Republicans Are Coming for Abortion Records
10.7.25
Click to skip ahead: In Missouri Republicans Want Abortion Patients’ Records, the new AG is demanding patient records from Planned Parenthood. In the States, news from Missouri, Kansas, California, and Maine. ICYMI, make sure to read our piece published earlier today about how Texas cops tried to cover up an abortion investigation. Ballot Box has election news from Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. In the Nation has the latest on Republicans’ hissyfit over generic mifepristone and a new piece on the impact of Trump’s immigration policies on pregnant women. Finally, in Keep An Eye On—what are these anti-abortion activists hiding?
Missouri Republicans Want Abortion Patients’ Records
In a shitty but totally unsurprising attack on privacy, Missouri’s new Attorney General Catherine Hanaway is demanding access to Planned Parenthood patient records.
The move is part of Republicans’ ongoing effort to keep abortion restrictions in place—even after voters overwhelmingly passed a pro-choice ballot measure in November. They claim their onerous clinic regulations—which have made care nearly impossible to access—are somehow necessary to “protect women.” The ACLU and Planned Parenthood are suing, with the case headed to trial in January.
Hanaway’s subpoena is a fishing expedition—an attempt to dig up ammunition for court while intimidating and harassing abortion providers. Planned Parenthood and the ACLU of Missouri put it plainly in a joint statement:
“Despite the Missouri attorney general’s blatant attempts to overturn the will of the people, all patients expect and have the right for their medical records to be private. Politicians have no place in the exam room with patients and their medical providers, and that’s why we will keep fighting for patients and their rights.”
Mallory Schwarz, executive director of Abortion Action Missouri, told Jezebel that they’re “not surprised, but disappointed” that the state’s first female AG is targeting patients’ private medical records. “These creeps get off on exploiting Missourians’ private medical records for their own political gain,” she said.
The subpoena seeks “patient medical records, incident reports, adverse event documentation, and communications regarding patient care.” Hanaway has also subpoenaed two former board members of Planned Parenthood Great Rivers, the organization’s chief medical officer, and a doctor who contracts with the group.
It’s the “adverse event documentation” I’m most interested in. Republicans are desperate to prove abortion is dangerous despite all evidence to the contrary. They’ve even built entire systems to manufacture the evidence: In Texas, for example, Republicans passed a law forcing doctors to report abortion ‘complications’ to the state, whether or not the conditions were actually caused by abortion.
The obsession with patient records isn’t limited to Missouri: Indiana’s Attorney General Todd Rokita has been on a one-man mission to make abortion reports public records—like birth and death certificates—and Ohio Republicans want to create a searchable public database of abortion records.
All of which is to say: we’ll keep tracking what’s happening in Missouri, but remember that this is part of a broader strategy.
In the States
Let’s stick with Missouri for a minute, because the state is determined to stay on my forever shit-list. A refresher: Ever since voters passed Amendment 3, Republicans have been trying to claw back an abortion ban: first by quietly keeping restrictions that block care, and now by putting a new ban on the 2026 ballot.
They know abortion is popular, so they’re trying to trick voters into thinking their ballot measure is pro-choice—naming it “Amendment 3” (just like the 2024 abortion rights measure) and drafting a biased ballot summary to match.
That summary was so blatantly biased that a judge has already forced Secretary of State Denny Hoskins to rewrite it—twice. The third version finally passed legal muster, but that doesn’t mean it’s anywhere close to unbiased.
As St. Louis Public Radio notes, the new version still doesn’t admit that the amendment would ban most abortions. Instead, the language—which you can read here—sounds downright pro-choice. It asks voters if they want to “guarantee women’s medical care for emergencies, ectopic pregnancies, and miscarriages,” and “ensure women’s safety during abortions”—making it appear as if abortions would be legal.
Hoskins’ fair ballot language, which will be displayed at polls, is similarly misleading—saying the amendment would “allow abortions in cases of medical emergency, fetal anomaly, rape, or incest.”
And while the summary mentions repealing “Article I, section 36, approved in 2024,” there’s no way for voters to understand that means repealing pro-choice Amendment 3.
It’s a shit-show—and proof, once again, that Republicans know voters want abortion to be legal. They just don’t care.
For a related deeper-dive: KCUR’s “Kansas City Today” covers the abortion rights fight in Missouri and Kansas, asking why the issue is still being fought out in court if voters already made their wishes clear in ballot measures. We have the same question! Listen to the 15 minute segment below:
The conservative lie that California allows doctors to “anonymously” prescribe abortion pills is still making the rounds—this time courtesy of the Catholic News Service. (The truth? Doctors and patients can keep their names off prescription labels as a shield against harassment and zealous prosecution.)
