Here's How They Ban Birth Control

4.1.25

Click to skip ahead: Alabama Win! Let’s start with some rare great news on efforts to target abortion funds and women’s right to travel. Criminalizing Care has the latest on the Georgia woman arrested for her miscarriage. All Eyes on Wisconsin looks at the state Supreme Court race with national implications. Attacks on Birth Control has more on the Trump administration’s Title X funding attacks. In the Nation, updates on the abortion case in front of the Supreme Court tomorrow, Elon Musk’s pro-natalist creepiness, and more. Legislation Watch highlights the voices of abortion storytellers and the women impacted by Texas’ abortion ban. Keep An Eye On warns that we’re taking young people’s support for granted. Finally, AED Near You has an event announcement for Portland, Oregon.

---

Alabama Win!

It’s not often we get good news—especially out of Alabama—so let’s take a moment to celebrate this one. A federal judge ruled yesterday that Republican Attorney General Steve Marshall can’t prosecute people who help patients get out-of-state abortions.

Here’s a quick refresher: After Roe fell, Marshall went on a radio show and warned that anyone who “aids and abets” an abortion could face conspiracy or accessory charges. For abortion funds and providers, that meant even sharing a pro-choice website could put them at risk of prosecution. With help from the ACLU, the Yellowhammer Fund and West Alabama Women’s Center (WAWC) sued, arguing that Marshall’s threats violated their First Amendment rights. They asked the court to rule that the AG couldn’t go after people for helping patients access out-of-state abortion care or abortion pills.

And yesterday, they won. U.S. District Judge Myron Thompson ruled that the prosecutions Marshall threatened would violate both free speech and the constitutional right to travel. He compared it to Alabama trying to punish residents for gambling in Las Vegas:

“It is one thing for Alabama to outlaw by statute what happens in its own backyard. It is another thing for the state to enforce its values and laws, as chosen by the attorney general, outside its boundaries by punishing its citizens and others who help individuals travel to another state to engage in conduct that is lawful there but the attorney general finds to be contrary to Alabama’s values and laws.”

It’s also important to remember that Marshall didn’t just threaten abortion funds—he threatened abortion patients, too. In one legal brief, he argued that Alabama could restrict pregnant people’s travel in the same way it restricts the movement of sex offenders. He claimed the state has a “strong, legitimate interest” in protecting fetuses—comparing it (seriously) to protecting the public from sexual violence.

So this ruling is a win on multiple fronts. You can read more on the legal details over at Law Dork. And if you can, please consider donating to the West Alabama Women’s Center and the Yellowhammer Fund—who can now finally fund abortions again.

Criminalizing Care

I know you all have been thinking about Selena Chandler-Scott—the young Georgia woman arrested after a miscarriage. I’ve been thinking about her too. First and foremost, you can donate to her legal defense here.

Because for whatever fucking reason, this 24-year-old—who was found bleeding and unconscious outside her apartment complex—is still facing charges of “concealing a death” and “abandoning a dead body” for placing her fetal remains in the trash. Just as baffling? There’s been virtually no major national coverage of her case.

"The reality is pregnancy loss is incredibly common, and no laws govern how to handle those remains in the privacy of one's home,” says Dana Sussman, senior vice president of Pregnancy Justice.

Still, Tift County District Attorney Patrick Warren continues to defend the charges, claiming that once a fetus is “separate from its mother,” whatever happens next is fair game for criminal prosecution.

That said, it’s clear Warren is feeling the heat as this story gains national attention (thanks in large part to the readers here). Over the past few days, he’s tried to distance himself from the case, insisting he wasn’t involved in issuing the warrants. He also said this:

“I want to make sure we take this off of the stage of national attention or what other people want us to do, and we slow down. We treat her as a human being. We look at the facts and circumstances of the case, we look at the valid Georgia Law, and if those two things don’t match, then we’re obligated not to go forward. But I will say if those two things do match, then we will go forward.”

I don’t know, Mr. Warren—arresting someone for losing a pregnancy doesn’t really scream “treating her like a human being.”

As Sussman asks, “What is gained by arresting Ms. Scott and stripping her of her humanity?”

“If the goal is to terrify women and further drive them away from seeking needed medical care, mission accomplished,” she says.

---

To learn more about criminalization, check out If/When/How and Pregnancy Justice. If you’re self-managing an abortion and need medical advice, contact the Miscarriage & Abortion Hotline: 833-246-2632. For free legal help as a patient or health practitioner, call this free Repro Legal Helpline: 844-868-2812.

---

All Eyes on Wisconsin

Today is the Wisconsin Supreme Court election—the most expensive judicial race in U.S. history. And it’s no wonder considering what’s at stake: Abortion rights in the state, and political power across the country. (Remember, Wisconsin is a key swing state, and the state Supreme Court can influence national elections through redistricting and voting rules.)

Conservative asshole and former Attorney General Brad Schimel is running against pro-choice judge Susan Crawford—which I’m sure absolutely kills him, considering he thinks women are too ‘emotional’ to rule. That’s not an exaggeration: Earlier this month, Schimel told a conservative radio host that the female justices were “being driven by their emotions” in the abortion case—and that “you could hear it in the tone of their voice.”

In response, all four female justices released a statement slamming Schimel for his “antiquated and distorted view of women.”

And let’s not forget: This is the same guy who was caught on tape admitting he’d already made up his mind about abortion in Wisconsin, saying there’s “not a constitutional right to abortion in our State Constitution” and that it would be a “sham” if the justices ruled otherwise.

It’s that kind of extremism Wisconsin Democrats are counting on to drive voters to the polls today. Ben Wikler, chair of the state Democratic Party, told the Guardian: “Abortion is the single issue that most motivates Democratic voters and persuades independent, moderate voters to cast a ballot for Susan Crawford and against Brad Schimel.”

Abortion was central last time, too. You probably remember that in 2023, the Wisconsin Supreme Court flipped to a liberal majority after Janet Protasiewicz won an election dominated by abortion rights. If Schimel wins today, conservatives will take back control of the Court. That’s why Elon Musk has dumped so much money into his campaign.

Then there’s what happens to abortion itself. For a quick refresher: After Dobbs, Republicans enforced an 1849 law they claimed banned abortion. But in 2023, a judge ruled that the law—written before women even had the right to vote—isn’t actually an abortion ban. She said it’s “a feticide statute only,” meant to criminalize assaults on pregnant people that end a pregnancy, not abortion care.

That ruling allowed clinics to reopen, even as anti-abortion groups continued to claim the law is still in effect. In addition to that case, Wisconsin’s Supreme Court is also likely to hear a separate case filed by Planned Parenthood over whether the state constitution protects abortion rights.

All of which is to say: This election is incredibly important, for all of us.

Attacks on Birth Control

If you missed my breaking news story yesterday about the Title X funding freeze, make sure to catch yourself up. This is the Trump administration’s first major move against contraception—and while Republicans will be desperate to frame it as anything but an attack on birth control, that’s exactly what it is.

BREAKING: The Trump Administration Freezes $35 Million in Title X Funding

Let’s be clear: The Trump administration is following the Project 2025 playbook. This isn’t just about freezing or cutting funding from reproductive health clinics, but redirecting that money to ‘marriage promotion’ programs and religious groups like crisis pregnancy centers.

This is how you ban birth control without ever passing a law: You run legitimate clinics out of town and replace them with religious centers that tell women birth control is a sin, or that it causes cancer (or whatever nonsense they’re pushing now). You don’t need to outlaw contraception if you can just make it impossible to access.

Something else noteworthy: Most coverage of the funding freeze has focused exclusively on Planned Parenthood. Clearly, this is a targeted attack on the reproductive health care organization—which conservatives have turned into a punching bag/bogeyman. But other groups were impacted too!

Plus, Republicans want this story to be framed as the defunding of Planned Parenthood because—as awful as it is—voters are used to hearing about it. It’s not a new message. What is new is the idea that nonprofit groups are losing funding simply because they opposed racism.

“This threatens to roll back enormous progress we’ve made in increasing access to care for—and will have a profound impact on—women across the South, many of whom rely on Title X as their only source of care. We cannot overstate the urgency here. Any delay forces providers to scramble and leaves patients in the dark without access to STI testing and treatment, cancer screenings and birth control.”

-Audrey Sandusky, Converge, Title X Grantee in Mississippi & Tennessee

In the Nation

Speaking of Republican attacks on reproductive health clinics and low-income patients—pay close attention to the case in front of the Supreme Court tomorrow. Medina v. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic is about South Carolina’s efforts to prevent Medicaid patients from visiting Planned Parenthood, but is a case with national implications.

For a breakdown on the case, check out AED’s coverage here, or explainers from Vox and KFF. I’ll have more on the oral arguments tomorrow, which you can watch live here.

Meanwhile, I think I might need to start a new section of the newsletter called ‘Meet the Creeps’—because WOW there are a lot of them these days. Take the country’s most-hated creep, King Incel Elon Musk. Please tell me why when asked about the thing that keeps him up at night, Musk answered the declining birth rate? You know what keeps me up at night? The rise of pro-natalist maniacs.

Let’s be clear: Men like Musk want to hide their white nationalist racism and misogyny behind these supposedly lofty concerns about humanity and population. But we all know who he really is.

Quick hits:

• Dr. Oz wrote a letter to Republican senators declaring his opposition to abortion and gender-affirming care in a move to rally their support for his nomination to lead the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services;

• Axios has more on a study about who gets advance provision abortion medication;

• And if you’re looking for a useful state-by-state tool on reproductive rights and health policies, I really like this 50-state Report Card.

Legislation Watch

By now, you’ve probably heard about SB 31—the bill Texas Republicans are touting as a fix to the state’s abortion ban. They claim it adds “exceptions” and gives doctors more leeway to provide life-saving care. But as I’ve been saying for over a week, that’s not what conservative legislators are really interested in.

In reality, SB 31 would revive a 1925 abortion ban and expand prosecutors’ power to go after abortion funds, helpers, and potentially even patients themselves.

I’m not the only one sounding the alarm. Abortion funds, pro-choice activists in Texas, and some of the nation’s top reproductive rights attorneys are all saying the same thing. But despite these warnings, some Democrats and doctors are backing the bill—unwilling to admit they’ve been duped by the very Republicans and anti-abortion extremists who wrote it. (And yes, the bill was literally written by Texas Right to Life.)

If they won’t listen to us, maybe they’ll listen to the people who know this law best: the women it nearly killed:

Keep An Eye On

Rewire has a must-read piece about the rise of anti-abortion activism on college campuses—something I hope will light a fire under some pro-choice asses. Anika Asthana reports that student anti-abortion groups are quickly growing their membership and increasing their activism, using the end of Roe as a motivating force.

Now, to be clear: Young people are still the most pro-choice demographic in the country. But that doesn’t mean they’ll stay that way.

I’m deeply concerned that we take young people’s support for granted—assuming that they’ll continue to be pro-choice, even as the anti-abortion movement aggressively woos and cultivates their support. Right now, conservatives are passing legislation across the country mandating anti-abortion lessons and videos be shown in public school classrooms; they’re doing outreach to middle and high schools via crisis pregnancy centers; and they’re spending millions on insidious social media and cultural campaigns that specifically target a young audience.

What’s more, they’re incredibly and centrally organized: Asthana reports that Students for Life of America (SFLA), a well-funded extremist group, works with more than 1,500 campus groups. Meanwhile, many pro-choice college groups are operating independently, without the same kind of institutional support. (Seriously, if you Google “pro-choice college groups,” the first result is Students for Life.)

Of course, we do have incredible orgs working with young people—URGE comes to mind, as does Planned Parenthood’s Generation Action. There are also terrific organizations like Medical Students for Choice and If/When/How that work with med and law students. But let’s be real: the investment in these groups doesn’t come close to the kind of money and strategy the right is pouring into Gen Z.

Asthana’s piece also highlights how much cultural groundwork the anti-abortion movement is doing—funding alt-right online spaces, shaping narratives, and training young people with tight, ready-to-go messaging. As Reproaction’s Laila Salaam put it, these groups have “a canned response to every single pro-choice/pro-repro talking point.” Olivia Barnes from Bobcats for Life—the Students for Life chapter at Ohio University—calls them their “pro-life apologetics.”

As far as I know—and please correct me if I’m wrong!—there’s no pro-choice equivalent working on messaging for young people at that scale. And that’s exactly what they’re asking for: how to talk about abortion rights, how to back up their arguments, how to push back online. (That’s part of the reason I wrote my book.)

Bottom line: Just because most young people are pro-choice now doesn’t mean they’ll stay that way—not with well-funded conservative extremists targeting them across schools, social media, and culture. If we don’t intervene now—if we don’t meet their energy with real support, strategy, and resources—we risk losing an entire generation.

AED Near You

Hey Oregon! I’ll be coming your way later this month to speak at an event for Planned Parenthood Columbia Willamette. If you’re in town and want to hear me rage out about what’s happening with abortion rights, order tickets by clicking on the invite image below.