I'll begin by saying that this article displays great journalistic integrity, offering corrective updates with lots of linked explanations. It also provides good context, which is very helpful in an article that requires some understanding of South Dakota state-level politics. However, I think Mother Jones is grasping at straws trying to give the story simple shock value, whereas the legal facts are much more subtle. This bill is shifting shape under scrutiny, and I think this author should do a better job of employing legal experts to demonstrate exactly what it does and does not do.

While the writer did a good job of sourcing and updating the article with new information, I am still unclear as to the actual bills' content, and find the distinction of legal abortions vs. illegal acts confusing. There is definitely an attempt to shock us with the title, but I agree with Jon, there are more nuances here.

This is a thorough review of South Dakota bill. With all concerns of state income and needed legislation many are still taking time to get legislation like this bill. Yes, to does take your breath away.

The article catches some of the outrage at this bill, and states the disingenuous denial of the bill sponsor without comment.