Stop Believing Republicans
3.17.25
Click to skip ahead: In Criminalizing Care, an update on the midwife arrested in Texas. Stop Believing Republicans has a reminder of the GOP’s strategy on hiding their anti-abortion extremism. All Eyes on Texas looks at new legislation seeking to ‘clarify’ the state’s abortion ban. Legislation Watch examines a Texas bill targeting pro-choice websites, tech companies, and abortion funds. You Love to See It with some good news about a bad doctor. In the States, news from Georgia, Idaho and Kentucky. Finally, in Coming Soon, a sneak peek at tomorrow’s newsletter.
Criminalizing Care
We have some new information on the Texas midwife arrested on felony abortion charges: The New York Times reports that it wasn’t just Maria Margarita Rojas who was arrested; her colleague, 29-year-old Jose Ley was also charged with the same offenses.
According to a friend, Rojas was on her way to work when she was pulled over by the police at gunpoint and handcuffed. “She said they wouldn’t tell her what was happening,” Holly Shearman says.
We shouldn’t be surprised by any of this, but that doesn’t make the news any less gutting.
Many of you have already asked about where to donate for Rojas’ legal defense; I’m working on getting that information for you as soon as possible. In the meantime, read Abortion, Every Day’s coverage below and keep an eye out for more soon:
Stop Believing Republicans
It’s a rule to live by, especially when it comes to abortion rights.
Right now, Republican state legislators across the country are pushing bills they claim will ‘clarify’ abortion bans, add vital exceptions, or otherwise protect women and doctors. For them, it’s politically necessary: Abortion bans are wildly unpopular, and conservatives need a smokescreen—policies they can point to and tell voters, See? I’m just trying to help!
Because we’re all so desperate to reduce the suffering abortion bans cause, it’s tempting to see these bills as good news. But let’s be clear: Republicans are not writing abortion legislation to help women. These bills are designed to make conservative legislators look more moderate while embedding even more dangerous policies into law.
The Kentucky legislation I told you about last week is a perfect example. Republicans are calling it a bill to add exceptions to the state’s ban—which sounds great! In reality, though, the legislation redefines abortion, and mandates that doctors perform ‘separations’ on patients with life-threatening pregnancies. In other words: forced C-sections or inductions. That’s part of the broader strategy I warned about in November—codifying the lie that abortion is never medically necessary.
Still, Kentucky Republicans are selling it as a way to make life-saving care easier for doctors to provide. Bill sponsor Republican Rep. Jason Nemes even warned, “If you vote ‘no,’ the blood is on your hands.”
It’s a brilliant con: Pass legislation you can tell voters proves that you’re looking out for women, while handing the anti-abortion movement exactly what they want. I mean, does anyone actually believe that Kentucky Right to Life—which endorsed this bill—would back anything that made abortion easier to get?? Give me a fucking break.
That’s one of the red flags to watch for in Republican bills that claim to help women:
🚩 Are anti-abortion groups supporting it? Then it’s garbage. Even if they’re just staying quiet—refusing to lobby against it—it’s probably bad news.
🚩 Are Republicans calling it ‘clarifying’? That’s GOP-speak for we’re not changing anything meaningful, but we want you to think we are. In fact, these bills are often worse than the original bans, further embedding false definitions of abortion or other sneaky new language.
🚩 Does the bill redefine ‘abortion’ or use the term ‘separation’? This is probably the clearest sign that a bill isn’t meant to help patients, but codify the lie that abortion is never necessary. Read Abortion, Every Day’s explainer on this strategy here.
🚩 Are Republicans calling for ‘educating’ doctors? If a bill includes anything about ‘educational’ materials or videos on abortion law for health care providers, it’s a wolf in sheep’s clothing. These so-called ‘Med Ed’ bills claim to help doctors understand when they can legally provide care—making it appear that Republicans are working with doctors to save women’s health and lives. In reality, they enshrine false definitions of abortion and pressure doctors into performing forced C-sections or inductions. (Check out AED’s coverage of South Dakota’s ‘Med Ed’ law here for more.)
There are plenty more red flags, so I may add this list to AED’s Resource Page and update it as needed. But in the meantime, just don’t believe them.
And listen, I get it: We all want to reduce the harm these bans are causing, and sometimes that may mean doing incremental work. But there’s a difference between chipping away at a bad law and giving Republicans the opportunity to make those bad laws even worse. Because even if some of these bills manage to help a few people in the short term—and that’s a big if—conservatives are using legislation like this as vehicles for long-term devastation to abortion access everywhere.
