On Monday, Colorado House Democrats dismissed the right to – and value of – innocent human life.

In a party-line vote, the House passed HB22-1279, which explicitly establishes abortion as a “fundamental right” in Colorado – and forbids any and all limitations on it.

To be clear, Colorado is already the most liberal of the 50 states on abortion. Democrats claim this bill is necessary in case the U.S. Supreme Court overturns its 1973 Roe v. Wade decision. They claim HB1279 merely “codifies” current law.

However, even if the Court were to overturn Roe – a highly unlikely outcome – nothing would change in Colorado.

As Republican State Rep. Stephanie Luck explained to me on KNUS radio, “We are what is known as a ‘code state.’ Under our laws, unless there’s a specific provision outlawing the practice, it is deemed permissible.” Consequently, any abortion restrictions must expressly become law to change a thing.

This isn’t insignificant: Restricting abortion has historically proven extraordinarily difficult here. Case-in-point: Proposition 115, which voters rejected in 2020.

The measure would have prohibited abortion after 22 weeks gestational age, with exceptions for the life of the mother or if her life is ‘threatened by a physical disorder, physical illness, or physical injury.'”

Importantly, Prop 115 reflected modern science: An unborn baby has a heartbeat at 15 weeks and can move fingers, react to physical stimuli and kick. At 24 weeks gestational age, a baby is fully formed and “viable” (capable of living outside of the womb).

If the pro-life movement has such difficulty placing this kind of commonsense limit on abortion – one which accepts the science about human beings in the womb – what could possibly justify Democrats’ alleged fears?

Republican legislators? Let’s be serious. There is virtually no chance there will ever be sufficient pro-life majorities in the General Assembly – along with a Republican governor – who could dramatically restrict the practice of abortion.

As I argued in The Denver Gazette in January, it’s highly improbable the Supreme Court will actually overturn Roe’s 50-year precedent.

“SCOTUS seems likelier to update Roe to reflect today’s medical science by enabling broader abortion limits after about 20 weeks, or five months into a nine-month pregnancy,” I wrote.

Such a ruling would revise Roe, not overturn it. As Ilya Somin, Professor of Law at George Mason University and a self-described supporter of abortion rights, told me, “As I see it, a possible 20-week point for restricting abortion would preserve most of Roe, as a practical matter, since over 90% of abortions occur before 20 weeks. It might make a hash of some of Roe’s reasoning, but the bottom line would be preserving abortion rights for the vast majority of those who want to exercise them.”

Let’s be real: The Democrats’ bill is unnecessary and preemptive. It isn’t based in reality. It’s also much more than simply “codifying” current law.

Colorado has only one substantive restriction on abortion. If a minor under age 18 seeks an abortion, her parents must be notified (but aren’t required to consent) unless the child obtains a judicial exemption.

HB1279 ends this commonsense yet limited restriction – one which ensures parents are at least aware of their child’s crucial medical decisions while providing a judicial off-ramp for children in abusive homes.

“We know that parental notification – even if it’s not parental consent – will significantly reduce the number of girls who will proceed with an abortion,” Luck noted.

So, why are Democrats separating children from their parents concerning such critical, life-altering decisions?

“Their parents will have absolutely no idea why their daughter is potentially suicidal, why she’s potentially having physical complications,” Luck added. “Abortion is not a simple procedure that doesn’t have complications.”

HB1279 effectively forbids local communities from zoning abortion clinics because that could impede access to an abortion. The government cannot regulate the safety standards of a clinic, either.

“It is by and large the most extreme thing I’ve ever seen in the legislature to say that you have an absolute right to kill another human being based on their age, developmental status, and location, and that there can be no regulation of that practice whatsoever – it goes beyond the pale,” Luck said.

She’s right. Roe v. Wade never went this far. It didn’t make abortion a “fundamental right.” It established a “right to privacy,” with abortion merely an extension of that broader right.

Furthermore, the Supreme Court has said that, once an unborn child is “viable,” states have an interest in regulating abortion because there is another person involved. House Democrats dismiss this core principle by even declaring a “fertilized egg, embryo, or fetus does not have independent or derivative rights.”

To House Democrats, an unborn baby does not deserve the right to life – at any stage of a pregnancy or under any circumstances. As The Gazette editorialized, this may even include infanticide after birth.

Numerous rights guaranteed under our constitutions – such as freedom of speech and of the press and the right to bear arms – are not absolute. They ALL have some boundaries.

Democrats are manufacturing a nonexistent crisis, scaremongering to its political base and ramming through preemptive legislation – all to fabricate a “fundamental right” with no limitations whatsoever. A right to terminate human lives, even at the point of birth.

Let’s hope the State Senate – or perhaps ultimately, Gov. Polis – puts a swift stop to this extremism.

Jimmy Sengenberger is host of “The Jimmy Sengenberger Show” Saturdays from 6-9am on News/Talk 710 KNUS. He also hosts “Jimmy at the Crossroads,” a webshow and podcast in partnership with The Washington Examiner.