South Carolina Republicans Move to Ban Birth Control
9.5.25
Click to skip ahead: In South Carolina’s National Blueprint, Republicans are advancing legislation they hope will ban some birth control and allow abortion patients to be charged with murder. In Attacks on Abortion Pills, RFK cites a junk science study to hint at restrictions on mifepristone, and the Center for Reproductive Rights is suing the Trump administration. Policing Pregnancy has an update on Brittany Watts’ lawsuit. In the States, news from Texas and Utah. In the Nation, veterans’ resounding response to Trump’s proposed VA abortion ban.
South Carolina’s National Blueprint
South Carolina Republicans are reviving their push for a total abortion ban—scheduling an October 1 hearing for SB 323, the ‘Unborn Child Protection Act.’
Among other horrors, the legislation would allow abortion patients to be charged with murder, and redefine contraception with the goal of banning certain types of birth control. And while lawmakers have tried and failed to pass SB 323 in the past, South Carolina abortion rights advocates tell me they’re worried that the legislation will have more support this time around.
Before we dig into the legislation, please know that this is not just about South Carolina. This bill, drafted by the National Right to Life, is a blueprint for what Republicans want across the country. So no matter what happens—whether the legislation is ‘weakened’ or dies entirely—we are getting an inside look at what conservative activists want for American women. Just as important, they’re telling us how they plan to do it.
So let’s get into it.
If passed, SB 323 would ban all abortion, stripping away exceptions for rape, incest, and fatal fetal abnormalities. Women who end their pregnancies could be charged with murder and subject to the death penalty. (Yes, really—if you need some background on ‘equal protection’ bills, click here.) Under this bill, patients with life-threatening pregnancies would be denied standard abortion procedures—instead, they’d be forced into labor or c-sections, even when their pregnancy is too early for the fetus to survive.
The bill is also a shocking attack on free speech. Referring someone for an abortion would be a felony, as would sharing information about how to get an abortion. Pro-choice websites would be illegal, and South Carolina attorneys tell AED that even giving someone gas money to get an out-of-state abortion could land you in prison for thirty years.
I’m not even done yet!
In addition to the fact that abortion providers would be violating RICO or racketeering laws, it would be illegal to work for or associate with abortion providers—unless you’re ready to spend a decade in prison. The bill also mandates that the anti-abortion propaganda video ‘Baby Olivia’ be shown in public school classrooms, and that schools that the Attorney General could compel schools that refuse to comply.
Incredibly, these are all attacks we’ve seen before—though perhaps not all in one bill. The bit of the legislation I’m most interested in, though, is what SB 323 says about birth control—because it pulls back the curtain on Republicans’ strategy for chipping away at the right to contraception everywhere.
As the ACLU of South Carolina notes, the bill redefines contraception to exclude anything that prevents ovulation or the implantation of a fertilized egg. That means that under this bill, certain kinds of IUDs, emergency contraceptives, and at least one kind of hormonal birth control pill would not be considered contraception.
Now, if you’ve been reading the newsletter for a while, you know that Republicans have long been working to redefine some types of birth control as ‘abortifacients’ in an effort to ban it. But they’re doing something even sneakier here. It gets a little complicated, but it’s important—so stick with me.
This bill—again, drafted as a national model—defines an ‘abortion’ as anything that ends a “clinically diagnosable pregnancy,” and “clinically diagnosable pregnancy” is defined as the moment when the hCG hormone can be detected. Here’s the thing: hCG is only detectible after a fertilized egg has implanted.
It seems to me that anti-abortion activists are giving themselves a clever out: the legislation starts the ball rolling to ban contraception by claiming that emergency contraception, IUDs, etc aren’t really birth control, but it also allows them to insist they’re not banning those methods because they act before implantation.1
All that rhetorical maneuvering serves a dual purpose: It gives Republicans cover to claim they’re not moving to ban birth control while they begin the process to do just that; and it creates a chilling effect—making providers hesitant to prescribe contraception and patients afraid to seek it out.
It’s similar to what they do with abortion ban ‘exceptions’. A state will say there’s an exception for fatal fetal anomalies, for example, but then define “fatal” so narrowly that no doctor would risk providing care. For Republicans, it’s a win-win—the letter of the law lets them pretend women can get care, while the reality ensures that will never happen.
