Abortion, Every Day (6.16.23)

Why Republicans keep using the word 'consensus'

In the States

We have some fantastic news out of Iowa: In a 3-3 ruling, the state Supreme Court did not reinstate a near-total abortion ban. In split decisions like this (one judge recused herself because she once worked for a law firm that represented an abortion provider), the Court affirms the lower court’s decision. In this case, it was a 2019 ruling that blocked the law. This doesn’t mean that Republicans can’t try to pass another abortion ban—they most certainly will.

A few things to note: In response to the decision, Gov. Kim Reynolds said the ruling “disregards Iowa voters who elected representatives willing to stand up for the rights of unborn children.” The truth is that 61% of voters in Iowa want abortion to be legal in all or most cases—so Reynolds is playing some rhetorical games here by claiming the decision goes against voters’ wishes because it overrules what legislators want.

As pro-choice advocates work across multiple states to get abortion rights on the ballot, we’ve been seeing an increase of language like this. The idea is that voters don’t need to have a direct say because they already made their voices heard when they elected their representatives. (Never mind gerrymandering, voter suppression, etc.)

I also wanted to applaud the AP for this description of what Republicans call a “heartbeat” law: “At the point where advanced technology can detect the first visual flutter, the embryo isn’t yet a fetus and does not have a heart.” More of this please.

North Carolina abortion providers are challenging the state’s recently-passed abortion ban, arguing that Republicans “injected requirements that are unintelligible, inherently contradictory, irrational, and/or otherwise unconstitutional into every part of the abortion process.” The lawsuit, brought by the ACLU on behalf of the providers, is focusing on a few specific provisions in the law including the fact that the ban says abortion is banned at 12 weeks, but specifically prohibits abortion medication after 10 weeks of pregnancy; conflicting and confusing language on ‘medical emergencies’; and a restriction on giving patients information on how they can get an abortion after 12 weeks, a clear violation of free speech.

In related news, North Carolina Gov. Roy Cooper spoke to The Washington this week about the abortion ban, specifically about how the law passed against the wishes of voters:

There’s also a new challenge this week to North Dakota’s abortion ban. The suit is an amended version of an existing challenge to the state’s trigger ban—changed now that the state’s trigger law bas been replaced with a new abortion ban.

The new law bans abortion with just a few ‘exceptions’: if a person’s life is at risk; if their health is at “serious” risk; and if the pregnancy is a result of rape or incest, but only within the first six weeks.

Center for Reproductive Rights attorney Meetra Mehdizadeh told the Associated Press that the law is confusing, and unclear as to “when people are actually allowed to provide an abortion under the exceptions.”

Mehdizadeh also said something that it so important, and that I’m definitely going to be stealing in the future: She points out that the law’s health and life exception doesn’t include mental health even though mental health is “one of the most common causes of pregnancy-related death.” That’s a striking—a true!—statement that we need to be talking more about.

The Ohio Supreme Court ruled today that Republican’s special August election seeking to raise the standard for ballot measures can go on as planned. Democrats had filed a lawsuit against the election based on the fact that Gov. Mike DeWine signed a law this year banning August elections. As you likely remember, the state GOP is using the special election to try to increase the votes required to pass a ballot measure from a simple majority up to 60%. Related: The Ohio Capital Journal has a profile of one of the conservative legal activists behind this effort to undermine democracy: University of Toledo law professor Lee Strang.

As expected, Oregon Democrats ended Republicans’ 6-week walk-out by watering down abortion protections for teenagers. In order for minors to be able to have an abortion without parental permission, a doctor will need to believe that notifying a parent or guardian would put the the patient in danger, or two doctors in separate facilities would have to agree that the lack of notification is in the best interest of the patient. You know how I feel about this—young people are a vulnerable group that needs more support than ever, and I’m disappointed by the ‘compromise’. That said, it definitely could have been worse.

A family medicine doctor in Maine has written a terrific op-ed at the Portland Press Herald about why abortion care at all stages of pregnancy is so vital—and why state law needs to take that into account. I especially appreciated Dr. Julia McDonald’s comments on the notion of ‘viability’, which she explains “is complex and dependent on a multiplicity of factors.”

“Since it is impossible to legislate every pregnancy experience, medical professionals must be trusted to use our best judgment,” she writes.

