I’m so late reading this, trying to catch up on AED! Just had to say that reading there are still 39,000 deaths a year from unsafe abortions has me like WHAT?! And curious to know does that number include both women who died from unsafe care AND their babies?
I know the history, but not the outcomes such as you mention. There was was a movie about it but Hollywood warps history so much, you have to look up the reality, anyway.
It is infuriating that the Catholic Church is able to maintain its tax free status as they repeatedly lobby, campaign, and meddle in politics. In fact, donations to the church should be treated like political donations rather than charitable ones.
Yes, with the referendum in Kansas roughly a year ago, the local Catholic bishop contributed nearly a million dollars. Where, and how, did he get so much to piss away? And how is this legal as you say?
FU. Virginia GOP, whiny babies; and go Virginia DEMs on the ad campaigns; don’t let up one iota; especially when the lying GOP talks about abortion up until birth, or even after birth; they don’t deserve a reprieve; the DEMs need to stay the course and be relentless.
On the bright side, Cochran County is not really on the way to New Mexico. I’d never pass through it on the way to Albuquerque or Santa Fe. It may be a shortcut to Hobbs and Clovis, but I doubt it’s much of one. Nevertheless the commissioners are all getting letters from us this week about violating our religious freedom rights.
The Nocturnalists Post-Roe America podcast is powerful, especially for anyone involved in health care or who knows someone who is (which is basically everyone). I wish it could be required listening for legislators!
I’m really pissed about the church sending out homilies - if they’re telling people how to vote in a church service, that’s a clear violation of their non-profit status
There is some wiggle room if the political activity of the church is framed as voter education. (https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-drop/rr-07-41.pdf) The church can't endorse a candidate, but can advocate for a 'cause.' Guidelines are horribly outdated since, given the takeover of one party by religious extremists, there isn't much practical distinction anymore.
How will these counties and municipalities even enforce these ordinances? Are they going to start pulling over any vehicles which have women in them to see if the women are pregnant? Will they carry pregnancy tests to see if the woman in the car is actually pregnant? Are they going to start pulling over cars willy-nilly to see if those cars are carrying (for example) Mifepristone or Misoprostol? This is insanity..........
I totally see them doing all the things. Enforcement will be geographic and sporadic. I picture it like the corrupt law enforcement loopholes that allowed people to be pulled over for nothing and extorted for thousands of dollars. Which is why I won’t set foot in many US places again.
Yes. You make a critical point. At the end of the day all of this is about how much people will tolerate. The threshold is much different in rural red areas from most larger urban areas. The law can survive if it's not enforced uniformly everywhere. And of course and probably more importantly, who is targeted by enforcement really matters. The country sadly really doesn't care about poor women, women of color, women with substance abuse issues, etc. But if a White legislator's daughter needs an abortion so she can finish her degree no one is going to interfere with that. Abortion funds are a relatively good target for them because by definition those patients needed assistance with funding, travel, etc. And the donors are liberal do-gooders of the type conservatives always like to attack. Where I think it gets tense is when one state tries to interfere with another state's providers. That's what's going to frustrate conservatives and why they demand federal action. TL;DR most of the horror stories we are reading end with the woman getting care in another state or giving 'birth' to a baby who immediately dies. So far it seems that only the most marginalized women have actually been forced to have a child. If that were to change I think (hope?) the level of resistance would change.
Yup, I have horrific visions of the gender equivalent of "DWB" ("driving while black") that African-Americans in this country have had to endure since the car was invented. Only now, it will also be "DWF" ("driving while/with female").
"The annual guidebook was first published in 1936 and helped African Americans safely navigate the roads of a segregated country. Green wrote this guide to identify services and places relatively friendly to African Americans so they could find lodgings, businesses, and gas stations that would serve them along the road."
Yes! Although in our times the other side would obtain the information and then turn its minions against those who dare help. I don't know if that ever happened to the Green Book?