Vicki Ringer, Director of Public Affairs for Planned Parenthood South Atlantic, says the legislation “is the most extreme, heinous bill restricting reproductive health care that we have faced yet in South Carolina.” And Carey Shofner, Board President of Palmetto State Abortion Fund (PSAF), says the bill “is not about protecting life, it is about political control over our most private decisions.”
Shofner also notes that extremists are using South Carolina as “a testing ground for extremist policies that could spread across the country.”
And that’s exactly right: Republicans are telling us—very clearly—what they want for the whole country. The only question is whether we’ll listen.
If you’re in South Carolina, consider signing this petition against SB 323 and donating to the incredible folks at PSAF and Planned Parenthood.
Attacks on Abortion Pills
Well, we all saw this one coming: After months of anti-abortion extremists like Sen. Josh Hawley and top ‘pro-life’ groups pressuring the Trump administration to restrict abortion pills, HHS Secretary RFK Jr. confirmed that he’s working with the FDA to do just that.
During his Senate hearing yesterday, Kennedy said that he’s working with FDA Commissioner Marty Makary to “review” the safety of mifepristone—a drug that’s been safely used for decades. That would be worrying enough on it’s own, but what’s especially troubling is that Kennedy appeared to cite the junk science mifepristone ‘study’ we’ve been warning about for months.
In the below exchange with U.S. Sen. James Lankford from Oklahoma, Kennedy accuses the last administration of “burying” data showing mifepristone is dangerous:
His full comments:
“We’re getting data in all the time, new data that we’re reviewing. And we know that during the Biden administration, they actually twisted the data to bury one of the safety signals, a very high safety signal—around 11%. So we’re gonna make sure that doesn’t happen any more.”
Carter Sherman at The Guardian posits—and I agree—that Kennedy is talking about debunked data from the Ethics and Public Policy Center (EPPC). For background on that so-called research, click here, here, and here.
The short version is that it’s ideological bunk. Abortion, Every Day even uncovered video of EPPC president Ryan Anderson admitting that the goal of the study was to “eliminate” abortion medication, and talking about colluding with national anti-abortion groups to weaponize the fake research.
Since the study’s release, conservatives have been lobbying to reinstate medically unnecessary restrictions on abortion pills under the guise of protecting women’s health. And that very public, intense pressure has ramped up over the last few weeks.
That’s because conservatives know that 1 in 4 abortions in this country are now provided via telehealth. Even just a requirement for in-person visits would slash access overnight.
Again: this is why Abortion, Every Day made such a big fuss about this study—and why we complained about the lack of mainstream media coverage! If more publications would have reported on how absurd this so-called data is—if Republicans would have been too embarrassed to even mention this study—it would be a lot easier to fight back now.
We’re not quite done talking about abortion medication yet—or that bullshit data. Today, the Center for Reproductive Rights (CRR) announced that they’ve filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration for refusing to comply with FOIA requests for records on mifepristone.
Namely, CRR wants to know if there was political interference or coordination between the Trump administration and the EPPC. They’ve asked for HHS records, “demanding all communications among the agencies, EPPC, and the office of Senator Hawley.” Yet the White House is withholding it.
I’m so glad they’re bringing this suit. Abortion, Every Day was the first place to flag that the Trump administration was clearly coordinating with anti-abortion activists on this junk science study—and we were the only place that kept beating that drum! From our coverage back in June:
This is all part of a well-planned strategy—one given away by the very obvious timeline. Just days before the EPPC report dropped, Makary said he might restrict mifepristone if new data showed it was unsafe. Then—just like magic!—a study appeared. Within 24 hours, Hawley sent a letter urging a full FDA review of the medication. And now here we are.
Rachana Desai Martin, CRR’s Chief U.S. Program Officer, says, “The timing of the administration’s interest in mifepristone and its reliance on discredited right-wing policy papers instead of long-standing peer-reviewed studies suggest that anti-abortion ideology is dictating the drug regulation process.”
“The public deserves to know.” We’ll keep you updated as the suit progresses.