All Eyes On Texas
Speaking of legislation crafted to disguise anti-abortion extremism: Texas Republicans introduced a bill on Friday that has quite a few of those red flags I mentioned.
Senate Bill 31 and House Bill 44 are being touted as legislation to ‘clarify’ (🚩) the state’s abortion ban in order to help doctors know when they can legally provide care. In fact, the legislation calls for doctors who treat pregnant patients to “complete at least one hour of ‘continuing medical education’” (🚩) on Texas’ abortion laws.
Bill sponsor Sen. Bryan Hughes said, “One of the most important things we want to do is make sure that doctors and the hospital lawyers are trained on what the law is.” Remember what I said about not trusting Republicans?
Hughes’ legislation would require the state medical board to “solicit the development of a course…by organizations representing physicians, institutions of higher education with medical schools, or other providers of continuing education to physicians acceptable to the board.”
This language immediately tipped me off to who Republicans have in mind to create this so-called ‘educational’ course: the American Association of Pro-Life OBGYNs (AAPLOG). That’s right, the extremist group that insists abortion is never necessary to save a patient’s life.
Why do I think Texas Republicans want AAPLOG to craft the course? Because that’s exactly what other GOP-led states have done.
After South Dakota passed a ‘Med Ed’ bill requiring an ‘educational’ video for doctors, the state’s health department tapped AAPLOG to create it. The result was a video filled with the group’s extremist talking points: the state defined abortion as an “intention,” claimed miscarriage care isn’t really ‘abortion,’ and directed doctors treat life-threatening pregnancies with a “maternal fetal separation”—AAPLOG’s euphemism for a forced c-section or induced labor.
If Texas passes this bill, we can expect a similar video from their state medical board.
Now, while the legal experts I spoke to say it's good that SB 31 strikes out vague language about “life-threatening conditions” from Texas’ abortion ban, they don’t think the bill would actually change much for doctors. After all, the legislation doesn’t make abortion any more accessible—it just (supposedly) clarifies when providers can act.
Meanwhile, Texas Right to Life—the state’s most powerful anti-abortion group—has been quiet on SB 31 (🚩). But last week, they proudly announced working with Sen. Bryan Hughes on something else: a massive bill targeting tech companies and abortion funds that ‘aid and abet’ the shipping of abortion medication.
After hearing about the details of SB 2880—which The 19th calls “the most sweeping abortion bill introduced in the state since the fall of Roe v. Wade”—it’s hard not to wonder if Hughes pushed his so-called ‘clarifying’ bill as a distraction from the real attack: a massive crackdown on abortion pills.
Let’s get into it in the next section…
Before reading on: If you haven’t upgraded your subscription yet, please do it tonight! Abortion, Every Day relies on reader subscriptions to publish, and we need your support more than ever:
Legislation Watch
The short version: Texas’ SB 2880 would expand the state’s already draconian ban by making it even easier to sue those who ‘aid and abet’ abortion—while also broadening what counts as ‘aiding and abetting.’
The 43-page “Women and Child Protection Act” wouldn’t just impose civil penalties on abortion funds; it takes aim at pro-choice websites that share information on abortion medication, social media platforms that allow that information to be posted, and even payment processors like Venmo, where people might send money for abortion pills.
Here’s how far this goes: If someone posted on Instagram about how to access abortion medication, any private individual in Texas could sue Instagram. If a person bought abortion medication and paid through Venmo, any private individual in Texas could sue Venmo.
It doesn’t stop there. Say there’s a clinic locator app—this bill would allow lawsuits against Apple’s App Store or Google Play for hosting it. Even encrypted messaging apps like Signal, which provide secure communication for abortion seekers, could be targeted.
If successful, this breathtaking attack on free speech wouldn’t just harm Texans—it could limit access nationwide. As law professor Mary Ziegler told The 19th:
“If the bill worked it would be a lot harder to find information about abortion online in Texas and potentially everywhere else. There’s no internet in Texas versus elsewhere. The internet is the same everywhere.”
In other words, if social media companies are worried about being sued by people in Texas, they’re not just going to censor abortion content in that state—but everywhere. The same goes for app stores, payment platforms, and more. The goal is to create a national chilling effect by making online platforms hesitant to allow any abortion-related content for fear of lawsuits.
I’m still making my way through SB 2880, but a few other things that stuck out:
It’s not just civil penalties. The bill would make it a felony to help someone pay for an abortion—even if that abortion is out-of-state. That means lending a friend money for an abortion would be a crime.
The bill defines ‘elective abortion’ as any abortion not performed in response to a medical emergency. In other words, unless your life is on the line, your abortion is ‘elective.’
