Abortion Every Day (3.29.24)

New travel ban proposed in Alabama

Click to skip ahead: Yes, we have yet Another Travel Ban being proposed, this time in Alabama. In the States, waiting on news from the Florida Supreme Court, Iowa’s AG continues her war on rape victims, and a bill to protect birth control stalls in Louisiana. In Media Muck-Ups, ABC News refuses to use the term ‘ban’. In the Nation, updates on the next big abortion rights case headed to SCOTUS.

Finally, if you missed my email earlier today about an incredible new poll, make sure to read it—it will put you in a good mood!

---

Another Travel Ban

New legislation proposed in Alabama would make it illegal to help someone under 18 years-old obtain an abortion. The bill joins the ranks of ‘abortion trafficking’ legislation across the country: Bills are advancing in Tennessee, Mississippi and Oklahoma; Idaho passed a law that’s currently blocked.

But Alabama being Alabama, HB378 goes even further than other Republican legislation. In addition to criminalizing anyone who “harbors or transports” a minor for the purpose of getting an abortion, the bill would also make it illegal to “aid and abet” a teen in getting care. This is important.

Feminists (including me!) have been pointing out that these so-called anti-trafficking laws are written so broadly that they could criminalize lending a teen gas money or giving someone the url to a clinic. In fact, that’s why Idaho’s law was blocked—a judge found it violated the First Amendment.

Incredibly, Republican Rep. Mark Gidley’s bill leans into that unconstitutional ground. From sections in the bill defining what it means to “harbor” or “assist” a teen:

“Providing lodging, shelter, transportation, or money to a minor girl that could help her procure an abortion or abortion-inducing drug without the knowledge, consent, or involvement of her parents or legal guardian…

Providing assistance to a minor girl in order to procure an abortion or obtain abortion-inducing drugs.”

So…yeah. They’re picking that fight. What makes this all the scarier is Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall, who argued in a court filing that the state can restrict travel for pregnant women when they have “strong, legitimate interests including preserving unborn life.” Most offensively, Marshall claimed the state could restrict travel for pregnant people in the same way it can restrict travel for sex offenders.

As you know, Alabama has been in the news quite a bit when it comes to abortion, between the state Supreme Court’s ruling that frozen embryos are children, to a Democrat flipping a state House seat after sharing her abortion story.

That’s why it’s a fantastic time to support folks doing work on the ground, like the West Alabama Women’s Center.

In the States

Speaking of Alabama: On Wednesday, I wrote that Marilyn Lands’ win wasn’t just important because she campaigned on abortion, but because she campaigned on her abortion. (Lands shared her experience in a campaign ad alongside a young woman who was unable to get care in the state.)

Today, POLITICO looks at how politicians are opening up about their abortion experiences—from Lands, who won by 25 points, to Arizona’s Eva Burch, who spoke about needing an abortion for a nonviable pregnancy in a floor speech. We’ve been seeing personal stories about abortion play an increasingly important role in elections, though generally, it’s been candidates sharing other people’s experiences. This shift of candidates talking about their own abortions is pretty exciting—it’s a sign that stigma is decreasing.

Renee Bracey Sherman, executive director of We Testify, a fantastic organization of abortion storytellers, points out that during the 2022 midterms, the country had the highest number of candidates who’ve spoken about having abortions running for office. She told AED that it’s “a wonderful and vulnerable way for all of us to connect in our families and communities, and for politicians to connect with their constituents.”

Florida’s Supreme Court is facing an April 1 deadline to rule on the language of a pro-choice ballot measure. That means we’ll know by Monday whether or not the Ron DeSantis-stacked court will let the proposed amendment get in front of voters this November. The measure has had broad support across the state, but needs approval from the Court before it can move forward. (Some more background here.)

Just yesterday I warned about the way that Republicans would be honing in on abortion reporting as a strategy for criminalization—and how Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita was upset that a change-up in the state’s reporting process made it harder for him to prosecute doctors. Well, at a Republican gubernatorial debate this week, candidate Curtis Hill name-checked the reports as a way to prove his ‘pro-life’ bonafides. So I’m on the right track! Definitely something to keep an eye on:

Strategy Watch: Abortion Reporting

About a year ago, I reported that Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird had stopped funding a program that provided free emergency contraception to rape victims. She even stood by the decision even after it was revealed that the majority of victims served by the funding were children.

In response to the understandable outrage, Bird’s office said they were simply conducting an audit, “carefully evaluating whether this is an appropriate use of public funds.” And when the Des Moines Register asked for a copy of the audit report, they said officials were still working on it.

But get this: On Wednesday, Iowa Auditor Rob Sand said there is no such audit happening!

“Let’s be abundantly clear here. The Attorney General has never asked us to audit payments for sexual assault survivors for emergency contraception. We are not performing any such audit and there is no third party performing any such audit. There is no audit going on here…That’s hogwash. This is her decision on day one to quit paying for emergency contraception for sexual assault survivors.”

This is how Republicans ban birth control: they slowly chip away at access—starting with the most vulnerable among us—until there’s nothing left.

Speaking of the war on birth control: this news out of Louisiana shouldn’t be shocking, but JFC. A bill to protect contraception has been stalled because Louisiana Right to Life doesn’t like it. Seriously.

