Abortion, Every Day (7.11.23)

America's most powerful anti-choice org says there's no such thing as abortion bans

In the States

Iowa is having its special legislative session today, in which Republicans will try to push through a near-total abortion ban: the legislation would prohibit ending a pregnancy after ‘cardiac activity’ is detected, approximately 6-weeks. (‘Heartbeat bill’ is a misnomer because there is no heart that early in a pregnancy.) All of this is being done against the wishes of Iowa voters, 61% of whom want abortion to be legal in the state.

Not-so-surprisingly, GOP leaders have set a very limited schedule for public testimony today, and are requiring a final vote by 11pm. From Democratic Sen. Janet Petersen:

“Do you have somewhere you need to be at midnight? Does someone in this chamber have somewhere you need to be tomorrow? You make women wait 24 hours for abortion care, but you’re going to give them less than 3 hours…to make the case of why their bodies should matter?”

Democratic Senate minority leader Pam Jochum said Republicans are “rushing to take away Iowans’ established rights and personal freedoms…and they hope they can do it fast enough that Iowans won’t even notice.” Ruth Richardson, president of Planned Parenthood North Central States, says that if the law is enacted, “it would block about 98% of abortions in Iowa.”

As Republicans try to speed the legislation through, abortion rights protesters have filled the Capitol building—and according to Iowa reporters, things have been getting pretty heated. Iowa citizens are rightfully furious. Check out the public testimony made by Des Moines resident Felicia Hilton, for example, who absolutely laid into Republicans. She says, “You’re the same people who would slap the bread out of Jesus’ hand.” (Someone give this woman a medal, for real.)

As we wait this nightmare out, you can read the full text of the Iowa ban here, watch a livestream of the public hearing here, and watch the legislative debate here. (And for some recent history on the abortion laws in Iowa, I did a bit of a recap in Saturday’s “The Week in Abortion.”)

Related news: The battle over abortion rights in Iowa may also put some additional pressure on Republican presidential candidates who have been campaigning in the state to talk about their support (or opposition to) a national ban. And Popular Information reports on the companies who came out with pro-choice statements post-Roe, yet still donated money to anti-abortion politicians in Iowa.

Abortion rights groups in Idaho filed a challenge to the state’s ‘abortion trafficking’ law today. This is one of the more egregious anti-abortion laws we’ve seen this year. The legislation makes it a crime to help a teenager get an abortion out-of-state, punishable by two to five years in prison—that means an older sister or an aunt who helps a young woman get care would be labeled a ‘trafficker’ and go to jail.

KFF Health News reports that the complaint argues the law infringes on the right to interstate travel and that it violates the First Amendment in how it restricts the right to speak about abortion and “engage in expressive conduct, including providing monies and transportation (and other support) for pregnant minors traveling within and outside of Idaho.”

The lawsuit also argues something I’ve pointed out here before: the law is so vaguely written (deliberately so) that it could criminalize a whole host of activities. If your niece gets abortion medication shipped to her, for example, and you drive her to the post office to pick it up—that could be considered 'abortion trafficking'. There’s even concern that the law could criminalize abortion funds in other states who help young people with logistics and funding.

From Idaho Statesman columnist Bryan Clark, writing about the legal challenge today:

“Is it illegal to privately inform a minor that abortion is legal in another state? To point them to a website where abortion-inducing drugs can be ordered? To drive them to the state border? Would just meeting with them privately to discuss it constitute ‘harboring’ or ‘recruiting’—two of the undefined ways in which someone can violate the travel ban.”

And remember: minors have always been the canaries in the coal mine when it comes to abortion rights. What happens to them today happens to us tomorrow.

The ultrasound requirement for those seeking abortion medication in North Carolina will remain blocked for now, as a legal challenge to that provision in the state ban continues on. A reminder: North Carolina’s 12-week abortion ban went into effect this month, with a judge only blocking this minor piece of the law.

Abortion providers point out that some patients seeking abortion medication will be too early in their pregnancies for anything to show up on an ultrasound, and the law doesn’t make clear if they would be prohibited from prescribing the pills until the pregnancy is visible. Which, of course, is the point: Despite Republican claims that they’re allowing abortions in the first trimester, every single sentence of their law exists to make it as difficult as possible for women to do so. In this case, they want to delay patients from getting abortion medication by an unnecessary ultrasound mandate.

The other part of the recently-passed ban that’s unsettled is a requirement that abortions after 12 weeks (only allowable in very limited circumstances) take place in a hospital. Which, again, is just another way to make it harder, if not impossible, to access abortion ‘exceptions’.

In Florida, where pro-choice activists are working to get an abortion rights ballot measure in front of voters, the organization behind the effort has collected nearly $5 million since it’s inception—and almost $2 million in June alone. That’s great news, but reports show that most of that money has already been spent on signature-gathering efforts. Obviously, something like this is a huge, costly undertaking; so if you want to help Floridians Protecting Freedom, please consider donating!

