Abortion, Every Day (5.5.23)

In the States

The war on democracy continues! Missouri Republicans are trying to sabotage a pro-choice ballot measure by putting language into the proposal that claims restoring abortion rights would cost the state billions of dollars. The actual cost estimated by the state auditor? $51,000.

Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey is blocking the proposal from moving forward by refusing to sign off the auditor’s cost estimate, arguing that legalizing abortion in the state could cost as much as $51 billion, including a potential loss of $12.5 billion in Medicaid dollars. (If you’re keeping count: that’s 1 million times higher than the actual estimated amount.)

The good news is that the ACLU is asking a judge to rule Bailey’s actions unconstitutional, arguing that “the unilateral actions of the unelected Attorney General to hold hostage the people’s constitutional right to the initiative process is an attempt to subvert direct democracy to prevent Missourians from voting on the fundamental right to reproductive freedom.”

As you know, this is all part of Republicans country-wide effort to stop abortion-related ballot measures from moving forward. They know Americans support legal abortion, so they don’t want voters to have a choice. In Ohio, for example, Republicans want to raise the standards on ballot measures to require 60% of votes instead of a simple majority. This week, former Ohio governors spoke out against the conservative efforts, saying that voters should have a choice. Which seems like…the bare minimum? Former Ohio governor Ted Strickland, for example, said, “It's a very transparent effort to subvert the will of the people.”

More on subverting the will of the people: Republicans in Oregon are trying to stop pro-choice legislation from passing by simply…not showing up for work. State senators haven’t shown up for several days in a row, preventing a quorum in order to delay any movement on HB 2002, which would protect abortion rights and gender-affirming care. Republicans claim that they’re boycotting because the bill doesn’t adhere to an old state law requiring that legislation summaries be written at a grade-school level. Which, of course, is bullshit. “This is about abortion, guns and transgender rights,” says Senate Majority Leader Kate Lieber. “The timing of this is such that they’re walking out on important legislation that Oregonians sent us here to do.”

As the North Carolina abortion ban heads to the governor (where it will be vetoed, and then the veto will be likely overridden), it’s important to remember that this law won’t just impact patients in the state. North Carolina has been an abortion safe haven for those from anti-abortion states, something Republicans are well-aware of and planned for: The restrictions mandating three day waiting periods and multiple in-person appointments will make it near-impossible for out-of-state women to get care in North Carolina. “It would be untenable,” says Duke OBGYN Dr. Jonas Swartz. “Most patients who are having abortions already have kids at home. They’re taking time off work, they’re traveling.” Which, of course, is the point. (Related: Here’s a piece on how the proposed abortion ban is impacting the gubernatorial race.)

In some better news out of the South, a group in Florida has formed to start a campaign for an abortion rights ballot measure in the state. Florida recently passed a 6-week abortion ban, which is expected to go into effect when the state Supreme Court rules on a challenge to the state’s existing 15-week restriction. Floridians Protecting Freedom will hold a press conference on Monday in Tallahassee. From their statement:

“The decision to have an abortion belongs to Floridians, their families, and those they trust—this campaign is an opportunity to ensure those protections remain in our state Constitution.”

Thanks to a recent effort by Republicans, ballot measures in the state now need 60% of voters to pass, as opposed to 50%. The hopeful news? Polling shows that 64% of Floridians believe abortion should be legal in all or most circumstances.

Montana Gov. Greg Gianforte signed legislation this week to restrict abortion access, including a law stating that the state constitution’s right to privacy doesn’t include abortion. The legislation was created to be challenged and will end up in front of the State Supreme Court, forcing them to issue a new decision on the matter. (Abortion has been protected in the state constitution since 1999.) Gianforte also signed a bill requiring prior authorization for Medicaid coverage of abortions due to rape, incest or the health of the mother; a bill requiring abortion medication complication reporting (you know what that’s all about); and a bill requiring a medically unnecessary ultrasounds before an abortion (this one, thankfully, was blocked from going into effect by a judge).