Policing Pregnancy
We have a brief update in the Brittany Watts lawsuit. As you likely remember, Watts—arrested for abuse of a corpse after miscarrying—is suing the city of Warren, the hospital where she was ‘treated,’ the police officer who interrogated her (as she lay in a hospital bed), the doctor who denied her care, and the nurses who turned her in despite her having done nothing illegal.
This week, those defendants filed their responses to the suit. The short version? They claim they did nothing wrong. The cop and the city say they didn’t conspire or fabricate evidence, and the hospital and its staff say that because Watts left against medical advice, they’re inoculated from liability.
I’m really hoping that we have some big news in this suit: I’d love to see a strong message sent to any other healthcare providers or law enforcement officers considering criminalizing another woman for her pregnancy outcome.
In related news, if you missed yesterday’s email on what’s happening in Kentucky, please read it below. We got a massive scoop in the criminal case against college student Laken Snelling: the county coroner told Kylie that when they say they’re investigating the death of an “infant,” that could actually mean “fetus.” Which exactly what we’ve been saying—and warning about—since news of the case first broke.
I’ve been so distressed seeing the way that this young woman is being attacked, harassed and threatened online. And to know that the police may be sitting on the news that she miscarried is absolutely keeping me up nights. Regardless of what happened—and no matter how far along she was in her pregnancy—what is happening to Snelling right now is a nightmare.
In the States
Texas is one step closer to enacting a nightmare bill that not only bans anyone from so much as touching abortion pills, but would allow anti-abortion extremists to run sting operations for profit. The state Senate made its final vote passing the legislation this week, and will now go to Gov. Greg Abbott for signing.
A brief refresher, since all of this is wildly convoluted on top of being evil: The bill would allow private citizens to sue anyone who mails abortion pills into the state for at least $100,000. Almost anyone could be targeted: manufacturers, distributors, hotline operators, even a loved one who picks up the pills from a PO Box.
Under the bill, the pregnant person or ‘father’ of the fetus could sue for the full $100,000, while anyone else would have to donate 90% to a ‘charity’—aka an anti-abortion extremist organization. Under this feature of the bill, anti-abortion activists and organizations could carry out sting operations as often as they’d like: ordering pills from an out-of-state provider in order to sue, then ‘donating’ $90,000 to the charity they’re affiliated with.
Texas abortion funds—including The Afiya Center, Frontera Fund, Fund Texas Choice, Jane’s Due Process, Lilith Fund, and Texas Equal Access Fund—condemned HB/SB 7 in a joint statement, warning that the bill “targets anyone who helps Texans access medication abortion care and attempts to spread Texas’ abortion ban beyond state lines—creating a nationwide fear and retribution.”
As this bill moves forward, here’s a reminder to support Texas abortion funds, who maintain they aren’t going anywhere: “Care is not a crime, and we refuse to cave to this harmful—and unconstitutional—legislation.”
If you’d like to do more, consider signing onto this petition urging Abbott to veto the legislation.
Let’s move onto Utah, where The Salt Lake Tribune has an in-depth piece about abortion reporting: Essentially, the state is sharing less information about abortions, even though the abortion rate has spiked.
Since Roe was overturned, the number of abortions performed in Utah has risen by 30%—an increase that’s likely due to out-of-state patients. And while the state continues to require doctors to collect and report a tremendous amount of data about their abortion patients, the state has “scaled down” how much of those statistics they’re publishing.
Isaac Maddow-Zimet, a data scientist at the Guttmacher Institute, told the SLT, “It’s a little bit the worst of all possible worlds, in that they both still have these reporting requirements in place, and they also, for all intents and purposes, seem to not be doing anything with them.” The idea scenario, he said, would be for the state to have no reporting requirements at all.
After all, doctors aren’t required to report data on their appendectomy or heart attack patients! The goal is to make abortion patients ashamed and afraid, to make providing care more onerous, and—Republicans hope—to use all that data to mislead voters about abortion.
That’s why we’ve been tracking conservatives’ various abortion reporting mandates: like the move in Indiana to make abortion reports public records, Texas’ law that forces doctors to report fake abortion ‘complications’, or Ohio’s push for a public dashboard of abortion data.