I suppose it has to be tested though. Any state or local government can pass any crazy law, and if everyone is too afraid to do what the law prohibits, the government wins at no cost. You have to make them either enforce it, which will be that much more unpopular than everything that's happened so far, or admit that they cannot.
I suspect Texas is making use of the Trump strategy. Because Trump has been able to consistently maintain the support of ~40% or more of American voters, he's forced the country to normalize him. He is not normal in principle, but something that gets 40+% support -is- normal in the sense that it's common, expected. In a similar way, Texas thinks it's big enough to do whatever it wants. We might be able to all boycott Idaho, say, but Texas is betting it's too big and important to the country and the economy for its decisions to cause much in the way of negative consequences for itself. They're raising and they expect that we'll have to fold, when we really need to do the opposite and test them.
Jessica, idk if when you use the verb 'believe' in statements such as 'it's unbelievable to me' or 'I can't believe that', you're using it figuratively or if it's a genuine expression of sentiment. My own view is that after eight years it's long past time for any of us to be surprised by -anything- these people do, and I expect it to get worse, possibly a lot worse, before it starts to get better. I think I've said this before but if Republicans win next year's election it won't be long before journalists are very unlikely to be safe.
I know what you mean. I use the phrase “I can’t believe...” a lot and for me it’s an expression of outrage. Even if something is another example of the typical GOP dumpster fire at this point, I want to stay outraged and, yes, to some degree surprised because I never want to think of any of this as normal or expected. We should all expect better. So I guess I think you can be both unsurprised and disbelieving? Lol.
Yeah I just brought it up because every time I read that phrase I'm thinking, you don't really mean that you were caught by surprise and weren't expecting this, right? I mean, that's why I bring up 2025. If Republicans win the election, eventually anyone who writes material hostile to the regime is going to be in some danger. Unless we have a revolution in the streets before it gets to that. It's not hyperbole; there's too much that rhymes with history here.
"Yelp makes clear that these centers don’t offer abortion care and may not have actual medical professionals on staff—which is true! But Paxton claims that they’re violating the state’s Deceptive Trade Practices Act “by appending inaccurate and misleading language to listings on pregnancy resource centers.”"
The Yelp reviews should all say some variation of "they browbeat you, and don't seem to understand basic reproductive biology, based on the number of lies they told.
“Attorney Jonathan Mitchell, the architect of Texas abortion ban, is targeting abortion funds and providers to get the names and information of thousands of patients, staff, volunteers—even donors.” Doesn’t HIPAA disallow this?
The Guardian piece makes it clear: they are not going after the patients themselves. They’re going after everyone else in anyway involved, so they don’t need the actual patient records:
“ The attorney and architect of the Texas six-week abortion ban has asked several Texas abortion funds to hand over information about every abortion that they have “assisted or facilitated in any way” over the last two years, including details about the abortion provider, the city and state where the abortion patient lived, as well as the identity of every person – other than the patient themselves and their family members – who may have helped the patient get the abortion.”
I know they passed the bounty hunter law first, and that explicitly could not be enforced by the state. But then after Dobbs, they passed a regular abortion ban too. I would think they're trying to use the two together here.
The funds are not covered entities under HIPAA. There may be privacy laws that prohibit this. As someone who volunteers for one fund, I’m tempted to say. “Bring it on.”
I would really love some clarification on this as well. What I'm learning is that if you live in a red state, especially Texas, normal rules and laws and even constitution do not apply!
I’m so late reading this, trying to catch up on AED! Just had to say that reading there are still 39,000 deaths a year from unsafe abortions has me like WHAT?! And curious to know does that number include both women who died from unsafe care AND their babies?
I know the history, but not the outcomes such as you mention. There was was a movie about it but Hollywood warps history so much, you have to look up the reality, anyway.
It is infuriating that the Catholic Church is able to maintain its tax free status as they repeatedly lobby, campaign, and meddle in politics. In fact, donations to the church should be treated like political donations rather than charitable ones.
