentation on the grounds that they are surplus or unlikely to develop normally. It also says that the state has a responsibility to guard fundamental rights in the face of biomedical technologies, since private conscience and researchers’ self-regulation alone may not ensure adequate protection.
Catholic ethics also sees respect for unborn life as part of a wider responsibility toward human dignity in medicine and public life. John Paul II praised medical work that protects the life and health of the unborn child, presenting scientific knowledge as something that can serve rather than instrumentalize vulnerable human life. The principle does not reject scientific research as such; it requires that research respect the human being rather than reduce that being to manipulable material.
In this account, rights are not gifts bestowed by parents, a majority, or the government. The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith says that the right to life and physical integrity belongs to every human being from conception to death, and that such rights are inherent in the person rather than concessions of society or the state. It therefore argues that civil law should recognize and defend these rights, including the rights of those who are most vulnerable.
Legal protection can include recognizing the unborn child as a bearer of rights, preventing intentional destruction, and providing appropriate sanctions for deliberate violations. The 1987 instruction specifically calls for legal protection of the unborn child and for appropriate penal sanctions against deliberate violations of the child’s rights. John Paul II likewise argued that legal recognition should reflect the embryo’s status as an individual human being and should not disregard the ethical significance of that status.
The underlying concern is equality before the law. If a category of innocent human beings is denied protection because of its developmental stage, the 1987 instruction argues, the state withholds from some people protection that should be accorded to all. This is why Catholic argument about unborn life is not only a private religious claim: it presents the protection of vulnerable human beings as a matter of justice and the common good. Benedict XVI similarly says that human dignity is an inalienable right and that every juridical order is required to recognize and respect it.
Catholic teaching does not equate every moral wrong with something civil law must prohibit in every circumstance. The 1987 instruction says civil law should defend fundamental rights and promote the common good, but it also recognizes that law cannot replace conscience or regulate matters outside its competence. It may sometimes tolerate conduct it cannot forbid without causing a greater evil.
That qualification does not mean that the Church regards the denial of unborn life’s dignity as morally acceptable. It distinguishes the moral judgment about an act from the practical judgment about what a particular law can effectively and justly require. The supplied teaching sets out the governing principle—protection of the unborn child’s fundamental rights—but does not prescribe a complete legal code for every country or settle every question about the design and enforcement of a particular statute.
The central Catholic claim is therefore both ethical and legal: unborn human beings have dignity and a right to life from conception, and justice requires that civil society take that claim seriously in law and public policy. The precise legal arrangements may differ by jurisdiction, but the available Catholic sources do not support treating the unborn child’s basic human worth as dependent on development, usefulness, or legal recognition.