Does Amy Coney Barrett Think Birth Control Should Be Left to the States?

9.8.25

Click to skip ahead: The Men Who Hate Us reports on Donald Trump making light of domestic violence. Language Watch digs into Amy Coney Barrett’s latest comments on reproductive rights. Stats & Studies find that infant mortality has risen in states with abortion bans. Shield Laws Under Fire—and in the Courts reports that NY’s AG is entering the interstate fight over abortion pills. Attacks on Democracy has the latest attacks on ballot measures in Missouri. Care Crisis has some quick hits. Finally, In the States, news from Kentucky, Virginia, Wisconsin, California, Texas, and South Carolina.

---

The Men Who Hate Us

Let’s be clear—what I’m about to tell you will not be the least bit surprising. We have a president who is an adjudicated rapist and serial abuser, with a sociopathic disdain for women. But it’s important to flag regardless: While speaking to the press today in Washington DC, Trump bemoaned that domestic violence is counted in crime statistics. Yes, seriously:

“Things that take place in the home they call crime…If a man has a little fight with the wife, they say this is a crime.”

Again, no surprise—he’s a piece of shit. But this isn’t just about one terrible man saying one horrible thing. What we’re witnessing is a broader trend normalizing violent misogyny.

We’re in a moment when conservatives have no issue admitting they want to strip women of their right to vote—and when mainstream media outlets take no issue with platforming them. That’s to say nothing of the fact that we have multiple abusers in major seats of power: from the two sexual predators on the Supreme Court, to the men Trump surrounds himself with. (Like Pete Hegseth, accused of rape.)

They are telling us very clearly who they are. And they’re not in the least bit ashamed.

Language Watch

Since we’re on the topic of total assholes: Am I losing it, or did no one else notice that Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett said something very alarming on CBS Sunday Morning?

When SCOTUS’ own Serena Joy sat down with Norah O'Donnell to talk about her new book this weekend, she seemed to indicate that certain issues—like contraception and miscarriage treatment—should be left up to the states. The moment came when O'Donnell read from the minority opinion in Dobbs, asking how the ruling might impact all kinds of medical care:

“What about the morning-after pill? IUDs? In vitro fertilization? And how about the use of dilation and evacuation or medication for miscarriage management?”

Here’s what Barrett said when O'Donnell asked whether these issues are coming up as a result of Dobbs:

“Let’s see, those are issues inherent in medical practice. And sure, they surround pregnancy care and the care of women. And those are issues that are left now to the democratic process. And the states are working those out. We have not had those cases on our docket.”

First of all, the Supreme Court has had these cases on their docket—it wasn’t so long ago that they heard arguments over whether Idaho can deny women emergency abortion care. Leaving that aside, since when should birth control and miscarriage treatment be left up to the states?

Before anyone says—But Jessica, Barrett writes in her book that birth control is a fundamental right!—here’s a little refresher why that doesn’t mean shit: For years, conservatives have been strategically conflating certain kinds of birth control with abortion. They claim that the morning after pill, IUDs, and anything that prevents the implantation of a fertilized egg aren’t actually contraceptives—but abortifacients.

This strategic redefinition allows Republicans and anti-abortion activists to say they’d never, ever ban birth control; because, to them, IUDs and emergency contraception aren’t birth control! It’s the rhetorical equivalent of crossing their fingers behind their backs, and it’s why Abortion, Every Day spends so much time paying attention to and tracking language:

The GOP’s Plan to Ban Birth Control (Part I)

So when Barrett writes or says that the right to birth control is doctrine
—as she does in the CBS interview—it doesn’t mean much unless she clarifies what she considers birth control. What I really would have liked O'Donnell to ask is whether the justice believes the morning-after pill and IUDs are contraception.

Without that kind of pointed questioning, ultra-conservatives like Barrett will continue hiding their extremism. After all, they know their beliefs are incredibly unpopular—that’s why they spend so much time using carefully-chosen language. Case in point: Barrett repeated an oft-used conservative talking point during her CBS interview, saying, “Dobbs did not render abortion illegal.” Give me a fucking break.

But we know who Barrett really is. This is the same justice who, during her confirmation, refused to say whether she agreed with Griswold v. Connecticut—the landmark case that legalized birth control. Now she’s on national television seemingly suggesting contraception and miscarriage care should be up to the states, while hiding behind talk of the “democratic process.”

She knows exactly what she’s doing: soft-pedaling an extremist agenda that most Americans would find abhorrent if she said it out loud. I just hope we stop letting her get away with it—especially on national television.

Stats & Studies

A new study in the American Journal of Public Health shows that infant deaths rose by 7.2% in states that enacted abortion restrictions after Dobbs. What’s more, the researchers found that abortion ban ‘exceptions’ didn’t meaningfully bring down the infant mortality rate.