Yes, with the referendum in Kansas roughly a year ago, the local Catholic bishop contributed nearly a million dollars. Where, and how, did he get so much to piss away? And how is this legal as you say?
Thank you Jessica for all you do. Appreciate your work.
FU. Virginia GOP, whiny babies; and go Virginia DEMs on the ad campaigns; don’t let up one iota; especially when the lying GOP talks about abortion up until birth, or even after birth; they don’t deserve a reprieve; the DEMs need to stay the course and be relentless.
On the bright side, Cochran County is not really on the way to New Mexico. I’d never pass through it on the way to Albuquerque or Santa Fe. It may be a shortcut to Hobbs and Clovis, but I doubt it’s much of one. Nevertheless the commissioners are all getting letters from us this week about violating our religious freedom rights.
Everyone should boycott those areas.
The Nocturnalists Post-Roe America podcast is powerful, especially for anyone involved in health care or who knows someone who is (which is basically everyone). I wish it could be required listening for legislators!
"the Archdiocese of Cincinnati donated $500,000 to the anti-abortion group Protect Women Ohio"
Half a million dollars for political action? Half a million dollars could feed hungry families.
Tax the churches.
...retroactively, yet they'll claim bankruptcy to avoid paying the victims of their predation.
I’m really pissed about the church sending out homilies - if they’re telling people how to vote in a church service, that’s a clear violation of their non-profit status
There is some wiggle room if the political activity of the church is framed as voter education. (https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-drop/rr-07-41.pdf) The church can't endorse a candidate, but can advocate for a 'cause.' Guidelines are horribly outdated since, given the takeover of one party by religious extremists, there isn't much practical distinction anymore.
Exactly. The rules are long overdo for a rewrite.
How will these counties and municipalities even enforce these ordinances? Are they going to start pulling over any vehicles which have women in them to see if the women are pregnant? Will they carry pregnancy tests to see if the woman in the car is actually pregnant? Are they going to start pulling over cars willy-nilly to see if those cars are carrying (for example) Mifepristone or Misoprostol? This is insanity..........
I totally see them doing all the things. Enforcement will be geographic and sporadic. I picture it like the corrupt law enforcement loopholes that allowed people to be pulled over for nothing and extorted for thousands of dollars. Which is why I won’t set foot in many US places again.
Yes. You make a critical point. At the end of the day all of this is about how much people will tolerate. The threshold is much different in rural red areas from most larger urban areas. The law can survive if it's not enforced uniformly everywhere. And of course and probably more importantly, who is targeted by enforcement really matters. The country sadly really doesn't care about poor women, women of color, women with substance abuse issues, etc. But if a White legislator's daughter needs an abortion so she can finish her degree no one is going to interfere with that. Abortion funds are a relatively good target for them because by definition those patients needed assistance with funding, travel, etc. And the donors are liberal do-gooders of the type conservatives always like to attack. Where I think it gets tense is when one state tries to interfere with another state's providers. That's what's going to frustrate conservatives and why they demand federal action. TL;DR most of the horror stories we are reading end with the woman getting care in another state or giving 'birth' to a baby who immediately dies. So far it seems that only the most marginalized women have actually been forced to have a child. If that were to change I think (hope?) the level of resistance would change.
Yup, I have horrific visions of the gender equivalent of "DWB" ("driving while black") that African-Americans in this country have had to endure since the car was invented. Only now, it will also be "DWF" ("driving while/with female").
Our country has gone insane.
The "Green Book" probably still applies.
"The annual guidebook was first published in 1936 and helped African Americans safely navigate the roads of a segregated country. Green wrote this guide to identify services and places relatively friendly to African Americans so they could find lodgings, businesses, and gas stations that would serve them along the road."
Yes! Although in our times the other side would obtain the information and then turn its minions against those who dare help. I don't know if that ever happened to the Green Book?
I suppose it has to be tested though. Any state or local government can pass any crazy law, and if everyone is too afraid to do what the law prohibits, the government wins at no cost. You have to make them either enforce it, which will be that much more unpopular than everything that's happened so far, or admit that they cannot.