Speaking of states working to restore abortion rights: I told you yesterday about Missouri House Minority Leader Crystal Quade’s gubernatorial campaign announcement. Quade is a strong abortion rights supporter who would be the state’s first female governor. The Kansas City Star has a piece examining whether or not abortion rights could help her in what is an admittedly uphill battle.

Democratic Rep. Maggie Nurrenbern told the paper, “I think women are fed up with men making decisions about their very lives…People want somebody who’s proven to be on the right side of these issues.”

As you know, Missouri is one of the states where Republicans have been trying to quash an abortion rights ballot measure: the state Attorney General Andrew Bailey has been refusing to sign off on the state auditor’s cost estimate of the measure as a way to stymie activists’ ability to collect signatures. Quade has been a major supporter of the measure, and said yesterday that “freedom is on the ballot.” Meanwhile, one of Quade’s Republican opponents, Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft, is being sued by the ACLU for writing misleading ballot summaries for the petitions. (When The Kansas City Star asked Ashcroft about Quade and the ballot measure, he responded that he trusts voters to “make a good decision.” Apparently not!)

And as we inch closer to the special August election in Ohio, which will determine the future of ballot measures in the state, Marilou Johanek at the Ohio Capital Journal reminds readers that the election “is a patent attempt by Ohio Republicans and anti-abortion lobbyists to tip the scales on a citizen ballot initiative before voters ever get a chance to weigh in.” She goes on:

“The powerful are afraid of the majority. Nullifying majority rule in Ohio, which is what Issue 1 will do if passed, removes the threat that we represent as a check on power.”

We’ve been watching what’s been happening in Arizona, where Gov. Katie Hobbs has essentially decriminalized abortion by transferring district attorneys’ power to prosecute abortion-related cases to state Attorney General Kris Mayes (who has made clear she won’t prosecute those cases). The latest from the state is that those district attorneys are considering bringing a lawsuit against the governor, who refuses to rescind her order. Hobbs’ order not only removes local attorneys’ power to prosecute abortion, but also bans state agencies from helping any other states with abortion prosecution, and prohibits the extradition of anyone in Arizona brought up on abortion-related charges elsewhere.

In case you needed any more reminders of how the attacks on abortion rights and trans rights are inextricably linked, consider what’s happening in Tennessee: an appeals court lifted a block of the state’s ban on gender-affirming care—a ban that goes into effect immediately. What case what cited throughout their decision? Dobbs. They used it to argue that the ban on gender-affirming care doesn’t discriminate on the basis of sex. As law professor Mary Ziegler said, “It’s no surprise that Dobbs appeared in the 6th Circuit's decision upholding TN's ban on gender-affirming care when it comes to due process, but fascinating to see the court treat Dobbs as a new paradigm for sex equality too…”

Finally, I told you yesterday about the huge number of abortion patients in Indiana who were coming from out of state—and how Indiana’s soon-to-be-enforced abortion ban would impact folks from neighboring states as well. Today, Side Effects Public Media (a collaboration of NPR stations across the Midwest) gets into exactly that: the way that the state’s ban will hurt countless others across the entire region. Jessica Marchbank of the Hoosier Abortion Fund says, “A crucial access point to abortion care is about to be cut off.”

Quick hits:

• More Republican ballot measure shenanigans, this time in Idaho;

• YellowScene Magazine on stories of patients traveling to Colorado for abortion care;

• The young woman who admitted to setting a Casper, Wyoming clinic on fire has reached a plea deal with prosecutors;

• Gizmodo covers Massachusetts Democrats’ efforts to protect abortion-related digital data;

• And Hayley Williams of Paramore blasted Texas Gov. Greg Abbott at one of her shows this past weekend (all while wearing an “abort the supreme court” shirt). 

In the Nation

Republicans are trying to add in all sorts of anti-abortion amendments to the defense spending bill: from revoking the Pentagon’s existing abortion policy to a proposal from Rep. Matt Gaetz that would prohibit the government considering a state’s abortion laws when thinking about where to put a military base. (I’m sure this is in part because of the controversy over the headquarters of Space Command.) CNN has more on some of the other amendments that conservative lawmakers are pushing as part of the bill.

Sarah Jones at New York Magazine has an important piece today about the religious freedom challenges to state abortion bans. If you’re a regular reader, you know that not only have there have been a good number of these kinds of suits, but that conservative lawmakers in certain states have preempted those challenges by revising their own religious freedom laws to exclude anything abortion-related from being protected. As Jones puts it in her piece: “The speculative rights of the fetus trumped all.” Make sure to check out the full column but I’ll leave you with my favorite bit:

“Abortion bans harm democracy in two ways: They relegate women to second-class citizenship and elevate one religious view at the expense of others. Neither outcome is compatible with a pluralistic and free society. The lawsuits, then, have performed a necessary function already. Even if they ultimately fail, they’re forcing an overdue reckoning with the way the courts have defined religious freedom. The principle is far too important to surrender to the right.”