The outlet quotes a lineup of anti-abortion extremists posing as medical experts: a nurse calling the law “a type of back-alley abortion,” an ethicist describing it as “patient abandonment,” and an OB-GYN claiming that “anonymous distribution of mifepristone is medical malpractice at its worst.”
Every single one of them is affiliated with anti-choice organizations that don’t even believe in life-saving abortions, so you’ll forgive me for not taking their medical advice seriously.
We expect this kind of coverage from conservative outlets, but language about “anonymous” doctors has also crept into mainstream reporting—even by publications like NPR.
So consider this your call to action: if you see a local or national outlet repeating that false framing, call it out! (Or, at the very least, send it our way.)
Finally, let’s turn to Maine, where a repeat offender clinic harasser reminds us about the fast-growing—and deeply alarming—anti-abortion “abolition” movement.
The Maine Monitor’s entire piece is well-worth a read: it focuses on John Andrade, who has been sued by the state for repeatedly targeting patients and staff outside Portland’s Planned Parenthood. Andrade is also a founding member of King’s Coalition for Abolition—a group that wants abortion patients charged with murder. [Ed. note: AED originally reported that Andrade was arrested, but that was incorrect—he was sued by the state.]
Bills from so-called abolitionists, ‘equal protection’ legislation, have been introduced in over a dozen states. In fact, there’s one being heard in South Carolina right now. (Maine saw a version too, but its sponsor effectively pulled it before a hearing.)
Abortion, Every Day has been raising the alarm about these bills since 2023—and warning that this once-fringe thinking is becoming increasingly normalized. Just last week, we reported that Turning Point USA is hosting a panel with leaders of the ‘abolition’ movement.
As quickly as these extremists are gaining steam, law professor Mary Ziegler tells the Maine Monitor that they’re playing the long game:
“If you look at how they have worked in places like Texas and Oklahoma, it’s not by getting their own bills passed. It’s by forcing the pro-life movement to change its bills…It’s making what seems to be kind of mainstream for the pro-life movement different.”
What I’ve also noticed is how effectively they’re organizing locally; they’re thinking small, and they’re targeting the next generation. (King’s Coalition, for example, is focusing its outreach on college campuses.)
So please, keep an eye out for these maniacs in your state—and for any talk of ‘equal protection’.
Quick hits:
Planned Parenthood is appealing a judge’s decision to let a Nevada parental notification law stand, saying, “It is insulting that this law questions the capability of a young person’s maturity and intelligence to make decisions about their own body and life.”
WPLN looks at why there’s been a drop in Tennessee patients leaving the state for abortion care (answer: abortion pills);
And U.S. Sen. Steve Daines of Montana published an op-ed in the Helena Independent Record claiming that “the abortion pill is harmful to women.” Read this takedown of his piece at the Daily Montanan instead.
ICYMI
Texas cops are trying to hide the fact that they launched a criminal investigation into an abortion patient, using an automated license plate reader to search tens of thousands of cameras across the country. The kicker? They were tipped off by her abuser. If you missed our email earlier today, check it out below:
Ballot Box
Wisconsin Republicans are nothing if not predictable. Rep. Tom Tiffany—the Congressman running for governor and the GOP’s highest-profile candidate—has quietly scrubbed any mention of abortion from his campaign website. This, from the candidate endorsed by Wisconsin Right to Life and Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America—the same guy who backed a 6-week ban and co-sponsored a 15-week ban in 2022.
Tiffany’s team told the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel that there’s nothing out of the ordinary about the move, claiming the page was simply updated for his gubernatorial run. We’re supposed to believe that the man who once tweeted, “I will always stand for life and support legislation that protects the unborn,” now means it when he says he’ll uphold Wisconsin’s current 20-week abortion ban.
Don’t buy it. Since Dobbs, Abortion, Every Day has tracked the countless underhanded ways anti-abortion candidates try to couch their extremism—because they know abortion rights are popular, and forced pregnancy is very much not.
Across the country—and up and down the ballot—Republicans are dodging the issue entirely or calling themselves “pro-choice” if they support a handful of narrow exceptions. On the federal level, they hide behind phrases like “minimum national standards” or “reasonable restrictions.”
We’ll spare you the time: They want to ban abortion. Whether they’re out and proud about it, or chip away “reasonably” one law at a time, the goal never changes—banning abortion, everywhere.