Finally, Michigan continues to model what proactive abortion rights leadership looks like. After enshrining reproductive rights in the state constitution, Michigan Democrats now plan to take on TRAP laws. From Senate Majority Leader Winnie Brinks:

“The whole idea under past legislatures controlled by anti-choice majorities, they would try to throw up unnecessary barriers that are not related to medical care because of their personal beliefs about reproductive health—and that's simply not the job of government.”

Some of the laws they plan to take on are restrictions on insurance coverage for abortion, waiting periods, parental consent requirements, and onerous mandates for clinics that have nothing to do with patient safety.

Quick hits:

• More info on the Utah Planned Parenthood that closed suddenly;

• The Washington Post profiles Wyoming abortion clinic Wellspring Health Access;

• CalMatters has a comprehensive investigation into the anti-abortion centers in California;

• A new report shows that Arkansas is the bottom five states in terms of child health, poverty, teen pregnancy and child care accessibility;

• How Colorado became an abortion safe haven;

• And vending machines stocked with emergency contraception are being installed on college campuses in Washington.

In the Nation

Vice President Kamala Harris is going to commemorate the anniversary of Roe being overturned with a speech in North Carolina. I have some mixed feelings on this, based on a critical question: Does this mean President Joe Biden will not be making a speech about the anniversary? If they’re both speaking, then perfect. That’s exactly right.

If Biden isn’t giving a speech, I’m going to be pretty pissed tbh. Obviously, the vice president is better on abortion rights by a mile and I would love to hear what she has to say. And we know Biden has been less than enthusiastic on the issue: in his State of the Union after Roe was overturned, the president dedicated about 30 seconds to abortion. But that’s why it’s so important that he does say something now. Biden should be giving a national address about the nightmare we’ve been living in for the last year. Half of the country’s population lost a fundamental human right! Say something!

In less irritating news, this is incredible: I missed this last month when Wired reported on it, but apparently the right wing ‘medical’ group, American College of Pediatricians, left its Google Drive open to the public, revealing all of their strategy documents. Yesterday, The Washington Post published an investigation into those documents and the organization—which claims they were the victim of a “malicious cyberattack and hate crime.” (LOL)

The American College of Pediatricians is part of the broader anti-choice trend that I flagged last month in our investigation into fake abortion ‘complication’ data in Texas. The movement is absolutely desperate to establish themselves as medically credible despite all evidence to the contrary, so they’ve been setting up these bullshit organizations that claim to have scientific expertise into the supposed harms of abortion. (And in this group’s case, deeply bigoted views about LGBTQ people.) It’s definitely worth reading WaPo’s whole article.

I reported this week that House Democrats had sent a letter to the executives at Costco, Health Mart, Kroger, Safeway and Walmart, asking them what the companies’ plans were on carrying and dispensing mifepristone. From the letter (which you can find in full here):

“Your continued silence is unacceptable as it is misaligned with your publicly stated values in support of equal access to health care and of gender equality. In light of current attacks on bodily autonomy and on people’s freedom to make their own health care decisions, your companies have a responsibility to consumers and communities to address this issue as soon as possible.”

The 19th looks at how Democrats are using data to fight for abortion rights, largely using a data clearinghouse called the Democratic Data Exchange. Former Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards says, “DDx is one of the greatest assets the pro-choice movement has in a post-Roe world.” It’s an interesting piece if you want to know some of nitty gritty campaign details.

In another close-up look at a pivotal part of what’s happening with abortion: The Conversation explains the role of hospital ethics committees in abortion cases and what they can and can’t do: “The question of whether an abortion is medically necessary or legally acceptable is one that doctors or lawyers would make, not ethicists.” I’ve been trying to learn more about these committees, and this was definitely a clarifying read.

And at MSNBC, Andrea Grimes writes about the question Republicans don’t want to answer about abortion bans:

“We should hear what charges politicians believe we should face if we refuse to comply with abortion bans or experience miscarriage. We ought to know what kind of time they believe we should serve, or the fines they believe we should pay. Because the people driving anti-abortion policy are not at all shy about their ultimate goal: criminalizing abortion, including people who have abortions.”

Quick hits:

• A new report shows how abortion rights impacted Republicans’ support with Latinos;

• Jezebel on Twitter’s decision to block abortion-related ads and other companies that are doing the same;

• Mashable on the importance of trans-inclusive language in the abortion rights fight;

• Smithsonian Magazine with some history on the Comstock Act;

• And Vogue speaks to women who had abortions later in pregnancy after fetal abnormality diagnoses about their experiences and abortion stigma.