House Bill 395 is paused while the anti-abortion group mulls their position. As you know, groups like Louisiana Right to Life hold an inordinate amount of power in certain states, essentially dictating legislation. (This ProPublica piece is terrific in explaining how that happens.)

As I’ve flagged a million times over, conservatives are trying to falsely define certain kinds of contraception—like IUDs and the morning-after pill—as abortions. So you won’t be surprised to find out that in debates about the bill, certain Louisiana Republicans raised concerns about…IUDs and the morning-after pill.

Rep. Michael Echols, for example, said, “As I read this bill, it just looks like to me that you are trying to put into statute the morning-after pill…which you are deeming as contraceptive.” Yes, Michael! Because it is a contraceptive!

In better news, New Hampshire Democratic gubernatorial candidate Joyce Craig is making abortion rights a centerpiece of her campaign. Craig unveiled a reproductive rights plan this week, telling voters that she wants Medicaid funding for abortions, that she’d establish a new “Bureau of Reproductive Health Care” within the state’s health department, and that if elected she’d issue an executive order to make New Hampshire a safe haven for women seeking abortions from out-of-state.

Quick hits:

• The Republican strategist who proposed ‘compromise’ abortion ballot measures in Missouri is running for Secretary of State;

• New Mexico Medicaid will cover over-the-counter contraception and pregnancy tests;

• The Seattle Times editorial board writes that Washington must continue to be a leader in abortion rights;

• And I love this write-up from The 19th of Gina Ortiz Jones and her new Texas group, the Find Out PAC. (Which put out one of the best ads ever.)

Media Muck Ups

If you’ve been reading Abortion, Every Day for a while, you know that I’ve been tracking the conservative campaign against the word ‘ban’. Republicans are so desperate to run from their own (very unpopular) policies, they refuse to call their own bans ‘bans’ anymore. Instead, they call them “standards,” “limits,” or “reasonable restrictions.”

The GOP mucking about with language is nothing new, but anti-abortion groups have also been pressuring journalists and media outlets to scrap ‘ban’, arguing that using the word is a sign of bias. Frustratingly, certain outlets have caved.

This week, it’s an ABC News piece that’s raising red flags—the reporter seems to go out of his way to call a 15-week ban anything besides a ‘ban’. For example, Tal Axelrod calls Republicans’ proposal for a national ban a “limit” and “capping abortion at 15 or 16 weeks.”

Let’s be clear: the Republican legislation isn’t a cap or a limit—it’s a ban. And journalists who adopt anti-abortion language are doing conservatives’ work for them. After all, their entire strategy is tricking voters into believing that their bans are not bans, and that their extremist policies are just “reasonable middle-grounds."

But let’s be serious; the bill cited in this article is a radical ban that would force women to carry nonviable pregnancies to term. Is that the kind of legislation ABC News wants to say is a simple “cap” with “exceptions?”

I’m curious whether doing away with the word ban is specific to this reporter, or if it’s become an ABC News standard. Stay tuned, because I’m determined to find out.

If you’ve made it this far in the newsletter it’s clear you care a lot about abortion rights! To show your support for Abortion, Every Day, consider upgrading your subscription—which you can do at a discount until the end of today:

In the Nation

Yesterday, 258 members of Congress submitted an amicus brief to the Supreme Court about the upcoming case on Idaho and the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA). The EMTALA is the federal law that requires hospitals to provide life-saving and stabilizing treatment to patients, including abortions. The ACLU has also filed a brief in the case.

It’s not as if we needed another reminder that they don’t care if we live or die, but this case in particular is just such a shock to the system. Republicans are literally fighting for the right to deny women life-saving care:

Of Course They Want Us Dead

Remember Sen. Tommy Tuberville’s months-long block on military promotions over the Pentagon’s (mild) abortion policy allowing service members to have paid time off if they needed care? Well only twelve people have availed themselves of that policy from June to December last year. That’s what Tuberville held up the country for.

The Guardian has a piece this week on whether pro-choice Republicans will end up switching parties or their votes. I think what we’re going to see a lot of is quiet support for Democrats or abortion rights policies. Consider this quote from a Florida Republican on the state’s pro-choice ballot measure:

“Everybody I talked to says: ‘Well, we aren’t coming out publicly, but we are definitely going to sign that petition, we are definitely going to vote for that amendment to be passed.’”

KFF Health News has a new podcast episode up about the mifepristone case before the Supreme Court, if you need a refresher:

Finally, NBC News has a heart-breaking article about the impact of abortion bans on migrant women who’ve been raped. One Salvadoran asylum-seeker shared her story of being assaulted, and then having to navigate Texas’ abortion ban. Incredibly, when she later had an opportunity to dispense abortion medication to other victims, she did so even though she was breaking the law and risking her own immigration status: “I prefer to help, and whatever happens happens.” That’s some serious bravery.

Quick hits:

• Reckon has an important piece on how anti-abortion crisis pregnancy centers target Latinas;

• Teen Vogue on how to get an abortion if you’re trans;

• Slate with a SCOTUS post-mortem;

• And Alanna Vagianos at HuffPost reminds us that while Donald Trump is staying quiet on the mifepristone case in front of SCOTUS, his “fingerprints are all over the attack.”

I hope everyone has a terrific weekend in spite of the hellscape, and that you talk to someone about abortion! Thanks for reading. -Jessica