I suspect Texas is making use of the Trump strategy. Because Trump has been able to consistently maintain the support of ~40% or more of American voters, he's forced the country to normalize him. He is not normal in principle, but something that gets 40+% support -is- normal in the sense that it's common, expected. In a similar way, Texas thinks it's big enough to do whatever it wants. We might be able to all boycott Idaho, say, but Texas is betting it's too big and important to the country and the economy for its decisions to cause much in the way of negative consequences for itself. They're raising and they expect that we'll have to fold, when we really need to do the opposite and test them.
Jessica, idk if when you use the verb 'believe' in statements such as 'it's unbelievable to me' or 'I can't believe that', you're using it figuratively or if it's a genuine expression of sentiment. My own view is that after eight years it's long past time for any of us to be surprised by -anything- these people do, and I expect it to get worse, possibly a lot worse, before it starts to get better. I think I've said this before but if Republicans win next year's election it won't be long before journalists are very unlikely to be safe.
I know what you mean. I use the phrase “I can’t believe...” a lot and for me it’s an expression of outrage. Even if something is another example of the typical GOP dumpster fire at this point, I want to stay outraged and, yes, to some degree surprised because I never want to think of any of this as normal or expected. We should all expect better. So I guess I think you can be both unsurprised and disbelieving? Lol.
Yeah I just brought it up because every time I read that phrase I'm thinking, you don't really mean that you were caught by surprise and weren't expecting this, right? I mean, that's why I bring up 2025. If Republicans win the election, eventually anyone who writes material hostile to the regime is going to be in some danger. Unless we have a revolution in the streets before it gets to that. It's not hyperbole; there's too much that rhymes with history here.
"Yelp makes clear that these centers don’t offer abortion care and may not have actual medical professionals on staff—which is true! But Paxton claims that they’re violating the state’s Deceptive Trade Practices Act “by appending inaccurate and misleading language to listings on pregnancy resource centers.”"
It's always projection with these people.
The Yelp reviews should all say some variation of "they browbeat you, and don't seem to understand basic reproductive biology, based on the number of lies they told.
These places are downright DANGEROUS. Here in Massachusetts, a woman’s ectopic pregnancy was misdiagnosed as normal. She’s suing.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna91660
They should all be closed for medical malpractice and/or practicing medicine without a license (or any proper training).
Absolutely! I don’t know why this hasn’t happened. It’s outrageous.
“Attorney Jonathan Mitchell, the architect of Texas abortion ban, is targeting abortion funds and providers to get the names and information of thousands of patients, staff, volunteers—even donors.” Doesn’t HIPAA disallow this?
Robyn,
The Guardian piece makes it clear: they are not going after the patients themselves. They’re going after everyone else in anyway involved, so they don’t need the actual patient records:
“ The attorney and architect of the Texas six-week abortion ban has asked several Texas abortion funds to hand over information about every abortion that they have “assisted or facilitated in any way” over the last two years, including details about the abortion provider, the city and state where the abortion patient lived, as well as the identity of every person – other than the patient themselves and their family members – who may have helped the patient get the abortion.”
I suspect there’s some sort of loophole where a crime is being investigated with a legal subpoena.
I know they passed the bounty hunter law first, and that explicitly could not be enforced by the state. But then after Dobbs, they passed a regular abortion ban too. I would think they're trying to use the two together here.
The funds are not covered entities under HIPAA. There may be privacy laws that prohibit this. As someone who volunteers for one fund, I’m tempted to say. “Bring it on.”
Same question!
I would really love some clarification on this as well. What I'm learning is that if you live in a red state, especially Texas, normal rules and laws and even constitution do not apply!
I wondered the same thing.
Yeah it's times like these you wish hell was real. These assholes would be sooooo surprised where they end up.
And it’s proof that they don’t believe in hell or they wouldn’t be so corrupt and lie so much.