Trump's New AG Dropped a Comstock Hint

2.11.25

Click to skip ahead: In the States, South Carolina’s ban is being challenged in front of the state Supreme Court, Idaho is considering making abortion pills a controlled substance, and South Dakota lawmakers want to mandate anti-abortion propaganda in public school classrooms.

Care Denied has updates on the lawsuits against a Catholic hospital in California that denied women life-saving abortions.

Criminalizing Care warns that Trump’s new AG Pam Bondi dropped a Comstock hint, and looks at interstate civil battles over abortion.

Reporting on Abortion has a few gripes with the AP and ‘both sides’ journalism.

Keep An Eye On flags anti-abortion attacks on colleges.

---

In the States

Oral arguments kick off tomorrow morning at the South Carolina Supreme Court over the state’s abortion ban, which prohibits the procedure after so-called ‘cardiac activity.’ Republicans claim that happens around six weeks, but the idea of a ‘fetal heartbeat’ that early is a myth—there isn’t even a heart at six weeks.

That’s why Planned Parenthood is asking the court to move the ban to the 9th week of pregnancy, when most of the primary parts of the eventual heart have formed. I’ve said this before, but it bears repeating: I have plenty of feelings about incremental change, but as a representative from Planned Parenthood South Atlantic pointed out a while back, the difference between a six-week ban and a nine-week ban is the difference between doctors turning away half their patients or 90% of them.

Planned Parenthood also sued with this argument in 2023, but the state’s all-male Supreme Court refused to take the case. (Since then the court has added one whole woman to the bench.) You can livestream the hearing tomorrow at 10:30am here, and read Abortion, Every Day’s explainer on the suit below:

South Carolina's “Heartbeat” Lawsuit

A few days ago, I flagged that Idaho Republicans are following Louisiana’s lead and pushing legislation to make abortion medication a controlled substance. At the time, I reminded folks that this isn’t just about criminalizing abortion or making the pills harder to get—but surveillance. Because remember, controlled substances are tracked in a state database.

Indeed, the Idaho legislator who introduced the legislation, Rep. Jordan Redman, clearly has that surveillance front-of-mind:

“Moving these drugs to Schedule IV means they get reported into the prescription drug monitoring program, so there’s more oversight to ensure they aren’t being abused by patients, prescribers or pharmacies.”

I’d love to know how one ‘abuses’ abortion medication. Again, it’s clear what this is really about: scaring the shit out of patients and providers, and compiling as much data as they can.

Meanwhile, South Dakota lawmakers say they have no plans to propose exceptions to the state’s total ban this legislative session. As Democratic House Minority Leader Erin Healy told the South Dakota Searchlight, “I just don’t think there is an appetite for any pro-abortion or pro-women’s rights bills, unfortunately.”

Remember, South Dakota women can have life-saving abortions, but Republicans are working to make that definition as narrow as possible. Last year, the state health department released a truly dystopian video that supposedly clarified when it was legally acceptable for doctors to save women’s lives.

If you missed Abortion, Every Day’s reporting on that video, please read it—it unpacks a key anti-abortion strategy playing out far beyond South Dakota.

The short version: While the video claims to help doctors interpret the law, it actually gives Republicans and anti-abortion activists the power to define what qualifies as a life-threatening condition. What could possibly go wrong?!

What’s more, the video dictates how doctors should treat that condition—namely, by c-sections or vaginal delivery, not abortion.

It should come as no surprise that the video was made in consultation with the American Association of Pro-Life OBGYNs (AAPLOG), an extremist group that claims abortion is never necessary to save a woman’s life. (For more on AAPLOG, revisit Abortion, Every Day’s explainer here.)

Speaking of South Dakota and videos: Republicans there want to mandate that public schools show an anti-abortion propaganda video in classrooms. The bill is similar to the one in Arkansas I reported on last week, and a broader legislative trend across several Republican states.

Finally, an update from Indiana, where two abortion providers are suing to stop the state from making abortion reports public records. Abortion, Every Day has been covering this fight for nearly a year—catch up on our reporting here and here.

The short version: Attorney General Todd Rokita, working hand-in-hand with an anti-abortion group, wants the Indiana Department of Health to treat abortion reports like public records—just like birth and death certificates. But OB-GYNs Caitlin Bernard and Caroline Rouse are fighting back, asking the court for a temporary restraining order to block the move. From the doctors:

“Everyone receiving medical care deserves to have their personal health decisions and pregnancy outcomes protected. There is no reason to release this sensitive information to the public. We will keep fighting to protect patient privacy and the trust between doctors and patients.”