This isn’t the first study that’s shown the devastating impact of abortion bans on infant mortality: A 2024 study found that the infant death rate rose in the U.S. after Roe was overturned; research published earlier this year reported that states with bans saw a 6% increase in infant death; and infant mortality rose by 13% in Texas after the state passed its abortion ban.

These past studies have, in large part, attributed the spikes to the fact that more women are carrying doomed pregnancies to term—forced to give birth to newborns who won’t live more than a few minutes or days. But what’s interesting about this latest data is that researchers say the increase wasn’t just due to women being forced to carry fatally-ill fetuses.

“Indeed, our paper finds that the rise in mortality was not solely due to perinatal or congenital issues and the time of birth. Increases also occurred in the catch-all category of ‘other causes’ that may affect infants up to the second year of life. This murkiness deepens the mystery around how, exactly, abortion restrictions are putting infants at risk.”

I think it’s fair to say that states with abortion bans are generally places that don’t care much about women, children, and families more broadly—but I’ll be interested to see what else researchers find.

Shield Laws Under Fire—and in the Courts

The interstate battle over shield laws rages on—and it’s looking more and more likely that the issue will end up at the Supreme Court.

New York Attorney General Letitia James announced today that she’ll be intervening in Texas’ lawsuit against abortion provider Dr. Maggie Carpenter, saying, “I am stepping in to defend the integrity of our laws and our courts against this blatant overreach.”

Some background: Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton brought a civil suit against Carpenter late last year for allegedly shipping abortion pills into Texas, where abortion is illegal. But New York’s shield laws protect providers from criminal prosecution and civil suits—which means it’s perfectly legal for Carpenter to help patients in Texas by mailing them abortion pills.

Still, Paxton has been relentless: he’s even suing Ulster County Clerk Taylor Bruck for rejecting his (multiple) attempts to file a summons compelling Carpenter to appear in a Texas court.

In a statement today, the Republican attorney general said, “No matter where [Carpenter] hides, our pro-life laws will be enforced, and justice will be served.” Paxton, ever classy, even called James “a lawless abortionist.” But James isn’t having it:

“Our shield law exists to protect New Yorkers from out-of-state extremists, and New York will always stand strong as a safe haven for health care and freedom of choice…Texas has no authority in New York, and no power to impose its cruel abortion ban here.”

And while legal experts have long expected that the interstate battle over abortion pills and shield laws would end up in front of SCOTUS, James’ intervention makes that possibility a lot more likely.

Right now, over 20 states have shield laws protecting abortion providers from out-of-state prosecutions, and 16 have protections from civil suits. (KFF has a fantastic interactive tool that helps you find the laws in your state.)

With one in four abortions provided via telehealth, these protections for providers who ship pills across state lates are more important than ever. That’s why Republican leaders are so desperate to stop them.

Paxton is one of about two dozen attorneys general who have called on Congress to pass legislation banning shield laws—and he’s not the only AG going after Carpenter with an eye towards the nation’s highest court. Louisiana’s attorney general Liz Murrill has been seeking the New York provider’s extradition in a criminal case. Republicans hope harassing doctors like Carpenter will force a case to the Supreme Court and eliminate shield laws altogether.

We’ll keep you updated as the case moves forward, but if you’re looking for a way to support Dr. Carpenter, consider donating to her organization: the Abortion Coalition for Telemedicine (ACT).

Attacks on Democracy

Just when you thought anti-abortion lawmakers couldn’t get any more brazen, I give you the latest from Missouri: In a special session, Gov. Mike Kehoe is pushing for sweeping new ballot measure requirements that would make it all but impossible to pass pro-choice amendments in the future.

Under this new bill, ballot measures would need to pass in every congressional district to succeed—effectively giving Republican districts the power to veto a proposed measure. But get this: the new policy would only impact citizen-led ballot initiatives, which means the abortion ban ballot measure Missouri Republicans sneakily pushed onto the 2026 ballot would need only a simple majority to pass.

What Republicans are trying to do here is not even vaguely slick. Last year, the state became the first in the nation to overturn a post-Dobbs abortion ban via ballot measure. But GOP leaders have been trying to repeal or weaken Amendment 3 ever since it passed:

Voters Thought They Were Overturning An Abortion Ban. They Got This Headache Instead.

As for the 2026 abortion ban measure, we’ve been covering that extensively at AED and—surprise, surprise!—it relies entirely on disinformation and deceiving voters. Republicans know that abortion rights are broadly popular in every state in the nation, so the measure’s language at no point discloses that it is a literal abortion ban—and even calls itself Amendment 3!

What this really tells us is that the anti-abortion movement has never been more desperate and aware of its inability to win on the popularity of its ideas. (Believe it or not, forced birth and women bleeding out in hospital parking lots don’t exactly poll very well!)