Anti-Choice Strategy: Domestic Terrorism

We know that violence and harassment directed at abortion clinics has been on the rise since Roe was overturned—and that there’s a long history of anti-abortion domestic terrorism in this country. Yet over the last year, Republican lawmakers and anti-choice groups have been working hard to make themselves into the victims, suggesting it’s actually the anti-abortion movement that’s under attack by violent pro-choice groups.

Earlier this year, for example, Republicans adopted a resolution condemning violence against anti-abortion groups. And the GOP has successfully pressured the Biden administration to use the FACE Act—meant to protect reproductive health clinics from violence and harassment—to prosecute pro-choice activists for isolated incidents of vandalism, like graffiti. (Let’s not even get into the frenzied bullshit of conservative media.)

It’s all so ridiculous, and now the trend got even more concerning: Today, The Intercept reports that the FBI is increasingly investigating pro-choice “domestic terrorism.” The publication found that the agency has opened almost 10 times the number of abortion-related terrorism cases as it had in 2021. And while the FBI declined to say what the breakdown was in terms of anti-choice vs pro-choice incidents being investigated, late last year, Director Christopher Wray said that about 70% of their cases “are cases of violence or threats against pro-life.”

Former FBI agent and Brennan Center for Justice fellow Michael German told The Intercept, “The FBI should not devote counterterrorism resources to vandalism cases that don’t threaten human life out of some flawed notion of parity.” Indeed.

Anti-Choice Strategy: ‘Consensus’

As the anniversary of Roe being overturned inches closer, we’re seeing a ton of reports come out looking at what’s happened over the last year—including a lot of polling data. AED will publishing a synthesis next week of what we think is the most important info for you to know, but I had to flag one thing in the meantime:

Data from PerryUndem shows that we’ve seen a significant shift in what people think other people believe about abortion. Before Roe was overturned, for example, 69% of anti-choice voters thought most Americans opposed abortion. But by December, only 43% thought the same.

I’m willing to bet this is part of the reason we’re seeing Republicans and anti-abortion organizations focus on the language of ‘consensus’—refusing to call a federal abortion ban a ‘ban’, instead calling it a “national consensus” or a “national standard.” It’s not only because they’re trying to distract from the fact that they’re passing restrictions and bans against the wishes of Americans, but because they know that voters are influenced by what they believe other people think.

If voters on the fence start to understand that the vast majority of Americans are pro-choice, that could swing them in our direction—and conservatives know it.

Listen Up

To hear about what activists on the ground have been doing post-Roe, check out this episode of Crosscut Talks, featuring Kelsea McLain of the Yellow Hammer Fund, and Judith Arcana, a member of the Jane Collective.

2024

The Republican mayor of Miami, Francis Suarez, has announced his candidacy for president this week. Suarez says he believes a 6-week abortion ban is too strict, but that he would support a 15-week federal abortion ban. Please take note of the way he’s using the kind of language we’ve been talking about so much here that suggests there’s an American ‘consensus’ on abortion:

“We are in a situation where 70% of the country agrees with a limitation of 15 weeks where there is an exception for the life of the mother and an exception for rape and incest…”

Speaking of Florida Republicans running for president: Ron DeSantis said in an interview this week that Donald Trump is too ‘soft’ on abortion. “He said it was ‘harsh’ to protect an unborn child when there’s a detectable heartbeat…I thought he would compliment the fact that we were able to do the heartbeat bill, which pro-lifers have wanted for a long time.”

What Conservatives are Saying

You know how I feel about this new trend of men talking about how abortion has traumatized them. I try to not give it too much oxygen, even as conservative media tries to make it a thing, but I had to share this IndyStar op-ed from a man who works at an anti-abortion organization talking about how sad he is that he didn’t get a choice in his partner’s abortion. It was this line, in particular, though, that had my eyes rolling all the way back into my head:

“More than 60% of Americans have internalized the idea that women hold ultimate power over their unborn children, up to and including the ability to end their lives at will.”

It’s the word ‘internalized’ that really did me in—as if women’s autonomy over their own bodies is some kind of fad rather than a vital human right. In any case, fuck this guy.

Have a good weekend. 🙂