Oral arguments started yesterday in the challenge to Wisconsin’s 1849 abortion ban, a law that state Attorney General Josh Kaul says is too old and conflicts with newer abortion legislation. A Republican prosecutor is asking a judge to throw out the lawsuit, but regardless of what happens the case is almost certain to end up in the state Supreme Court, where pro-choice Judge Janet Protasiewicz will be seated in August.

Maryland Gov. Wes Moore signed abortion rights legislation on Wednesday that establishes a reproductive rights ballot measure for the 2024 election, protects patient data, and prohibits the prosecution of abortion providers and patients. Gov. Moore said, “We are living at a time when the Supreme Court is actively working to take Americans’ rights away instead of expanding them…when more than half the states’ in our country are moving toward banning or severely restricting abortion access.”

Colorado activists are raising the alarm about anti-abortion centers targeting young people in the state. University of Northern Colorado student Aurora Rousseau says that a center is trying to trick people into their facilities by saying they offer “pre-abortion screenings”—language that implies they offer abortions without actually saying as much. Rousseau said, “We have had reports of students going in there and then they are essentially slut-shamed and told that they shouldn’t get an abortion.” Part of the problem, she pointed out, is that students are looking for accessible healthcare—and the center offers free STI testing. “But when you get there, it’s a very different experience and it causes a lot of harm.” 

Speaking of anti-abortion centers: The medical director of a chain of centers, Choices Pregnancy Centers, is asking the courts to reinstate Arizona’s near-total abortion ban. (State Attorney General Kris Mayes is asking a judge to reject his suit based on the fact that he has no standing.)

The fight on abortion continues to go local: Danville, Illinois, banned the mailing of abortion pills via city ordinance, in spite of state law that says abortion is legal. This is all part of a broader effort by anti-abortion activists to bring a case like this all the way up to the Supreme Court. Mark Lee Dickson, the (very creepy) guy behind these efforts, says, “We don’t expect to see this end in Danville. We expect to see other cities throughout the great state of Illinois pass ordinances as well.”

A few numbers for you: Idaho doctors are continuing to the leave the state in droves. A recent survey showed that 75 of 117 OBGYNs in the state—over 64%—are considering leaving. In some better statistics, a poll of Nevada voters shows that 62% of respondents would support enshrining abortion rights in the state constitution.

And you should always read Moira Donegan and Mark Joseph Stern—but you should especially read them when they’ve written something together! Here they are in Slate on the Texas man who sued his ex-wife’s friends for helping her to obtain an abortion, and how his abusive tactic is now backfiring. (Good, fuck that guy.)

Quick hits:

• California has launched a hotline for people who need legal help around abortion rights;

• The Michigan House passed legislation banning companies from retaliating against employees for receiving abortions;

• I appreciate this op-ed from a Maryland nursing student taking on the conservative talking point that “women deserve better than abortion”;

• The editorial board at the Albuquerque Journal in New Mexico call on politicians to find common ground in stopping maternal mortality;

• And abortion funds in the South are struggling so now is a good time support your local group!

In the Nation

Reporter Sofia Resnick has a good roundup of the kinds of broad attacks we’re seeing from the anti-choice movement, who are focusing especially on abortion medication. What’s particularly noteworthy is how activists keep claiming that they’re protecting women and don’t want to punish anyone for having an abortion, yet continue to push policies that are cruel and punitive. West Virginia Republicans, for example, have introduced legislation that would require women to bag up whatever they bleed while having an abortion at home via medication, treat it like medical waste, and bring it back to their health care provider. I told you about this policy late last year, which was thought up by the radical anti-abortion Students for Life; they (falsely) argue that flushing it is bad for the environment. As I pointed out then, anyone having an early medication abortion is unlikely to be able to distinguish embryonic tissue from general bleeding. The cruelty and humiliation is the point.

