All Eyes On Texas

3.27.25

Just two sections today! Legislation Watch looks at the bills in front of a Texas Senate committee, and Criminalizing Care has updates on the abortion providers targeted by Texas.

---

I thought about doing a regular report today—but ultimately, I had to dedicate the newsletter to what’s happening in Texas. Because whew. Also, this is important no matter where you live! Texas has always been the anti-abortion canary in the coal mine for the rest of the country.

Legislation Watch

If you’ve been following my furious tweeting today, you already know that several abortion bills were in front of a Texas Senate committee—including SB 31, the Trojan Horse bill that would let Republicans revive a 100-year-old abortion ban.

That 1925 law would open the door to prosecuting abortion funds, helpers, and maybe even patients themselves. Still, some Democrats and doctors—desperate to ease even a sliver of the suffering caused by Texas' ban—have been tricked into backing the bill.

If you need a refresher, check Monday’s newsletter:

URGENT: The Texas 'Exceptions' Bill is a Trojan Horse

Republicans insist the bill is just meant to “clarify” (🚩) Texas’ ban for doctors worried about civil and criminal penalties. But it’s getting harder and harder for them to keep up the charade—especially after today’s bombshell.

Remember how I warned that people should be wary of SB 31 because it was endorsed by Texas anti-abortion groups (🚩)? Well, it turns out I didn’t know the half of it: The legislation was written by Texas Right to Life.

That’s right, the legislation we’re supposed to believe would make it easier for doctors to provide life-saving abortions was crafted by a group that doesn’t believe in life-saving abortions.

If that wasn’t proof enough that SB 31 is a Trojan Horse, consider this: Texas Right to Life president John Seago dropped a key hint while testifying at today’s committee hearing. Seago said that the bill “updates the pre-Roe statutes”—in other words, it revives the 1925 ban Republicans are itching to use.

Later, Seago insisted to Houston Chronicle reporter Taylor Goldenstein that activating the old ban wasn’t the main goal of SB 31, because they believe it’s already enforceable. But when she asked if passing the bill would bolster their argument? He said, “Definitely.”

They are not even hiding it anymore.

That’s why I was relieved to see the Chronicle speak to abortion funds and reproductive rights activists about what this bill would actually do. Superstar lawyer Molly Duane at the Center for Reproductive Rights, for example, warned that the legislation would impact everyone from abortion funds to “a 90 year-old grandmother who paid for their granddaughter’s abortion”

“I just don't understand why anyone would take that risk and put pregnant people and their families and people that help them in harm's way,” she said.

Also worth remembering: SB 31 would force doctors to take a state-run ‘education’ course on the abortion law (🚩). And who do you think will be running that class? We’ve seen this before in South Dakota: the extremist group AAPLOG—who claim abortion is never medically necessary—created the state materials that dictate when doctors can give care.

Despite all this—even after Seago all but confessed what this bill is really about—some Democrats are still backing the legislation. Texas House Democratic Caucus Chair Gene Wu said today, “We will not trade the lives of Texas women and infants for righteous political posturing.”

Political posturing?

Listen, I understand that there are some well-meaning people behind this legislation. But they need to understand that they’ve been duped.

The alternative is that they haven’t been tricked at all—but that they’re willing to throw patients, helpers, and abortion funds under the bus for the ability to say (wrongly) that they’ve added exceptions into the state’s ban. I sure hope that’s not the case.

Everything happening with SB 31 in Texas reminds me of what just went down in Kentucky. There, Republicans also claimed their bill would ‘clarify’ the law and help doctors—but it actually paved the way to ban life-saving abortions and codify the lie that abortion is never necessary.

Before folks caught on to what was really happening, that Kentucky bill was sailing through the legislature with glowing media coverage for Republicans who supposedly “added exceptions” to the state’s ban. (Sound familiar?) But thanks to lobbying from Planned Parenthood and a veto from Gov. Andy Beshear—the narrative flipped.

That’s what I’m hoping for here, too. If SB 31 is going to pass, the very least we can do is make sure Republicans don’t get to pretend this was some kind of generous effort to help women.