You might remember Dr. Bernard—she was thrust into a national firestorm after speaking out about a 10-year-old rape victim forced to leave her state for abortion care. In retaliation, Rokita weaponized his office against her, even going after her medical license. It was a clear attempt to silence Bernard and send a warning to other doctors. So I love to see her fighting back—showing that he didn’t and couldn’t shut her up.

Quick hits:

• Hawai’i is considering stockpiling abortion medication in the event that the Trump administration uses the Comstock Act to ban the shipping of abortion medication.

• Good for them: An Illinois county courthouse will no longer be named after former U.S. Rep. Henry Hyde, who was responsible for the nightmarish Hyde Amendment.

• And a personhood bill in Montana is moving to the state House floor.

Care Denied

I have updates on the lawsuit against the Catholic hospital that refused to provide two California women with life-saving abortion care. If you need a refresher, you can read about the first patient’s experience here and the second woman’s story here. Both are as horrific as you’d expect—one woman was even given a bucket and towels for the drive to a hospital that might actually help her.

California Attorney General Rob Bonta is also suing Providence St. Joseph Hospital for endangering women’s lives and violating state law—which doesn’t just mandate life-saving abortion care, but requires hospitals to provide treatment that prevents “serious injury or illness.”

Last month, St. Joseph tried to have the cases dismissed—arguing that the state doesn’t have standing to tell them to save women’s lives with abortion because they answer to a ‘higher power.’ Yes, seriously.

Now SF Gate reports that Bonta’s office is asking the judge to rule against that motion to dismiss, slamming the hospital for refusing “to allow its doctors to meet this standard of care, vastly increasing the risk to patients.” And while the hospital claims that they don’t discriminate against pregnant patients, California points out that St. Joseph’s “denies pregnant patients, and pregnant patients alone, the recognized standard of care in medical emergencies.”

Setting aside the sheer insanity of having to legally force hospitals to save women’s lives, this case matters because it’s part of a larger fight over emergency abortion: Republicans argue that states should have the right to refuse women care under any circumstances, and they brought that claim all the way to the Supreme Court. (For Abortion, Every Day’s explainer of that case, click here.)

Essentially, federal law—the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA)—requires emergency rooms give women life-saving abortions. But with Trump in office, Republican-led states no longer have to worry about the federal government enforcing it.

What’s more, the Trump administration has already started making noise about expanding and ramping up enforcement of ‘conscience’ laws. These are policies that allow health care providers, pharmacists and others to decline treatment or prescriptions if it goes against their religious beliefs. So I’ll be curious to see just how far this California case goes.

Side note on language: St. Joseph spokesperson Chamia L. Chambers said the hospital doesn’t “perform elective abortions” but does “provide medically necessary interventions to protect pregnant patients…”

I’ve flagged ‘interventions’ before—it’s a deliberate word choice. Anti-abortion activists use it to create the illusion that women can get care without actually committing to providing abortions. After stories started surfacing about women dying under abortion bans, for example, anti-abortion groups rushed out statements insisting that doctors in every state can “provide care” or “intervene” to save a patient’s life. But they wouldn’t say that doctors could provide abortions. That’s because they want women to be forced into c-sections or vaginal delivery rather than be given a safer, quicker, easier, and less traumatic abortion.

So with this particular statement, St. Joseph is making clear that they have no intentions of performing abortions—no matter what the circumstances. (Truly, once you know about this language trick, you’ll never be able to unsee it.)

Read more about how religious hospitals endanger women’s lives:

The Catholic Hospital System Killing Women

Criminalizing Care

Abortion rights advocates have been worriedly waiting to hear what the Trump administration plans to do with the Comstock Act, the 150 year-old zombie law conservatives say bans the mailing of abortion medication. If enforced, Comstock wouldn’t just make illegal to ship abortion pills, but supplies for abortion or anything Republicans deem ‘obscene.’

Because bans are so unpopular, the hope has been that Trump would want to fly under the radar on abortion. But in a meeting last week with Louisiana Republicans, newly-appointed Attorney General Pam Bondi dropped a hint about Comstock that made my stomach drop.