Other Wisconsin gubernatorial news: Attorney General Josh Kaul has put speculation to bed that he’ll run for governor, instead announcing that he will run for reelection for a third term as AG. Kaul has been a staunch abortion rights supporter.
Meanwhile, all eyes are on Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court race—which, unsurprisingly, is all about abortion. (It’s almost like this is a winning issue for Democrats!) Every ten years, Pennsylvania judges face a retention vote; this year three of the court’s seven justices are on the ballot: Christine Donohue, Kevin Dougherty, and David Wecht.
Gov. Josh Shapiro just released a 30-second ad urging voters to keep all three, saying “we can count on them to protect a woman’s access to abortion and birth control.”
The ACLU is also rolling out a $500,000 campaign to educate voters about the election—including the role it plays in abortion rights.
In the Nation
My god, what babies. House Republicans are demanding firings at the FDA over the approval of a new generic form of mifepristone. According to NOTUS, a dozen lawmakers wrote a letter to HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., calling the FDA’s approval “alarming” and claiming it contradicts his announcement that the agencies would conduct a safety ‘review’ of the drug.
The Republicans “respectfully urge” Kennedy to remove the director of the Office of Generic Drugs, the director of the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, “and other bureaucrats responsible for this reckless decision.”
As we’ve reported, there wasn’t much politics involved in the FDA’s move to approve the generic mifepristone—in fact, the agency didn’t really have a choice. So why all the anti-abortion outrage?
Either anti-abortion lawmakers are trying to pressure the Trump administration into cracking down on abortion pills—because they know the president might need a push to attack something so popular—or they’re playing a longer game: the strategy I floated last week, where activists feign outrage now to help the Trump administration look “moderate” on abortion later, when it eventually restricts the drug.
Our ‘pro-life’ president is making life hell for pregnant immigrant women across the country. Today, The 19th has a new report featuring the stories of immigrant women preparing to give birth after their partners have been deported. These women find themselves isolated, living in fear, and struggling to scrape together resources or pay bills as they fear so much as setting foot outside their homes:
“Many patients—nervous about encountering immigration officials if they leave their homes, drive on public roads or visit a medical clinic—are skipping virtually all of their pregnancy-related health care. Some are opting to give birth at home with the help of midwives because of the possible presence of ICE at hospitals.”
Recall that earlier this year, the Trump administration rescinded a federal policy that protected sensitive areas like hospitals and domestic violence shelters from immigration raids. It can’t be said enough: The cruelty is the point.
One OBGYN based in California told the outlet that “fear of ICE is pushing my patients and their families away from the very systems meant to protect their health and their pregnancies.”
Quick hits:
The Cut has a good breakdown of what’s been happening with the FDA and mifepristone;
The New York Times on free speech and crisis pregnancy centers;
And Reason writes that Texas and Florida are national models for using the police to wage “culture war” battles.
Keep An Eye On
Something caught my attention today over at Catholic Vote. (Hey, there’s a reason I read the opposition!)
Right now, there’s a legal fight over Idaho’s so-called abortion ‘trafficking’ law—the one that makes it a crime to help a teen get an abortion in any way. Republicans insist it’s about protecting teens, claiming it prevents abusive adults from taking victims across state lines for abortions meant to hide evidence of sexual abuse.
In reality, the law punishes anyone who tries to help a teenager access abortion care—from an older sister picking up pills at the post office to a grandmother lending her granddaughter gas money to leave the state. The original version even threatened jail time for anyone who so much as shared information about abortion with a minor.
As part of the ongoing legal challenge, abortion rights advocates have subpoenaed the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC) and Right to Life of Idaho (RLI), seeking as much information as possible—including their communications with Republican legislators.
Anti-abortion leaders are pissed, arguing the request violates their First Amendment rights. James Bopp Jr., general counsel for NRLC, complained that the subpoenas “strike at the heart of constitutionally protected activity,” insisting they “cannot be compelled to turn over their strategy sessions and internal communications simply because their opponents wish to gain an advantage in court.”
Well, James, now I really want to see those emails with lawmakers! These people have a long history of saying truly wild things when they think no one’s looking—so I’ll be keeping a close eye on this one.
It bears repeating: Any time conservatives say they want to protect women they really mean restrict and control. Conservatives NEVER empower women or make our lives safer or better, they ONLY make us more confined and vulnerable.
So anti abortion advocacy groups communication with lawmakers is protected by the first amendment but patients private medical information is not? Interesting. 🤨 can’t have it both ways losers.