Abortion, Every Day (4.3.24)

80% of Texas women don't know the extent of the state's abortion ban

Click to skip ahead: In the States, news from Ohio, Texas, Kansas and more. In Ballot Measure Updates, good news in Arizona, bad news in Maine. All Eyes on Florida looks at more responses to the state Supreme Court’s rulings & the GOP’s plan to push for fetal personhood. South Dakota’s ‘Med Ed’ Law details the truth behind this new legislative trend. In the Nation, publications and lawmakers finally catch on to the Comstock Act & a new study on criminalization. Finally, 2024 looks at what the Florida rulings mean for Trump.

---

In the States

Ohio’s Republican Attorney General Dave Yost finally admitted in a filing on Monday that the state’s 6-week abortion ban is no longer constitutional in the wake of Issue 1—the abortion rights amendment that passed in November.

Yost, best-known at AED for claiming that the story of a 10-year-old rape victim was fabricated, has been desperate to stop Issue 1 from going into effect. But because he lobbied against the pro-choice measure before it passed—warning voters that it would automatically repeal the state’s ban—he didn’t really have a leg to stand on.

That doesn’t mean Yost is giving up trying to restrict abortion. He’s asking the court to only repeal the ban itself, while allowing other restrictions to remain—like requiring doctors to shame patients by telling them about fetal ‘heartbeats’ and mandating providers document the reason someone is having an abortion. (I wrote about the anti-choice strategy of ‘abortion reporting’ just last week.)

Remember, Ohio voters were very, very clear that they don’t want the government involved in legislating pregnancy. Yost’s move here is just another reminder that Republicans don’t care what voters want.

This is wild: the Austin American-Statesman reports that more than 80% of Texas women of reproductive age don’t have an accurate understanding of the state’s abortion ban.

A survey by Resound Research for Reproductive Health found, for example, that 32% of respondents incorrectly believed that rape and incest victims can get a legal abortion in Texas; and about 25% believed that women with a fatal fetal diagnosis can obtain an abortion. They can’t.

What’s more, the survey showed that Republican scare-tactics are working: 24% of women believed that it was illegal to leave the state for an abortion.

Now, several counties and towns have passed local ordinances that make helping someone leave the state for an abortion illegal—but the consequences are civil, not criminal. The point of these ordinances is to sow fear and paranoia within communities, and to make people too afraid to help each other. (For more on travel bans, click here, here, and here.)

A Kansas bill that would make abortion ‘coercion’ a crime punishable by 25 years in prison is heading to Democratic Gov. Laura Kelly with a near veto-proof majority. When I first reported on this legislation, I pointed out that the language was extraordinarily broad: it would be felony coercion, for example, to threaten an “adverse financial consequence.” Does that mean it would be a crime for a roommate to tell someone they’d have to move out if they have a baby?

And Kansas Democrats flagged that the “adverse financial” harm could even be interpreted to include the cost of a divorce! That’s the point, of course—to make this sort of bill as broad and scary as possible. (And remember: “coerced abortions” are a new focus of the anti-abortion movement, who are desperate to pretend as if they care about abused women.)

Finally, the Tennessee travel ban that we’ve been following passed a Senate committee yesterday, putting it one step closer to a full vote. This so called ‘abortion trafficking’ law would make it illegal to help a teen get an abortion in any way—from bringing them out-of-state to texting a minor the url of an abortion clinic.

Quick hits:

• North Carolina abortion providers are preparing for an influx of Florida patients once that 6-week ban goes into effect;

• Axios has more on the horrific report out of Louisiana showing that doctors are giving women with life-threatening pregnancies c-sections instead of abortions;

• The president of EMILY’s List, Jessica Mackler, urges Minnesota voters to “show up for pro-choice champions;”

• And The Los Angeles Times on how Trump could gut abortion access in California.

Ballot Measure Updates

Arizona abortion rights advocates say they’ve collected enough signatures to get a pro-choice measure on the November ballot. Arizona for Abortion Access, a coalition of reproductive rights groups, told NBC News that they’ve gathered more than 500,000 signatures—over 120k more signatures than they need, with months to go before their July 3 deadline.