I’ll have more on SB 2880 tomorrow, but I need to stop here before I give myself a rage-induced heart attack.
UPDATE/CORRECTION: An earlier version of the newsletter said that this bill allowed exempted rapists from civil action, but I misread the bill. The legislation says rapists may not bring civil action. Huge apologies for the error, and thank you to folks for quickly catching the mistake.
You Love to See It
I think we could all use a palate cleanser, so here’s something I really love: OBGYN Dr. Jennifer Lincoln is submitting a formal complaint to the American Board of Obstetrics & Gynecology (ABOG), urging them to revoke the board certification of anti-abortion activist Dr. Ingrid Skop.
If you need a refresher on Skop, click here—but fair warning, it may inspire you to throw your laptop across the room. In her complaint, Dr. Lincoln points out how Skop routinely spreads dangerous disinformation, prioritizing ideology over medical fact. She’s so reckless that even her so-called ‘research’ has been retracted by publishers.
This is a fantastic move. Skop is one of just a handful of OBGYNs working to ban abortion—because the vast majority of reproductive health providers understand that abortion is healthcare. Yet Republicans trot her out repeatedly to testify in favor of their bans, propping her up as if she represents mainstream medical opinion. Stripping her board certification could help make it clear: This is not a credible physician, and she certainly does not have women’s best interests at heart.
Just look at what happened when two major anti-abortion studies were retracted by their publisher—it became that much harder for conservatives to pretend they care about science. The same could be true here. So nice job, Dr. Lincoln!
In the States
Shanette Williams is calling on Georgia legislators to change the state’s abortion ban—the law that killed her daughter, Amber Nicole Thurman. Last week, she stood at the state capitol, demanding action:
“Today I am here, and I will continue to speak her name, I will continue to be wherever I need to be, so that this will not happen to another woman. Is it going to bring my daughter back? Nothing will bring her back. Is it going to ease the pain? Absolutely not. It won’t bring her back, but it’ll save other lives.”
I had a chance to hear Williams speak about her daughter recently, and it really did change something in me. I’ll write about it soon—I’m still processing the experience, to be honest. The thing that stayed with me most? The fact that she didn’t call Amber by her name. When she spoke about her daughter’s life and death, she said, “my baby.”
My baby was in pain. My baby is dead.
For all Republicans’ talk about caring for babies, they don’t seem to realize that women are someone’s babies, too.
Meanwhile, Idaho Republicans say they’re just going to let the horror of abortion bans “play out.” The state has already lost nearly a quarter of its OBGYNs, but conservative legislators insist there’s no need to change the laws.
Rep. Brent Crane, who chairs the committee that usually handles abortion legislation, told the Idaho Capital Sun that doctors will grow more “comfortable” with the laws over time:
“The more that this plays out, I think doctors are going to become more comfortable with it and understand the true intent behind the law. So we’ll just let it play out and see…if there is need for legislative intervention.”
Just to be clear: Women are going septic. Maternity wards are shutting down. And they want to ‘let it play out.’
And in case anyone needs another reminder of what Republican ‘pro-family’ laws actually look like: Ona Marshall from the Kentucky Reproductive Freedom Fund told a local outlet that her family decided it was too dangerous for her pregnant daughter to visit them:
"It's dangerous and life-threatening to be pregnant in Kentucky. We live in a state where it's too dangerous to be pregnant. How sad it is for us because our own daughter can't visit us in her home state? She's in a state where she is able to receive compassionate, timely, comprehensive medical care and we think it's best for her to stay in those states.”
The quote is a good reminder that the consequences of bans have ripple effects. It’s not just that patients are harmed, or that doctors have to leave anti-abortion states—families go without seeing each other because traveling has become too dangerous for pregnant people.
Coming Soon
In tomorrow’s newsletter: Terrific news from Maryland; abortion access for minors in Colorado; efforts to codify fetal personhood efforts in Kansas; the latest on abortion access in Missouri; and the fight to protect patient privacy in Indiana. I’ll also get into what the Trump administration is thinking on abortion medication, emergency abortions and more.
I'll probably say this a billion times before we're back in the saddle again, but here goes: You're my hero. You're doing the good work and keeping me (us) aware while I (we) slog through late-stage capitalism life. I appreciate you more than I could ever say in words. I wish I could do more for you as you do so much for all of us.
And for those who don't know or appreciate you yet, I hope that someday they'll be aware that you're saving their lives. Thank you.
Thank the gods someone is finally calling out Ingrid Skop. That doctor is a ghoul.