BOSTON – Abortion-rights advocates and opponents are fighting over access to clinics, with dueling proposals that tighten requirements on women’s reproductive centers or provide more access to them.

Legislation filed by Reps. Betty Poirier, R- North Attleborough, and John Rogers, D-Norwood, requires clinics that perform at least 10 abortions a year to be licensed separately from other medical clinics and undergo inspections.

Poirier, the House of Representative’s second assistant minority leader, said the bill aims to protect womens’ health.

“I’m not proposing eliminating clinics that perform these procedures, but I do think they should be licensed and inspected so that women going to them don’t endanger their lives,” she said. “It’s a common sense proposal.”

Abortion-rights advocates say Massachusetts clinics are safe and don’t need more inspections. They call the move a “deceptive” attempt to restrict access to reproductive services that will stop private-practice doctors and clinics from performing abortions if their facilities don’t meet the criteria for a state license.

“There’s no place in our state for policies or facilities that seek to limit access to abortion under the guise of protecting women,” said Megan Amundson, executive director of NARAL Pro-Choice Massachusetts. “We cannot allow scare tactics and shame to replace medical science and the basic right to health care.”

NARAL Pro-Choice and other abortion rights groups are backing legislation to provide more access to reproductive services.

One bill, supported by more than a dozen lawmakers including Sen. Barbara L’Italien, D-Andover, seeks to restrict anti-abortion “crisis pregnancy centers” by banning state agencies from funding or referring patients to them.

Another measure, backed by more than 50 lawmakers, allows women under 16 to get permission from a judge to get an abortion if their parents, family or legal guardians are unwilling or unable to consent to the procedure.

“We know that requiring young women to consult with their parents does not compel them to do so,” Amundson said. “It results in them taking desperate measures, such as seeking care out of state or in other ways that might be unsafe.”

Nationwide, the battle over abortion clinics is raging as many states further restrict them.

On Tuesday, a federal appeals court upheld new limits in Texas that require abortion clinics to meet hospital-level standards – including rules on room sizes, staffing and air ventilation systems. The restrictions, approved by the state Legislature and signed by Gov. Rick Perry in 2013, are among the toughest in the nation.

Abortion rights groups said the ruling by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals will require millions of dollars in upgrades that will force many Texas clinics out of business, leaving only a handful of clinics in the state.

Nearly two dozen states, including Alabama, Wyoming, Mississippi and Tennessee, have approved laws requiring clinics to meet hospital-level standards and other restrictions, according to the nonprofit Guttmacher Institute, which supports abortion rights.

Other states have raised standards for medical care at clinics.

Last November, Tennessee voters approved an amendment to the state constitution that paves the way for tougher abortion regulations, including a requirement that clinics be licensed as ambulatory surgical treatment centers.

In Florida, lawmakers recently moved to require women to wait 24 hours before obtaining an abortion unless they can prove they are victims of crimes such as rape or domestic violence. Gov. Rick Scott is expected to sign the legislation.

Overall, the number of women seeking abortions in Massachusetts appears to be falling. There were 19,448 abortions in the state in 2013, according to the state Department of Public Health. That’s down 5.6 percent from 2010 when hospitals, clinics and physicians reported 20,802 abortions to health officials

Andrew Beckwith, executive director of the Massachusetts Family Institute, said at least 16 “unlicensed” abortion clinics in the state put women at risk because they’re aren’t regulated by state health officials.

“Tanning salons and tattoo parlors have higher levels of inspection than an abortion clinic,” he said. “Regardless of what your view is on abortion, itself, I think everyone wants women to be safe when they go for a medical procedure.”

Abortion rights groups say the licensing legislation will force clinics to close and women to go elsewhere.

“We all want to protect women’s health and safety. This bill will not do that,” said Tricia Wajda, a spokeswoman for the Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts. “It is an attempt to restrict access to safe, legal abortion.”

Gov. Charlie Baker, a Republican who is pro-abortion rights, hasn’t said whether he will support any of the bills.

But Democratic officials blasted the governor this week for headlining a political fundraiser for Poirier, saying his effort to raise campaign cash for the lawmaker is “ostensibly counter” to his own abortion views.

“Baker may continue to claim he is a different kind of Republican, but the fact remains he is the leader of a Massachusetts Republican Party that still has a long way to go on social issues such as a woman’s right to choose,” said Massachusetts Democratic Party spokesman Pat Beaudry in a statement.

Christian M. Wade covers the Massachusetts Statehouse for CNHI’s newspapers and websites. Reach him at cwade@cnhi.com