The FDA might approve an over-the-counter birth control pill—which is great news! But if you’re wondering if the anti-abortion groups going after mifepristone will similarly attack the FDA over contraception, the answer is: you bet your ass. Though, naturally, they won’t say that explicitly. When The Washington Post asked anti-abortion groups about the hormonal birth control that could soon be more available, the National Right to Life organization said it “does not take a stance on anything that prevents fertilization,” and Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America said it is currently focusing on “advancing laws that protect unborn children and their mothers from abortion, especially from dangerous mail-order abortion pills.” Both of which are very clever ways of saying nothing at all and everything at the same time.

Don’t miss this piece from The Guardian about what it’s like to work in an abortion clinic in a state where abortion has been banned. These are providers and clinics that are somehow still managing to help patients, even as they’re being turned away elsewhere. One Alabama woman who had an abortion out-of-state, for example, tried to go see a doctor after she came home and ran a fever—hospital staff refused to see her. West Alabama Women’s Center was the only place she found treatment (and kindness.)

Quick hits:

• The Nation on why it’s so vital to protect tele-health abortion;

• GQ has some tips for post-Roe sex etiquette (which sounds more trite than the article actually is!);

• Conservatives and religious leaders are still making a fuss about the rule allowing service members to obtain abortions in limited circumstances;

• Ms. magazine on the young people leading the abortion rights charge;

• And more and more colleges—today it’s Wesleyan—are coming out to promise coverage of abortion medication.

Keep An Eye On

When Idaho passed its ‘abortion trafficking’ law, I warned that this was just the beginning of Republicans finding ways to limit women’s ability to travel. It was never going to stop with preventing minors from getting care. Right on cue: The Washington Examiner, a conservative outlet, ran a piece today about pro-choice states that are acting as abortion sanctuaries for out-of-state patients. The reporter complains about abortion providers setting up clinics in border towns in order to make it easier for patients coming from anti-choice states, calling it “abortion tourism” and bemoaning how it “encourages interstate travel” for abortion.

And Kelsey Pritchard, the Director of State Affairs at Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, told the Examiner that “states are going to have to look at things like what Idaho has done and try to think about how to be creative about this problem.” (Emphasis mine.) Please pay attention to the language that they’re using here! They’re not going to say outright that states should ban travel, but they are absolutely indicating that that is the goal.

SBA Pro-Life America, in particular, is very slick about saying things without saying things. Back in January, for example, I flagged that a representative from the group said they wanted to focus on stopping minors from leaving the state “particularly without their parents' consent.” Please not that ‘particularly’! They are signaling, very clearly, in my opinion, that they next move will be to ban teens from leaving the state for abortion even with a parent’s permission.

So when an anti-choice activist at a leading national group says they want legislators to “be creative” about women leaving the state—we should be fucking worried!

What Conservatives Are Saying

You know I talk a lot about the way that conservatives and the anti-choice movement have been co-opting feminist rhetoric. The latest comes from this piece about Colorado’s law that stops doctors from offering unproven and unscientific ‘abortion reversals’—legislation that the writer calls “forced abortion.” That’s quite a statement! We’re going to see more and more of this; anti-choice activists know that people see then as anti-women (because they are) and are desperate to use language that makes it seems as if they give a shit.

By the way, North Carolina Republicans are really focusing in on their “reasonable, commonsense” language when it comes to their not-at-all-reasonable-or-commonsense bill. House Speaker Tim Moore called it a “middle-of-the-road” bill; and Sen. Joyce Krawiec, a bill sponsor, said last night that lawmakers “worked for months to come up with this mainstream, common-sense piece of legislation that will address the abortion issue, as well as reduce infant and maternal mortality and morbidity.”

What a crock of shit. It’s that second piece that interests me too—the idea that the bill will reduce maternal and infant mortality, which we know isn’t true. Especially knowing how Republicans are fabricating data at the moment, and that North Carolina’s ban has the same complication reporting language as Texas’ legislation. (By the way, doctors in North Carolina are VERY pissed about the language legislators are using.)

Abortion, Every Day in the News

I was on MSNBC with Chris Hayes last night if you’d like to check out my segment. Fun fact: I recorded that from the back of a van aka MSNBC’s “mobile studio.” (The only time you’ll ever catch me getting into an unmarked white van!)