Quick hits:

• Al Jazeera, Jezebel and the BBC on Sen. Tommy Tuberville’s block of military promotions over the Pentagon’s abortion policy;

• The emergency contraception company Julie is doing a 1:1 donation program: for every box of the medication that’s purchased, they donate another to shelters, college campuses, or sexual violence programs;

• And telemedicine abortion provider Hey Jane is launching a multi-state billboard campaign in the Midwest.

Conservative Strategy: Anti-Abortion Centers

Somehow I missed this legislation when it was first introduced, but it connects to something we’ve been talking about a lot lately: The way that Republican lawmakers are funneling money to anti-abortion centers (aka crisis pregnancy centers).

Apparently Senate Republicans—led by Sens. Jim Risch, Mike Crapo, Ted Cruz, Cindy Hyde-Smith, Josh Hawley, and Marco Rubio—are pushing a bill called the Pregnancy Center Security Act. The legislation would establish a grant program for these non-medical, religious centers to upgrade their security systems, based on the ongoing myth that anti-abortion centers are being targeted by pro-choice ‘domestic terrorism’.

But wait, there’s more: the ‘grant program’ would also give money to anti-abortion centers to help them “comply with requirements under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990.” So to be clear: This grant program give money to anti-abortion centers for a security problem that doesn’t exist, and to help them follow a law they’re supposed to be following already??

And just a reminder that it doesn’t fully matter if bills like this don’t go anywhere; we need to talk about them because this is how conservative lawmakers and activists tip us off about what they want to do next.

Keep An Eye On

Republican efforts to repair their image. Something we’ve covered quite a bit is the way that both conservative lawmakers and anti-abortion groups are working hard to reframe themselves as ‘pro-women’. They know that Americans are furious over abortion bans, and so they’re doing everything from co-opting feminist rhetoric to suddenly showing interest in policies they’ve opposed for years—like Medicaid expansion.

St. Louis Public Radio has a good example of this today in their piece about Missouri’s new law that extends postpartum Medicaid coverage. Maggie Olivia of Abortion Action Missouri says, “The anti-abortion folks who set themselves up as supporters of this policy were really only doing so in order to save political face and falsely signal compassion, while they are continuing to further attack access to care for pregnant folks across the state.” And Democrats, who make clear they’re glad any legislation to help pregnant people is passed, say the same. House Minority Leader and gubernatorial candidate Crystal Quade says, “I definitely think it is because of that backlash [to Dobbs].”

We’ve seen a similar move when it comes to child support policies: some states are now requiring financial support begin during pregnancy. It’s a way for Republicans to feign interest in helping pregnant women, while actually just establishing fetal personhood. The same duplicitousness underlies Republicans’ focus on anti-abortion centers: they can funnel money to religious groups while patting themselves on the back for supporting services that supposedly help women and families.

All of which is to say: Don’t believe the hype, keep a close eye on any Republican ‘pro-women’ efforts, and always look for what their real goal is.

Told Ya So

Speaking of Republicans’ real goals: You know I’ve been writing for months about the anti-abortion movement’s war on language—specifically, how they’re trying to do away with the word ‘ban’.

First it was that they quietly replaced the term ‘national ban’ with ‘national consensus’, a shift meant to distract voters from the fact that abortion bans were being passed against the wishes of voters: ‘consensus’ makes bans sound like something Americans agree on. Next, the movement started making an explicit argument that ‘ban’ is entirely incorrect and shouldn’t be used at all (even by reporters).

Less than two weeks ago, I even pointed out that the way anti-abortion groups were redefining ban would mean that not one piece of anti-abortion legislation in the country would qualify as one.

And here we are today: Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, wrote a column at The Hill arguing that “the dictionary definition of ‘ban’ is ‘to forbid someone to do something’…In no state are all abortions forbidden.”

This is incredibly important! The most powerful anti-abortion group in the country is arguing that the United States has no abortion bans.

Dannenfelser goes on to present what she says is the correct characterization of anti-abortion laws: “Every state that has enacted life-affirming laws makes some exceptions.” She also links to SBA Pro-Life America’s map of state abortion bans, which they gently call ‘protections’. (As in: Texas has a “9-month protection.”)

Oh, and the headline of the column? “How the media mislead about Americans’ consensus on abortion.” They’re nothing if not predictable!

This is why I’m tracking anti-abortion strategy every single day: Doing so means that we were months ahead of what is obviously going to be a huge cultural and political messaging campaign. It means we have more time to prepare, and to call them on their bullshit. So I’ll leave you with an ask: If you appreciate all the work that goes into the newsletter, and our analysis of abortion rights stories and conservative trends, please make today the day you upgrade your subscription! It really is the best way to help me keep doing this work: