"I'm Not Going to Be A Walking Tomb."

7.15.25

Click to skip ahead: The ‘Exceptions’ Lie has reminders from North Carolina and Florida that so-called abortion ban ‘exceptions’ are bullshit. In Criminalizing Care, New York stands up to Texas bullies coming after an abortion provider. Policing Pregnancy has a positive update about the South Carolina woman jailed for her pregnancy loss. In the States has news from New York, Iowa, West Virginia, and more. In the Nation has some behind-the-scenes tea about Trump’s abortion strategy. And in Anti-Abortion Strategy, Republicans are trying to co-opt ‘gaslighting’.

---

The ‘Exceptions’ Lie

For years, Republicans have been using the lie of abortion ban exceptions to convince voters that ‘good’, ‘deserving’ women will still be able to access care if they need it. Obviously, this is a crock of shit—exceptions are just a political tool created to help Republicans’ public image, not to expand abortion access.

Take North Carolina, for example, which claims to allow abortions in cases of fatal fetal abnormalities. NC Health News has a must-read piece this week that lays out in detail how this ‘exception’ exists in name only.

They tell the story of ‘J’, whose fetus was diagnosed with a fatal condition—but because of how severely providers are punished under the ban, her doctor wouldn’t sign off on an abortion. After all, the so-called exception calls for a condition to be “uniformly diagnosable,” which is a near-impossible standard.

That, of course, is the point. In fact, Abortion, Every Day warned this would happen back when the ban passed in 2023—pointing specifically to that “uniformly diagnosable” phrase.

Instead of going on a mad hunt for a doctor willing to take the legal risk, ‘J’ decided to leave the state for an abortion. “I’m not going to be a walking tomb,” she said.

This isn’t just happening in North Carolina. Just this week, a Florida woman took to TikTok to share that even though her pregnancy was diagnosed with two devastating abnormalities—including Trisomy 13, which is fatal—she wasn’t able to get an abortion in the state.

Once again, that’s likely because of the carefully-chosen language in Florida’s ban. The state claims to allow abortions for fatal conditions, but only if death will happen “upon birth or imminently thereafter.” If a newborn might survive a few days or weeks, that’s not a ‘fatal’ condition—or least, it’s not legally certain enough for most doctors to risk prison time.

This young woman who shared her story says her maternal fetal medicine specialist told her that if she started to bleed, she should “let it rain.” Really think about that. This is where we are as a country. This is the kind of advice doctors are forced to give.

For more on the anti-abortion campaign to force women to carry doomed pregnancies to term, consider reading AED’s ‘Calculated Cruelty’ series (Part I, II, III). Or check out my piece below about conservatives’ attempt to pit women against each other by shaming those who end nonviable pregnancies and glorifying those who carry to term:

The New Mommy Wars

Criminalizing Care

Texas is still coming after a New York abortion provider: You probably remember that Attorney General Ken Paxton is suing Dr. Maggie Carpenter for sending abortion medication to a patient in the state. Carpenter has also been indicted in Louisiana for the same.

In March, Paxton’s office asked the Ulster County clerk’s office in New York to file a court summons ordering Carpenter to appear in Texas court, but was roundly rejected by acting clerk Taylor Bruck. Paxton—who apparently doesn’t like to take ‘no’ for an answer—had Assistant Attorney General Steven Ogle send yet another request last week. (You’ll recall that Paxton himself is a little tied up right now!)

Despite having a few days to respond, Bruck sent Texas a response bright and early Monday morning that should put a smile on your face:

“The rejection stands. Resubmitting the same materials does not alter the outcome. While I’m not entirely sure how things work in Texas, here in New York, a rejection means the matter is closed.”

It doesn’t get any clearer than that. This is the exact kind of language that’s needed to stand up to anti-abortion bullies and authoritarian anti-abortion states—no equivocation, and full command of the law.

For those who need a refresher: Back in December, Paxton filed a lawsuit against Carpenter for allegedly prescribing and mailing abortion pills, which is legal under New York’s shield law. Shield laws—which are active in eight states—protect abortion providers from legal threats for providing abortion care to patients across state lines.

Still, in February, a district judge in Texas ordered Carpenter to pay a penalty of $113,000, and to stop sending abortion medication to the state. That’s when Texas sent their first request to the Ulster County clerk’s office. And when Bruck declined, it marked the first time that a shield law was invoked to protect a doctor from another state’s abortion laws.

New York has also backed Carpenter against criminal charges in Louisiana. Republicans there have spent the last several months smearing Carpenter as a “drug dealer who victimized a child” and pushing for her extradition. But New York Gov. Kathy Hochul has said “there’s no way in hell” that’s happening—and has since signed legislation allowing providers to leave their names off prescriptions for abortion pills, which is how Carpenter was identified by law enforcement in both conservative states.

It can’t be stressed enough that this is not just about one doctor in one state: As Abortion, Every Day warned back in January, Louisiana and Texas’ broader goal is to force a Supreme Court case to overturn shield laws, and block providers from mailing abortion pills to banned states. And the goal of that is to trap residents of anti-abortion states under their draconian laws.

Republicans are hellbent on pushing this fight as far as they can. After all, this is a pretty existential divide between pro-choice and anti-abortion states: As one expert in extradition law put it earlier this year, “We haven’t seen this kind of disparity in state laws around human rights since the Civil War. What constitutes a human right in one state is a capital crime in another.”

That’s why leaders in pro-choice states need to be unequivocal and unflinching in their support for abortion rights and abortion providers. Let them all take a lesson from Bruck, who modeled how to do just that.

Policing Pregnancy

Last week, we told you about a 31-year-old woman in South Carolina who faces a felony “desecration of human remains” charge after losing her pregnancy. Some rare good-ish news: Abortion, Every Day has learned that ‘B’ was just released yesterday on bond with the help of the Palmetto State Abortion Fund (PSAF).

Right now, the group is raising money to support her legal case and ensure she has a safe place to stay. From Ashlyn Preaux, co-founder and executive director of PSAF:

“No one should be put in jail for losing a pregnancy. People in South Carolina already struggle to get the healthcare they need. Arresting someone instead of giving them care only makes things worse. We will be here every step of the way to support our client throughout the legal process.”

Remember, this is a woman who faces the threat of ten years in prison for not disposing of fetal remains ‘properly’. Please consider supporting her here.

While we’re relieved that ‘B’ is no longer in jail, this is just one of a growing number of cases—all while state governments ramp up their efforts to surveil and punish pregnant people. That means it’s an important time to support the work of groups like Pregnancy Justice, If/When/How, and your local abortion fund.

In the States

Speaking of how important abortion funds are, let’s look to New York—where Politico has a bleak update on the New York Abortion Access Fund: The fund is on the brink of running out of money.

Nearly 40% of the patients NYAAF supports are from out-of-state, and the increasing costs of travel, lodging, and abortion procedures are taking a toll. That’s in no small part thanks to the uptick of patients who are later in pregnancy, who require abortions that are much more costly. (Reminder: it was just over a week ago that a study found states with bans were driving up the number of later abortions.)

And while New York’s assembly granted NYAAF $1 million last year, NYAAF says the city and state funding is difficult and slow to access—which has forced the group to take out a $1 million loan to bridge the gap.

So please consider setting up a monthly donation to support NYAAF’s work, if you can.

And remember, this is an issue we’re seeing across the country: In the immediate aftermath of Dobbs, abortion funds received an influx of one-time “rage donations,” as an organizer at the Abortion Fund of Ohio has called them. But this hasn’t been sustained over the last three years, and amid a range of competing demands within the reproductive rights movement—including numerous costly ballot measure efforts and political campaigns—donations to sustain abortion funds’ vital work have declined.

While pro-choice activists across the country are struggling, Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds is busy congratulating herself over the state’s wildly unpopular, deadly six-week ban. Reynolds stroked her own ego before hundreds of anti-abortion activists at the Family Leadership Summit last week, declaring that there’s “no effort she is prouder of” than the state’s ban.

Reynolds said that “as of today, abortions in Iowa are down more than 60% since the fall of Roe v. Wade.” Please note that a decisive majority of Iowans—64%—support legal abortion; and the law is actively endangering the lives of pregnant patients in the state. Yet the Republican governor says she can’t wait for things to get even worse.

“It means that four of our state’s six Planned Parenthood centers are closing and if the courts allow President Trump’s one, big, beautiful bill to pull the remaining centers’ taxpayer funding, more may be on the way.”

She is, in effect, bragging that entire communities in her state might soon lose access to their sole health provider.

Finally, we got some late-breaking news out of West Virginia that has national implications: A federal appeals court has upheld the state’s ban on abortion medication, in a ruling bolstering the power of anti-choice states.

You may remember that GenBioPro, a U.S.-based manufacturer of mifepristone, sued West Virginia over the state’s ban on abortion pills—arguing that the FDA’s approval of the medication trumped the state’s law. But today, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit dismissed GenBioPro’s case—becoming the first federal appeals court to say that states can restrict abortion medication.

GenBioPro CEO Evan Masingill, said in a statement the ruling threatens to cause “a dangerous ripple effect on the availability of essential medications in this country.”

Quick hits:

• The number of abortions in Florida have plummeted by a whopping 40% in the first half of 2025;

• A Colorado abortion provider is suing the state over its parental notification law (good!);

• Wisconsin Public Radio looks at what’s next for the legal fight over abortion in the state;

• And States Newsroom covers the attacks on privacy in Indiana. (If you haven’t been following this story, you should absolutely catch up.)

In the Nation

Remember how on the 2024 campaign trail, candidate-Donald Trump avoided talking about abortion like the plague??? When he did talk about it, he tried to have it both ways—bragging about being the one to kill Roe while also absurdly claiming to have made states more liberal because voters get to decide. (Fact-check: Many states don’t allow voters to put measures on the ballot, and… to state the obvious: You can’t be pro-choice and kill Roe!!!!)

Still, it was clear he simply didn’t want to talk about abortion—and at least once snapped at a reporter who asked about the issue. Why? Because abortion is popular and restricting it is not. In fact, a new book about Trump’s 2024 campaign confirms exactly this.

An excerpt of 2024: How Trump Retook the White House and the Democrats Lost America published in CNN earlier this month reveals that part of Trump’s aversion to talking about the issue—in addition to the fact that he is, as a general rule, utterly incoherent—is that he received “conflicting advice” across the anti-abortion movement on how to talk about it.

After the 2022 midterms, which saw Democrats overperform after decisively running on abortion rights, Trump reportedly told an anti-abortion leader, “I have to find a way out of this issue. It’s killing us.”

Some anti-abortion groups pressured Trump to advocate for a national 15-week ban; Trump called for everyone to “follow their heart” on abortion (which, where do I even begin…); and top anti-abortion groups railed against Trump’s proclamations that he’d be the “fertilization president,” adamantly backing IVF.

Meanwhile, Trump’s campaign manager Susie Wiles reportedly gave a presentation titled, “How a national abortion policy will cost Trump the election”—directing Trump away from advocating for specific week cut-offs. Along the way, Trump, JD Vance, and other Republicans loudly distanced themselves from the idea of a national abortion ban—continuing to support one, obviously, but refusing to call it one. (Remember ‘minimum national standard’??)

We all know how this awful story ends—look who’s in the White House right now. But it’s telling, and at least a small sign of hope, that anti-abortion leaders know how unpopular abortion bans are and have to rely on deceit and avoidance. Now, the onus is on pro-choice politicians to refuse to allow them to do this.

Quick hits:

• The 19th digs into how Republicans’ big bullshit bill will impact abortion travel;

• Rewire has more on the anti-abortion ‘medical’ groups lobbying RFK Jr. to restrict access to mifepristone;

• And in international news, Trump isn’t the only leader pardoning violent anti-abortion extremists.

Anti-Abortion Strategy

In case you somehow missed it, Republicans passed a sweeping, distinctly not-beautiful budget bill that defunds Planned Parenthood and all abortion providers. The consequences are steep: One in four abortion providers could close, and in some cases, entire communities will lose their main health provider.

As Planned Parenthood has stressed, no one can possibly step in to fill the gap if their clinics are shuttered because of the broad range of health services they provide—and yes, that includes abortion.

But anti-abortion voices are now accusing us—that is, everyone who’s warning you about how catastrophic this budget bill is—of “gaslighting.” Yes, the people who told us for years that the Supreme Court would never overturn Roe are now accusing us of gaslighting.

These are the same people insisting that Trump and Republicans would never enact a national abortion ban, even as Republicans just passed a bill that—if permitted to stand—could decimate abortion access across the country. What are you supposed to call that except a ban?

A Washington state-based conservative columnist, Jason Ratz, wrote this week, “You’re being gaslit around defunding Planned Parenthood, and you shouldn’t fall for it.” Ratz points to warnings from local OBGYN Dr. Judy Kimelman about the devastating impacts of defunding Planned Parenthood, accusing her of spinning “an emotional” and “profoundly dishonest” narrative.

Planned Parenthood deserves to be defunded, Ratz writes, because it is an “abortion empire” that’s “holding women’s healthcare hostage to protect their abortion business.”

“Don’t fall for this emotional blackmail. Don’t let them gaslight you into believing this is about anything other than what it is. This is a fight over abortion and whether you should be compelled to pay for it.”

I wish my taxes paid for abortion—alas, lately, they’re tied up in funding a xenophobic, rogue police force and weapons for foreign wars, while federal law prohibits taxes from paying for most abortions.

In any case, I think this column speaks to a broader trend among conservatives right now: By accusing feminists of “gaslighting” about the extreme detriments of defunding Planned Parenthood, they’re co-opting feminist language—similar to how they accuse abortion providers of being “coercive” and “abusive” toward patients. (Not to mention, they’re projecting!)