The GOP's Endless Innovations in Torturing Women

5.7.26

Click to skip ahead: The Cruelty of the GOP’s National Abortion Ban; Good Bill, Bad Bill; With Thanks To: Elevated Access; In the States: Missouri, Iowa, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Ohio; The Anti-Abortion ‘Coercion’ Lie is in Federal Court; California Doctor Threatened with Extradition Fights Back; Stats & Studies; Fighting ‘Baby Olivia’

---

The Cruelty of the GOP’s Proposed National Abortion Ban

Republicans have introduced a national abortion ban. But they think no one will notice if they couch their ban in grotesque, abstract language—and that’s exactly what they’re doing, as Jessica explained yesterday. The so-called Dismemberment Abortion Ban Act “establishes a federal prohibition on dismemberment abortions, including dilation and evacuation procedures”—inflammatory, inaccurate language that makes clear the bill could effectively ban abortion after the first trimester.

For more on just how cruel this is, we spoke to Massachusetts OBGYN Dr. Armide Storey, a fellow with Physicians for Reproductive Health. She noted that D&Es are the safest and most common way to end a pregnancy after the first trimester—and that while there isn’t a specific gestational threshold after which doctors provide D&Es, the bill could ban “all procedural abortion beyond 15 weeks.”

But there’s more: if D&Es were illegal, Dr. Storey says, the alternative would be to end the pregnancy and induce labor—which is “longer, more painful, and often more risky,” while also being “inaccessible and undesirable for many patients.”

That means patients who find out their fetus has a fatal fetal abnormality—or someone whose life is at risk—would be forced into vaginal labor because Republican lawmakers don’t like a particular medical procedure.

Anti-abortion politicians have never cared about the suffering and needless medical risk their laws inflict on pregnant patients. Just look to states like Louisiana, where the total ban has forced women with life-threatening pregnancies into c-sections—rather than standard abortion procedures, which are safer and less invasive.

This new bill—again, a national ban—marks a new low in Republicans’ endless innovations in torturing women.

Good Bill, Bad Bill

Welp, there’s good news and bad news. We can start with the bad news. U.S. Sen. Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee recently introduced a bill called the Title X Abortion Provider Prohibition Act, which is exactly what it sounds like: a wholly redundant bill to ban abortion providers from receiving Title X funds—even though these organizations are already (wrongfully!) barred from using federal funds for abortion services.

The bill comes as Republicans are doubling down on attacking funding for reproductive health, with anti-abortion activists pressing the GOP to renew the 2025 Big, Beautiful Bill’s ‘defund’ provision. The Trump administration also recently released insidious Title X guidelines that would prioritize “natural family planning,” while HHS’s proposed 2027 budget slashes all family planning funding and the Teen Pregnancy Prevention Program.

Now for some good news: House Democrats just introduced legislation to nullify the Trump administration’s global gag rule, which prohibits international non-governmental organizations from receiving U.S. funding if they provide, ‘promote,’ or even talk about abortion.

In reality, the global gag rule—which GOP presidents have been enacting since Reagan—spikes rates of unplanned and unsafe pregnancy, unsafe abortions, and maternal mortality abroad. Under the first Trump administration, International Planned Parenthood Federation warned the gag rule would yield “3.3 million more abortions, most of which will be forced to occur in unsafe settings, 15,000 more maternal deaths, and 8 million more unintended pregnancies.”

House Democrats’ bill is a long-shot in the GOP-led Congress, but at a time when the global gag rule has largely been pushed out of the national conversation, good on them for making it a priority.

With Thanks To: Elevated Access

In a moment when anti-abortion politicians are closing in on telemedicine medication abortion—which could drive more abortion-related travel—we’re feeling especially grateful for Elevated Access.

This volunteer pilot network helps transport people seeking abortion and gender-affirming care across state lines. Some patients come to them through abortion funds like the Midwest Access Coalition and Yellowhammer Fund, and because pilots fly small private planes, there’s no worry of TSA, ticketing, or identification requirements—which is especially important for undocumented patients.

What’s more: every pilot flies on their own dime. (When you’re talking about fuel and parking for an airplane, that isn’t nothing.) Be sure to read Men’s Health’s excellent feature on their essential advocacy.

In the States: Missouri, Iowa, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Ohio

Missouri is one of several states that’s introduced inflammatory ‘Born Alive’ anti-abortion legislation this session, threatening doctors with the death penalty. This week, after extensive negotiations with Democrats, Republicans dropped a feature of the bill that created civil liability for anyone who directly or indirectly helps someone access or self-manage an abortion.

But even without that portion of the bill, it remains a nightmare. We’ve written at length about the influx of ‘Born Alive’ legislation we’ve been tracking this session, here. As a reminder: these bills are about stigmatizing later abortion and erasing the devastating, highly complex situations that pregnant patients may be navigating with their doctors, often traumatizing grieving families.

‘Born Alive’ mandates can also force doctors to perform futile and painful medical procedures on fatally ill newborns—robbing parents of the chance to say a peaceful goodbye to their children.

The Missouri House already passed the ‘Born Alive’ bill and it just passed out of the Senate committee this week.

Speaking of the inherent complexity of pregnancy, and why the government has no business legislating it: an Iowa woman says she was denied abortion care even after her pregnancy was diagnosed with a fatal fetal condition.

“I was told I could miscarry at home,” Jessica Djukanovia, a mother of three, told KCII, “that I could wait it out and miscarry at home or go out of state.”

Djukanovia says her OBGYN told her there’s a “gray area” with the state’s emergency exception, discouraging many from providing care in a timely manner:

“They are worried more about legal recourse than they are about saving a woman’s life. That’s disgusting. That’s not medical care. That’s business.”

Djukanovia’s frustrations are valid and important. Nor can we absolve abortion bans, which have created this very environment where doctors perform dangerous legal calculus instead of prioritizing pregnant patients’ health and safety. Iowa has the lowest rate of OBGYNs per capita, and experts say the state’s abortion ban has only worsened this, to the detriment of public health.

After weeks of uncertainty, Djukanovia was ultimately able to access abortion care that she should have been able to have immediately.

---

Support Abortion, Every Day by becoming a paying member! Through this week, you can upgrade at a discount:

---

Some extremely frustrating news in Oklahoma, which is weighing a bill to allow out-of-state anti-abortion organizations to receive state funding. In 2017, the state launched its Choosing Childbirth program, which one local news article frustratingly characterizes as “a key part of Oklahoma’s strategy to support young children and pregnant women.” In reality, the Choosing Childbirth program involves a network of anti-abortion crisis pregnancy centers, which exist to prey on, deceive, and surveil prospective abortion seekers. In what world does that “support young children and pregnant women”?

Oklahoma allocated $18 million to CPCs from 2024 through 2027. Now, SB 1503 would allow organizations like Human Coalition—based in Texas—to receive some of these funds to provide anti-abortion “telecare” services. It’s all as dystopian as it sounds. Even some Republicans are expressing concern about the implications of funding out-of-state groups. State Rep. Marilyn Stark said:

“I am absolutely pro-life—everybody on this floor knows that. But I’m also a representative of Oklahoma and my constituents. And where their money goes is important to me.”

Some more state news to keep on your radar: In Tennessee, racist gerrymandering efforts sparked massive outcry this week, as Republicans seek to erase political representation for the Black-majority city of Memphis. This comes as the GOP has spent the last year escalating gerrymandering efforts across the board—all, in part, to maintain their wildly unpopular, undemocratic attacks on reproductive freedom.

In Ohio, a doctor who admits to having coerced his partner to take abortion pills just pleaded guilty to four felonies: fourth-degree counts of unlawful distribution of an abortion-inducing drug and disrupting public services, and fifth-degree counts of deception to obtain a dangerous drug and identity fraud. The anti-abortion movement has pointed to this case as a sign of endemic ‘coercion’ supposedly facilitated by access to abortion pills—even as abortion bans are inherently coercive and have empowered abusers nationwide.

As horrific as this man’s behaviors are, the charges against him are eyebrow-raising in how they could potentially be weaponized against people who choose to take abortion pills. Consider, for instance, the charge labeling abortion pills a “dangerous drug.” We’ll certainly be keeping an eye on this case. For more on the anti-abortion movement’s weaponized, bad-faith ‘coercion’ obsession:

Exposing Republicans' Bad-Faith Abortion 'Coercion' Obsession

The Anti-Abortion ‘Coercion’ Lie is in Federal Court

This is disgusting: the Wall Street Journal just published a deranged op ed, which we won’t link, called “Mifepristone as a Tool for Coercion,” warning that “women across the country claim their boyfriends forced or deceived them into taking the abortion drug.” This is exactly why we wrote our explainer of the right’s ‘coercion’ propaganda campaign in February. Abortion bans have entrapped domestic violence victims across the country, so, to obscure this reality, anti-abortion activists are weaponizing select cases to justify and even frame their bans as feminist.

The timing of this Journal story is infuriating, with medication abortion access more precarious than ever in light of recent court rulings. Instead of clearing up disinformation and providing resources, the Journal is aiding the anti-abortion movement.

Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America’s Marjorie Dannenfelser called the 5th Circuit court’s decision against mifepristone “a huge victory for victims and survivors of Biden’s reckless mail-order abortion drug regime.” Louisiana justified its lawsuit against the FDA largely on the grounds that telemedicine abortion access was endangering survivors by leading to ‘coerced’ abortions.

The truth? If/When/How’s Elizabeth Ling warns us that attempts to ban telemedicine abortion only “make survivors less safe” as they “rely on telemedicine as a safe and discreet way to access care.”

And, one more time, because it can’t be said enough: Neither Louisiana nor anti-abortion activists across the country want abortion ‘left up to the states’—they want every single one of us trapped under post-Dobbs bans. That’s why they’re targeting not just abortion pills, but are also fighting to end shield laws that protect blue state abortion providers.

California Doctor Threatened with Extradition Fights Back

Since last summer, an abusive man in Texas has been suing a California doctor for allegedly mailing abortion pills to his girlfriend. The doctor, Remy Coeytaux, recently filed a motion to dismiss the suit, arguing that the anti-abortion law that is the basis for the lawsuit against him is unconstitutional. That law is HB 7, which allows people to sue anyone who manufactures or mails pills into the state for at least $100,000. Coeytaux’s filing states:

“The basic concept of democratic rule is undermined when public powers are exercised ​by those who are neither elected by the people, appointed by a public official or entity, nor employed by the ⁠government.”

A quick refresher on this case: the Texas man, Jerry Rodriguez, claims his girlfriend was ‘coerced’ into taking the pills that Coeytaux allegedly mailed. In reality, it’s Rodriguez who has an alarming record of domestic violence, including assaulting a woman in 2006, pleading guilty to threatening to kill a different woman in 2009, and allegedly strangling and nearly killing a woman in 2024. Eight months after that 2024 incident, Rodriguez, represented by notorious anti-abortion attorney Jonathan Mitchell, filed his lawsuit against Coeytaux.

Coeytaux is the first provider to face a lawsuit under Texas’ HB 7. The state of Louisiana is currently trying to extradite Coeytaux as part of their own legal war on him. All of this is about challenging shield laws and trying to trap people under abortion bans.

We’ll continue to monitor the case as it moves forward—or, hopefully, doesn’t.

Stats & Studies

A new study shows a 9.2% increase in pregnancy-related deaths in states with abortion bans that took effect in 2022. Each of these deaths is an unthinkable, preventable tragedy.

Thanks to ProPublica, we know of at least five cases of women who have died as a result of state abortion bans: Josseli Barnica, Porsha Ngumezi, and Nevaeh Crain in Texas; and Amber Nicole Thurman and Candi Miller in Georgia. Their stories are, tragically, the tip of the iceberg.

Co-researcher Suzanne Bell of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health says:

“Increases in these measures of mortality can be hard to detect, but these findings suggest many preventable deaths have occurred in states that banned abortion. This study adds to a growing body of research that demonstrates the devastating—and in this case deadly—consequences associated with abortion bans for pregnant people and their families.”

Even prior to Dobbs, states with abortion restrictions had higher rates of maternal morbidity and mortality. Researchers at the Gender Equity Policy Institute (GEPI) say that in the first year after Dobbs, the risk of maternal death in Texas was 155% higher than in California. Louisiana mothers were three times as likely to die of pregnancy-related causes as mothers in states that protect abortion, per GEPI.

Fighting ‘Baby Olivia’

Anti-abortion politicians know how unpopular their agenda is among young people—that’s why they’ve been pushing legislation to require that public schools teach propaganda ‘Baby Olivia’ videos in health and science classes. Nearly half of all states have introduced or passed such bills in recent years. (The fantastic organization SIECUS has a helpful tracker so you can see if the legislation has made an appearance in your state.)

Over the last year, people have caught on to the fact that the video—produced by the extremist group Live Action—is ideological and non-scientific. So now Republicans are removing the name “Baby Olivia” from their bills and rewriting the requirements so specifically that only Live Action’s video would qualify.

Here's the good news: there are other videos that schools can use!

The organization Health Care Education & Training (HCET) is now offering an important alternative to ‘Baby Olivia’ propaganda: a series of accurate videos depicting human growth and development during pregnancy for classrooms.

Abby Hunt, CEO of HCET, says the free resource is “intended to support educators in meeting instructional requirements, and can be used as part of an existing curriculum.”

Watch one of the videos below, and learn more about HCET’s classroom resources here.