I can’t believe we haven’t even gotten to the other Texas abortion bills at today’s hearing! There’s SB33, for example—legislation to stop taxpayer money going towards abortion travel funds. Introduced by Sen. Donna Campbell, the bill was created in response to liberal cities like Austin, which created a grant program to help women leave the state for abortion care.

But the legislation I’m really worried about is SB2880—a Texas bill that could impact the whole country. As I’ve outlined before, this bill would deputize everyday citizens to sue pretty much any online entity that shares information about abortion.

Under the bill, Texans could sue pro-choice websites that tell people how to get an abortion; they could sue social media platforms that allow that information to be posted; they could even sue payment processors like Venmo or secure messaging apps like Signal, where people might send money for abortion pills or share info on how to get the medication.

This massive attack on free speech isn’t just about Texas. The goal is to create a chilling effect that shuts down online abortion content across the country. Republicans hope that by allowing any private citizen to sue, tech companies will decide it’s too costly and legally onerous to allow abortion-related content at all.

Because as you know: Platforms like Meta are already censoring abortion content, and they’re not even being threatened with lawsuits yet!

Criminalizing Care

I have some rare good-ish news on the criminalizing front. The New York Times reports that a county clerk in New York has blocked Texas from moving forward with legal action against Dr. Maggie Carpenter—the abortion provider who mailed abortion pills to a patient in the anti-choice state.

As you likely remember, Dr. Carpenter is facing a civil suit from Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, and she’s also been indicted in Louisiana for mailing abortion medication to a patient there. These coordinated attacks are expected to spark a major legal battle over states’ rights and abortion access—one that’s sure to head to the Supreme Court.

That’s because Dr. Carpenter is protected by New York’s shield laws—which protect providers and patients from out-of-state prosecutions. Specifically, the laws prohibit New York courts and agencies from cooperating with legal efforts like Paxton’s.

Today was the first time New York’s shield law was put into action: a county clerk in Kingston, NY refused to process a summons from Texas or enforce a court order against Dr. Carpenter. (Because Dr. Carpenter and her legal team haven’t responded to the Texas suit, a county court there issued a default judgment—trying to fine her six figures and block her from sending abortion pills to the state.)

According to the Times, New York Attorney General Letitia James had already sent guidance to courts and state agencies outlining how to implement the shield law. “I commend the Ulster County Clerk for doing what is right,” James said.

Again, these kinds of interstate legal fights are a big fucking deal—and Republicans have been planning for them. They know this issue is going all the way to the Supreme Court, and they’re carefully choosing the cases they think have the best shot.

In Louisiana, for example, the Republican governor and Attorney General looked for a case they thought would withstand public backlash. Specifically, they picked one they could frame around ‘coercion.’ Because remember, back in 2023, anti-abortion activists identified ‘coercion’ as the GOP’s most effective messaging strategy. After all, “no one is openly in favor of coerced abortions.”

You can read more about that tactic here, but just remember that none of these cases are picked by accident.

On that note, let’s talk about Maria Margarita Rojas, the midwife arrested on abortion charges in Texas. As I’ve written previously, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton targeted Rojas in part because she’s a midwife and Latina; we’ve already seen conservatives starting to drop talking points about “illegal” immigrants providing abortions.

That said, I’m glad to be able to report that Rojas posted bond and went home today—though she’ll be forced to wear an ankle monitor. In less pleasant news, the Houston midwife had a court appearance today, where she invoked her Fifth Amendment rights—even as prosecutors needled her and her attorneys.

Attorney Amy Hilton from Ken Paxton’s office, for example, asked Rojas’ lawyers if they were licensed to practice in Texas. The comment was a nod towards Paxton’s claim that Rojas is unlicensed to provide care. Later, as Rojas invoked the Fifth, Hilton sneered to the judge: “It looks like she’s enjoying this.”

I don’t know how many different ways they can make it clear: The cruelty is the point.

For more on Rojas’ arrest and the attacks on abortion providers, read below:

BREAKING: Texas Midwife Arrested on Felony Abortion Charges