Republicans Introduced A National Abortion Ban and They Think You Won't Notice

5.6.26

Click to skip ahead: Pro-Choice Speech Under Attack; Republicans Introduce National Abortion Ban; The Hypocrisy of Anti-Abortion Women; In the States: Florida, Illinois, Idaho, Connecticut; California Gubernatorial Candidate Would Extradite Providers; Fifth Circuit Fallout; Trump Administration Still Silent on Mifepristone; AED x Katie Couric;

---

Pro-Choice Speech Under Attack

Well, it was bound to happen. YouTube removed a video I made about abortion pills, claiming that I was facilitating the sale of illegal drugs. (The video was actually quite tame, so I wonder if it was the target of a mass-reporting campaign.)

I’ve appealed the content violation, and fortunately the video is available on other platforms. But this still feels ominous—and familiar. Abortion, Every Day has been tracking the rise of anti-abortion censorship online and off. It’s not just that abortion providers and advocates are having their content blocked and accounts banned. It’s not just that college professors are being demoted over writing something pro-choice. States are passing laws that criminalize sharing abortion information or advertising abortion pills. Republican senators have even tried to weaponize the federal government to shut down pro-choice websites.

Over the last four years, community care and support has become criminal “trafficking,” or “aiding and abetting.” They’re hyper-focused on stifling speech because they know that we are taking care of each other.

I’ll let you know what happens with my video soon. In the meantime, check out Repro Uncensored’s work on fighting back against online abortion censorship.

Republicans Introduce National Abortion Ban

Republicans have introduced a national abortion ban, and they think Americans are too stupid to realize it.

Last week, Senate and House Republicans introduced legislation that would effectively ban abortion after 12 weeks by criminalizing dilation and evacuation (D&E) procedures—the most common way to end a pregnancy in the second trimester.

The full language of the “Dismemberment Abortion Ban Act” isn’t available yet, but a press release from sponsor Rep. Kat Cammack notes that the bill “establishes a federal prohibition on dismemberment abortions, including dilation and evacuation procedures.”

By banning a procedure rather than ‘abortion’ more broadly, Republicans think they’ll be able to sneak a national abortion ban past voters without the usual blowback.

After all, there’s a reason GOP legislators have mostly laid off publicly pushing for federal abortion restrictions since the end of Roe. They know how unpopular banning abortion is!

Consider Sen. Lindsey Graham—who introduced a 15-week ban every full session since 2013. He suddenly stopped in 2022. And when Congressional Republicans introduced a “Life at Conception Act” last year, they went out of their way to claim that it wasn’t an abortion ban. Rep. Don Bacon said the bill “doesn’t even mention the word abortion.” Instead, he insisted, “It’s a statement of principle that the unborn child has rights.”

This D&E ban is just the latest attempt to impose a national abortion ban while pretending it’s something else entirely.

The legislation also pulls together a lot of the language and strategy Abortion, Every Day has tracked over the years. Consider just this one sentence from Cammack’s press release:

“This bill bans one of the most barbaric late-term abortion procedures in modern medicine while ensuring women are not the target of prosecution.”

Since 2023, I’ve warned that Republicans were trying to strategically redefine “late” abortion as anything past the first trimester. This bill does just that. “Ensuring women are not the target of prosecution” is also doing quite a lot here. Suddenly, a bill that doesn’t punish women is being framed as legislation that actively protects women.

Cammack reiterates that message herself:

“This bill sets a clear federal standard that holds providers accountable, protects the dignity of all life, and ensures women are protected, not prosecuted.”

Just a week ago, I predicted that Republicans would start to position themselves as somehow “moderate” on abortion by loudly opposing the prosecution of women. Now, here we are.

I’ll keep you updated on this bill as I learn more, but consider it a reminder that anti-abortion legislators and activists are trying out new strategies all the time: whether it’s “coercion,” abortion in the water, or bills like this one.

The Hypocrisy of Anti-Abortion Women

Just a quick fun fact about the above bill: if sponsor Rep. Kat Cammack sounds familiar, it’s because AED wrote about her last year when she was denied treatment for her ectopic pregnancy in Florida. That’s right—a Republican lawmaker who could have died thanks to an abortion ban is now proposing one for the entire nation.