The proposed amendment would protect abortion rights in the state constitution up until fetal ‘viability’, after which someone could end a pregnancy if their life, physical or mental health was endangered.

Abortion is legal until 15 weeks in Arizona while the state’s 1864 ban is being battled out in the courts; we’re expecting a ruling any day now. (A reminder: Abortion, Every Day helped to get an anti-abortion activist justice to recuse himself from this case!)

Abortion rights activists in Nevada also had some good news this week: Nevadans for Reproductive Freedom announced that they’ve collected more than 110,000 signatures for their pro-choice petition—more than half of the signatures they need by the state’s June 26 deadline.

Abortion is already legal in Nevada—but as is the case in a few other pro-choice states, activists want to enshrine abortion rights for an extra layer of protection.

Meanwhile, philanthropist and model Karlie Kloss is out there collecting signatures to restore abortion rights in Missouri. Kloss, who is a native of the state, says, “It's devastating to me the reality of what is happening and how it has become so politicized.” Love to see it!

In less exciting news, Democrats’ effort to enshrine abortion rights in Maine’s constitution has failed after lawmakers failed to get the two-thirds support they needed to send the measure to voters. The proposed amendment from Sen. Eloise Vitelli would have protected reproductive healthcare, “including access to abortion, birth control and fertility care—in our constitution.”

All Eyes On Florida

Florida abortion rights advocates are worried President Joe Biden will hurt their ballot measure effort by alienating Republicans, the majority of whom support the pro-choice measure heading to the November ballot.

State Senate Minority Leader Lauren Book, for example, tells POLITICO that the measure is seeing bipartisan support—and they want to keep it that way:

“This language was supported by Republicans and independents. While it’s deeply political, I had Republican women alongside me collecting petitions because they believe the Legislature went too far.”

Book’s comments come at the same time that activists behind the measure are trying to distance themselves from partisan politics, knowing that abortion rights are more popular than Biden is.

Meanwhile, the Associated Press looks at how the 6-week ban will put pressure on abortion clinics in pro-choice states, and The Guardian’s Carter Sherman speaks to abortion providers in Florida who are coming to terms with the state’s new reality.

Dr. Chelsea Daniels in Miami, for example, brings up the fact that there were more than 80,000 abortions performed in Florida in 2023. “Where are these 80,000 patients gonna go?” she says. Florida abortion fund workers also tell Sherman that they expect their cost-per-patient will double as a result of the ban.

Florida & fetal personhood

We’re not quite done with Florida yet, and this is important. Make sure to read Slate’s Mark Joseph Stern on the “giant threat lurking behind” the state’s abortion rights amendment. Namely, fetal personhood.

Abortion, Every Day actually flagged this back in February: During oral arguments over the pro-choice ballot measure, Florida Supreme Court Chief Justice Carlos Muniz asked whether the proposed amendment would interfere with the rights of the fetus, and questioned the state attorney on whether the guarantee that all “natural persons” be “equal before the law” in the Florida constitution can apply to fetuses.

Basically, Muniz was giving Republicans ideas for how to make a personhood argument. And late last month, Republican Attorney General Ashley Moody took the bait; her office raised the possibility of filing a brief about the “natural persons” provision of the state constitution.

What Stern points out in Slate is chilling: the state Supreme Court has made it clear that they’re ready to enshrine fetal personhood if Amendment 4 loses in November:

“The majority’s rhetoric indicates that if the pro-choice amendment fails this fall, the Florida Supreme Court remains ready to grant fetuses and embryos a constitutional right to life that prohibits the Legislature from legalizing abortion in the future.

…It means that if the initiative fails in November, the Legislature may never be able to loosen the state’s current restrictions on abortion.”