You all know that Louisiana district attorney Tony Clayton recently indicted a New York abortion provider for shipping pills into the state, even though New York is a shield state that protects providers from prosecution. When Bondi showed up to speak with Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landry and local law enforcement, Clayton complained to Bondi that shield laws were stopping him from extraditing abortion providers:

"We're gonna need your help. I would like to see some consistency around the country that states just can’t harbor fugitives away from folks down here in Louisiana."

Bondi’s response? “I would love to work with you.” The new AG knows enough not to say anything too much more than that, but Bondi’s response is definitely an indication that she plans to take some kind of federal action against providers.

For more on the Comstock Act, read our explainer here—and keep an eye out for a new and updated one coming your way this week.

I’m not just paying attention to interstate criminal disputes—but civil ones, too. Over at CNN, anti-abortion maniac John Seago, president of Texas Right to life, is downright jubilant over the conflict between states. “Our side is happy to see this collision finally taking place,” he says.

If Seago’s name sounds familiar, it’s because he’s the guy who stalks men’s rights groups to find aggrieved men who want to sue over their ex’s abortions. He’s working to bring wrongful death suits against out-of-state abortion providers by seeking out the worst kind of abusive assholes—men furious that the women in their lives had abortions without their permission.

Law professor Rachel Rebouché says this “was always going to happen after Dobbs.”

“Letting states create their own abortion policies when there’s such division among the states—and their state legislatures—about permitting or restricting abortion creates this tension.”

Reporting on Abortion

You all know one of my biggest pet peeves is “both sides” coverage of abortion rights. Mainstream outlets have a bad habit of treating anti-abortion misinformation as if it’s just another perspective—even where there’s an obvious, real truth.

The latest example comes from the Associated Press, which is normally pretty good on abortion issues. In a piece about the various attacks on reproductive rights, the AP publishes this paragraph on abortion pills:

“While critics say the drugs are unsafe, some major medical groups disagree. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists says there is decades of evidence that mifepristone and misoprostol are safe and effective. The group cited a study showing that major adverse events such as significant infection and excessive blood loss occur in less than 0.32% of patients taking mifepristone for a medication abortion. Medical organizations say mifepristone’s safety compares to that of the over-the-counter pain medication ibuprofen.” (Emphasis mine.)

Let’s be clear: Abortion medication is proven safe and effective. It’s not some major medical groups that disagree with claims otherwise—it’s all of them. And it’s not just one study confirming the medication’s safety, but more than one hundred.

I understand this may seem like nitpicking, but language matters now more than ever. And media outlets shouldn’t downplay overwhelming medical consensus in the name of appearing ‘neutral.’

There’s something else: When the AP reports on Republican efforts to punish abortion patients, it leaves out the fact that the consequences of these bills include prison time and the death penalty. That’s a hell of a thing to omit.

Just as disappointing, the AP frames these laws as legislation that “rarely gain[s] traction.” While it’s true that these bills are unlikely to pass right now, it’s incredibly dangerous to dismiss or downplay their significance.

If you’re a regular reader, you know that legislation like this is becoming increasingly normalized—both because of how much more often bills are getting introduced, and how much more openly Republicans are embracing them.

Right now, there are six states considering legislation that would punish abortion patients as murderers. In Texas, the GOP platform already calls for the same! That’s not some fringe idea—it’s a growing threat.

And the AP isn’t just another news outlet; it’s a wire service that gets reprinted nationwide. If anyone needs to get this right, it’s them.

“You cannot predict the outcome of a pregnancy. Abortions happen at all points of pregnancy for all sorts of reasons. People think of these laws as theoretical, not something that impacts people’s lives, but 1 in 4 women of reproductive age will have an abortion.”

- North Carolina family medicine physician Dr. Joi Spaulding, Prism

Keep An Eye On

It was just last week that I flagged an increase in right wing media attacks targeting college professors and students who said anything even remotely pro-choice. This week, they’re back at it: Conservative outlet College Fix is attacking Barnard College over a small (very cool sounding!) event the library is hosting on abortion medication.

The conservative publication reports that the event “includes dried herbs and an outdoor garden with plants historically used to induce abortions,” insinuating that students will be shown how to end their pregnancies with herbs.

What they don’t mention is that the herbs are actually part of an art exhibit, and that the event will discuss “the history of self-managed abortion, what it is, how medication abortions work, and why this is critical knowledge.” Oh, and pizza will be served. (Can I come??)