A refresher: in 2024, a hospital delayed treating Cammack’s ectopic pregnancy because Florida’s six-week ban had just taken effect. Rather than blame the draconian Republican law, Cammack pointed the finger at abortion rights activists—claiming that their “absolute fearmongering” made the doctors too afraid to offer her the medication. (This is a common and long-planned messaging tactic.)

Cammack also insists that “what I went through wasn’t an abortion.”

I’m so over these women, honestly. Why do they think that they are the exception to the rule? Is the patriarchal pat on the head truly worth selling out their entire gender?

In the States: Florida, Illinois, Idaho, Connecticut

Let’s stick with the shitty state of affairs in Florida for a moment: the Sun Sentinel reports that a woman there is being forced to carry a doomed pregnancy to term. Twenty-two year old Nellyann Martinez is a preschool teacher in Tampa Bay; she found out at 14 weeks into her pregnancy that her fetus had a rare congenital brain malformation. Infants with this condition don’t survive for more than a few days.

“If they had told me earlier, they could have done a D&C,” she says. Martinez says the ban is forcing her to carry to term: “She’s growing and kicking…it’s going to be difficult.”

Let’s call this what it is: state-mandated torture.

Over in Illinois, the Chicago Tribune reports that Democrats haven’t taken any steps towards protecting abortion in the state constitution even though it’s something Gov. JB Pritzker called for in 2023. Without action now, reporter Dan Petrella says, “Pritzker will end his second term without voters having an opportunity to decide whether abortion rights should be enshrined in the Illinois Constitution.”

Here’s the thing: I think that’s just fine. Illinois is well-protected, Democratically-led, and has some of the strongest pro-choice laws in the country. And constitutional protections are not always the most urgently-needed move in a pro-choice state.

Right now, Illinois is treating more out-of-state abortion patients than any other state in the country. Given how insanely expensive ballot measure campaigns are, I have to imagine abortion advocates think that money would be better spent directly helping patients access care and supporting the providers who are already overwhelmed.

Sometimes I worry that people see constitutional protections as the ultimate protection for abortion rights, but that’s not always true—just ask the folks in Missouri.

Let’s stick with ballot measures for a moment and talk about what’s happening in Idaho. As you know, abortion rights advocates have collected enough signatures to get the issue before voters this November; they’re just waiting for the okay from state clerks, who have less than two months to verify over 100k signatures.

Today, primary and obstetric care provider Dr. Robin Sautter writes in the Idaho Capital Sun that the Reproductive Freedom and Privacy Act is exactly what the state needs to “restore patients’ ability to make private medical decisions” without interference from the government.

Remember, Idaho has a critical shortage of healthcare providers which was made worse by the end of Roe. (The state lost about a third of its OBGYNs.)

Finally, the latest attacks on mifepristone are giving new urgency to expanding Connecticut’s shield law. Advocates are calling for movement on Senate Bill 295, legislation that would do something crucial: protect doctors who provide abortion care via telehealth to patients in other states.

OBGYN Cara Delaney told the Hartford Courant that expanding the state’s protections would go a long way in making providers feel more secure:

“There are providers that are providing this care across state lines. And there would be more that would be providing this care if there was a shield law that protected them.”

Quick hits:

• USA Today reported on the Arkansas women challenging the state’s abortion ban after being denied health- and life-saving care;

• North Carolina Republicans are pointing to a West Virginia case to defend abortion restrictions;

• And local media looks at how attacks on mifepristone would impact Kansas, Arizona, and Wyoming.

California Gubernatorial Candidate Would Extradite Providers

I hope people are paying attention to what’s happening in California. Right now, the leading Republican candidate for governor wants to extradite abortion providers to anti-abortion states. (Big thanks to Reproductive Freedom for All for flagging this.)

In January, Steve Hilton spoke to KQED about Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill’s demand that California hand over an abortion provider. While Gov. Gavin Newsom told Murrill to “go fuck yourself” (literally), Hilton said he’d comply.