Care Crisis

• Rewire reports that abortion bans have made some healthcare providers worried about discussing birth control options with patients;

• A reminder that Adriana Smith’s baby remains in critical condition;

• Slate on the impact abortion bans are having on IUD placements;

• And—ever the charmers—Republican Senators have written a letter to the Department of Veterans Affairs, supporting the Trump administration’s move to strip abortion access from rape victims and those with life-threatening pregnancies.

In the States

Republicans make an endless fuss about being the party of small government and free speech, but abortion always winds up being the exception. In Kentucky, state Attorney General Russell Coleman is reportedly “reviewing” the clever gas station ad campaign that Mayday Health is running in multiple anti-abortion states. (“Pregnant? Don't want to be? Learn more at Mayday.Health,” the ad reads.)

The ad—posted at 80 gas stations across Kentucky alone—has stoked the ire of the state’s top anti-abortion activists, who call the ad “dangerous,” “frustrating,” and “alarming.”

In response to that outcry, Coleman’s office says they’re “reviewing the matter.” Kentucky’s Republican AG has a history of legal actions against abortion pills—including signing onto a letter effectively calling for the Supreme Court to review the FDA’s approval of the medication. So, that’s hardly encouraging—especially at a time when anti-abortion AGs across the country are leading the charge against interstate shipment of medication abortion.

But it’s unclear what, exactly, Coleman will be able to do about it. After all, several anti-abortion states have tried to pass laws banning pro-choice ads and websites, with little luck. And the the good news is that ads are working: Mayday Health founder Liv Raisner says she’s “heard from individuals who didn’t even know abortion pills existed until they found us.” We love to see it!

Meanwhile, manufactured right-wing outrage over nebulous allegations that a Virginia high school was paying for teens abortions rages on. Click here for some background on the so-called controversy, but here’s the short version: A Fairfax County high school has come under fire from unsubstantiated internet rumors that a school social worker helped two students access abortions three years ago.

Virginia Republicans are latching on to this ‘story’ for dear life ahead of a key gubernatorial election, hoping outrage will send conservatives to the polls in droves—and justify legislation even further eroding minors’ abortion rights. It’s also a pretty transparent strategy ahead of Democrats’ efforts to get a pro-choice ballot measure in front of voters in 2026.

The latest from conservative news outlets is that anti-abortion activists are protesting across the state—including outside of a middle school, which seems wildly inappropriate.

Unfortunately, you can be sure we’ll hear more about stunts like this for a while: GOP gubernatorial nominee Winsome Earle-Sears has called the story, “a gift that keeps on giving.”

Another state appears to be waist-deep in campaign season already: Wisconsin liberals just won a crucial state Supreme Court seat to hold a narrow majority and overturn a Civil War-era abortion ban. Now, conservative Justice Rebecca Bradley has announced she won’t seek another term in 2026. This gives pro-choice justices an opportunity to increase their narrow majority from 4-3 to 5-2. Anti-abortion justices meanwhile will look to hold onto their 3-4 position.

This is no small thing: the makeup of the swing state’s Supreme Court isn’t just vital for abortion rights, but for national politics. (There’s a reason that Elon Musk sunk so much money into the last election.)

Even though liberals will hold their court majority until at least 2028, the stakes for reproductive rights in the state remain as high as ever: Just look at the Republicans running for governor, all with histories of anti-abortion extremism: Business man Bill Berrien, for example, describes himself as “in line with Donald Trump”—you know, the president who takes credit for killing Roe. Another candidate, Josh Schoemann, touts his support for the extremist organization Pro-Life Wisconsin. A third, Congressman Tom Tiffany, has a record of voting against enshrining a right to contraception.

Once upon a time, it might’ve been a national news story to have Republicans this virulently anti-abortion vying to run a state. Now, it’s just another Monday.

A heads up that California has just two weeks left in its special session to pass legislation allowing providers to keep their names off prescription labels for abortion pills. This has been a vital protection across multiple shield states, but as The New York Times points out, “a majority of medication abortion services across the country use California-based pharmacies to dispense and ship the pills, [so] the bill would have broad national impact.”

Finally, let’s check in with South Carolina. We told you last week about SB 323—a bill that would punish abortion patients as murders, ban certain kinds of birth control, and make a felony to even share information about abortion.

The legislation has been getting an understandable amount of horrified pushback. The advocacy director of South Carolina’s ACLU, Courtney Thomas, called the bill "unconstitutional and deadly" in a statement.

“This bill would criminalize medical care, invade our privacy, and place unconstitutional restrictions on speech, travel, and association. Any lawmaker who cares about the health and safety of South Carolinians should be fighting tooth and nail to stop this bill.”

If you want a quick way to help our abortion rights friends in the state, consider signing or sharing this petition.

That’s all for today—which is plenty! Thanks, as always, for caring about this issue. We got through another day, and we’ll do it again tomorrow—together. - Jessica & Kylie