In fact, anti-abortion activists are already gearing up for a fetal personhood fight. For more on what’s happening in Florida with abortion rights—from the 6-week ban and ballot measure to what it all means for 2024—check out yesterday’s explainer:

Florida & Abortion, Explained

South Dakota’s ‘Med Ed’ Law

Remember ‘med ed’ bills? Back in February, I told you about this anti-choice legislative trend meant to trick voters into thinking Republicans’ bans aren’t all that bad. Essentially, conservatives want Americans to believe that these bills will ‘clarify’ abortion bans and help doctors give women life- and health-saving care.

‘Med ed’ legislation just signed into law in South Dakota, for example, mandates that the health department publish an informational video and other materials to explain when doctors can give women an abortion. (South Dakota’s law only allows life-saving abortions.)

Anti-choice groups have done a huge PR campaign around the law, with conservative news outlets claiming that the legislation ends pro-choice “abortion misinformation.”

Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, in particular, has been leading the charge, with the group’s public affairs director, Kelsey Pritchard, saying, “Though every state with a pro-life law allows pregnant women to receive emergency care, the abortion industry has sown confusion on this fact to justify their position of abortion without limits.”

In reality, these laws are a way to allow Republicans, not doctors, to define abortion and decide what constitutes a health- or life-threatening condition. They’re incredibly, incredibly, dangerous—because GOP lawmakers are pretty much the last people you want deciding when an abortion is ‘necessary.’ Catch up on ‘med ed’ legislation here, and I’ll let you know when the next state introduces one.

In the Nation

If you’re a regular reader, you know the Comstock Act poses a grave danger to reproductive rights across the country. (For a refresher, check out Abortion, Every Day’s explainer here.) Since Roe was overturned, feminists and abortion rights experts have been raising the alarm about the law—which could ban the mailing of abortion medication and supplies.

That’s why I was so glad to see this New York Times op-ed from U.S. Sen. Tina Smith of Minnesota, announcing that she wants to repeal the Comstock Act:

“Here’s the bottom line: We can’t let anyone—not the Supreme Court, not Donald Trump and certainly not a random busybody from the 19th century—take away Americans’ right to access medication abortion. We must protect the ability of doctors, pharmacies and patients to receive in the mail the supplies they need to exercise their right to reproductive care.”

The mainstream media is also catching on; the editorial board of The Washington Post called on Congress to repeal the Comstock Act this week, writing that “it’s a fight worth having.”

Finally, in some very unsurprising news, a new NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist poll finds that 84% of Americans oppose legal action against against abortion patients. That number includes 4 out of 5 Republicans.

Quick hits:

• Columnist Jennifer Rubin on how Republicans’ “abortion woes” are worsening;

• Morning Joe’s Joe Scarborough points out that Republicans are losing races because voters overwhelmingly support abortion rights;

• And WIRED reports that more American women are traveling to Mexico for abortions.

2024

I told you yesterday about Donald Trump’s vague response to the Florida Supreme Court’s rulings—he said that his campaign would be announcing a statement on abortion next week. I wondered whether it was a dodge or a tease of a coming announcement; media coverage today seems to think it’s the latter.

NBC News and The New York Times both have articles about a possible announcement from the disgraced former president, who obviously sees the pro-choice writing on the wall—and is getting nervous.

You all know by now what my Trump prediction is: I think he’s going to hone in on having it both ways by taking credit for both anti-choice and pro-choice wins. Trump, who loves winning above all else, will say that his role in overturning Roe allowed states to decide for themselves. Ohio voters protecting abortion rights? All him! Florida’s 6-week ban? He’ll say he thinks it’s too extreme, but that he’s the reason the state gets to decide.

Indeed, a representative from Trump’s campaign put out a statement on the Florida rulings noting that the former president “supports preserving life but has also made clear that he supports states’ rights because he supports the voters’ right to make decisions for themselves.”

Meanwhile, President Biden tweeted in response to the news that Trump would have an abortion announcement, “You already made your statement, Donald,” attaching a picture of a social media post from Trump, with words circled in red, where he said, "I was able to kill Roe v. Wade."