Think about what that means: Hilton would hand over a California doctor to Louisiana authorities, where that provider could face life in prison for helping a woman end her pregnancy. His justification? He claimed California was imposing its will on Louisiana.

“Louisiana is trying to uphold what its people voted for, and California is undermining it. And I don’t think that’s right. Just as I wouldn’t want to see Louisiana coming in and undermining something that we voted for here in California.”

This is exactly the hypocrisy that Democratic attorneys general pointed out in their Supreme Court amicus brief. Louisiana isn’t defending states’ rights—they’re trampling all over them by trying to control what California doctors can do in their own state.

And that's what makes Hilton's position so chilling. At a time when the anti-abortion movement has made punishment their primary weapon, here's a leading gubernatorial candidate eager to help them wield it.

“This is the strategy: When the rules mean that the anti-abortion movement loses fair and square, in the courts or at the ballot box, its members change the rules. When public opinion doesn’t line up with their aims, they steamroll public opinion.”

- Jill Filipovic, Slate

Fifth Circuit Fallout

There is a very clear media consensus in the aftermath of the federal court ruling on mifepristone: abortion is back as an election issue, and the GOP is going to have to deal with it.

Now, we all know abortion was always an election issue—that’s why Republicans have worked so hard to avoid it, especially before the midterms. But there’s no question that the renewed focus on mifepristone puts candidates in the hot seat.

For those who need a refresher, read AED’s explainer here. The short version is that Louisiana sued the FDA over telehealth access to mifepristone, and the conservative Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of the Republican-led state. Monday, a Supreme Court order paused the decision.

“This is certainly the most significant development in the courts on abortion since the Dobbs decision overturning Roe, so I think when people start to understand what’s happening, they’re going to be pretty shocked and outraged by that,” ACLU attorney Jessica Arons told The Hill.

The Washington Post reports that Democrats see the ruling as an opportunity to go on offense—noting that mentions of abortion from Democrats and left-leaning influencers increased sharply across social media and on podcasts.

Yesterday, over 250 Democratic lawmakers filed an amicus brief to the Supreme Court in support of mifepristone access. The lawmakers urged the Court to stop the federal court ruling that would reinstate an in-person dispensing requirement for the abortion medication.

Meanwhile, anti-abortion activists are calling the focus on abortion pills “a five-alarm crisis for the pro-life movement and for the GOP.”

Want more on the attack against mifepristone? We’ve got you covered:

• KFF has a legal breakdown of the ruling and surrounding political context;

• Nancy Northup, president of Center for Reproductive Rights, spoke to CNN about the ruling;

• Our friends at Your Local Epidemiologist look at miso-only abortions;

• Mother Jones has an in-depth piece about how we got here;

• Finally, Here & Now on NPR dug into the Supreme Court’s pause and what happens now:

Trump Administration Still Silent on Mifepristone

We’re still waiting to hear from Donald Trump and his administration on last week’s anti-mifepristone ruling.

The decision puts Trump in a very awkward position: his administration has been careful to avoid picking any public fights over abortion rights, well-aware that the issue is a big loser for Republicans. Trump’s FDA even asked—and last month, received—a pause on Louisiana’s suit, claiming it needs time to finish its bogus “safety review” of mifepristone.

Now, the Trump administration has to either alienate voters by going along with the ruling—or piss off anti-abortion activists by appealing. When CNN asked the White House about their position this week, a spokesperson pointed journalists back to that so-called safety review.

Anti-abortion activists are furious already, blasting the administration as “negligent” and calling for FDA commissioner Marty Makary to be fired.

Over at MS NOW, law professor Mary Ziegler puts it plainly:

“What is clear is that abortion, once considered a minor issue in 2026, will now be on the front burner again. And the Trump administration will be forced to take a position on mifepristone before the Supreme Court.”

AED x Katie Couric

The inimitable Katie Couric was kind enough to have me on her livestream yesterday to talk about the mifepristone ruling, the ensuing chaos, and what this attack on abortion pills is really about.

I’ve included a clip below, but you can catch our full conversation here.