Apparently, it’s that last bit of horror that Utah is working on. A spokesperson for the state Department of Health and Human Services told the SLT that the reason they haven’t produced abortion reports recently is because, “We decided to focus our resources on creating the abortion statistics dashboard instead of creating manual reports.” Just terrific.
The concern with publicly-available dashboards of people’s abortion information is that—even with patient names redacted—folks will be able to reverse engineer patients’ identities. Not to mention, it’s fucking weird! Mind your business!
In the Nation
Remember earlier this summer when the supposedly pro-military Trump administration proposed a sweeping, national ban on veterans’ access to abortion care for medical emergencies, rape, and incest? Well, Tuesday marked the last day for public comment on this rule change.
In the last month, active military members and veterans have reportedly flooded the administration’s website with formal complaints over the proposed abortion ban, with over 20,000 public comments filed.
The Independent has a few of these complaints, well worth reading. On person wrote, “I am a veteran of the US Army and if this rule was in place I wouldn’t have joined.” Another complaint says, “As [a] veteran of the Marine Corps, having these medical procedures available gave me the option to stay combat ready…How dare you take that right away from our women in uniform.”
And here’s an especially colorful one for good measure:
“Abhorrent and disgraceful. Letting a bunch of old, white, male ghouls strip away women's healthcare. What healthcare organizations endorse this? I'm getting out of the Army next year. I can't take this disgusting bull*** anymore. America is not free.”
After Dobbs, the Biden administration’s VA moved to cover abortion for rape victims and those with life-threatening pregnancies. But in August, the Trump administration claimed this was “federal overreach.”
If the administration thought veterans would quietly accept what is effectively among the most extreme abortion bans in the nation, it looks like they were woefully mistaken.
With the rare exception of copper IUDs.
South Carolina lawmakers are dragging us back into the dark ages with Senate Bill 323—the so-called “Unborn Child Protection Act.” Let’s call it what it really is: a Pregnancy Criminalization Act.
This bill didn’t just quietly die in committee earlier this year. No. Anti-abortion extremists resurrected it, scheduling a new hearing for October 1, as if the women and families of South Carolina are pawns in their endless game of control.
Here’s what S.323 would do:
Treat abortion as homicide, carrying sentences of up to 30 years in prison.
Eliminate exceptions for rape and incest, forcing children to give birth to their rapists’ babies.
Threaten IVF and contraception by redefining “life” in ways that defy science.
Criminalize even sharing abortion information online.
Trap families inside South Carolina’s borders by banning minors from leaving for care.
This isn’t policy—it’s a power grab dressed up in morality. It doesn’t protect life; it weaponizes the state against its own people. It transforms every pregnancy into a potential crime scene, every miscarriage into grounds for interrogation, every doctor into a suspect.
And let’s be clear: South Carolina’s women and families already know what’s at stake. They’ve been forced to travel hundreds of miles to neighboring states for care, only to face packed clinics and weeks-long waits. S.323 would cement that cruelty into law.
The ACLU, Planned Parenthood, and countless advocates have sounded the alarm. But this should alarm everyone. If lawmakers can strip away your ability to decide your own pregnancy, what stops them from controlling every other aspect of your health, your body, your future?
South Carolina’s leaders want headlines for being the cruelest in the country. They want their names etched into history as the ones who went furthest to punish women. Fine. We’ll give them headlines. But they should know this: their cruelty will not go unanswered.
Her Safe Harbor will not be silent. We will not stop answering the phone. We will not stop mailing care. We will not stop reminding the women of South Carolina—and everywhere else—that they are not alone.
Because while politicians imagine a thousand ways to trap us, we can imagine a thousand ways to break free—and build better.
More than a year ago (25 July 2024), I warned how Republicans would work to ban all contraception as part of Project 2025. I put a link to the newsletter I wrote on this Substack, among others.
https://andrawatkins.substack.com/p/project-2025-outlaw-chemical-abortion?utm_source=publication-search
This was always the plan. I begged and pleaded with people LAST YEAR to elevate my work, hoping it might make a difference last November. This is one of those times where I really wish more people with bigger platforms had offered me a seat at the table.
So when I write my next piece about what they're going to be doing in six months to a year, I hope more people will listen.