Wyoming Anti-Abortion Bill Could Ban Chemo

2.4.25

Read for a brief overview or click to skip ahead:

In All About ‘Coercion,’ a look at how anti-abortion groups are doubling down on their latest messaging term.

In the States, Wyoming Republicans introduce an anti-abortion bill that could outlaw chemo, Colorado Democrats look to expand pro-choice protections, and a potential GOP challenger against the New York governor won’t give a straight answer on the case against an abortion provider.

Criminalizing Care has a theory on how police may have discovered a Louisiana teen’s abortion.

Attacks on Privacy reports that Indiana abortion reports are officially public records.

In the Nation, RFK is one step closer to lead the HHS, and Elon Musk may have access to veteran’s medical records—including abortions.

Keep An Eye On new Texas legislation that would give AG Ken Paxton the power to prosecute abortion cases.

---

All About ‘Coercion’

I wrote yesterday about the messaging strategy behind the criminal abortion case in Louisiana: it’s all about ‘coercion.’ Definitely check it out if you haven’t already, because we’re going to be seeing a lot of this nonsense. You can also get caught up by reading the thread I did earlier today, posted at the bottom of the section.

In the meantime, I had to flag this quote from Katie Daniel, the director of legal affairs at Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America (SBA-PLA):

“This case exposes how mail-order abortion drugs are fueling an epidemic of coercion, a new form of domestic violence against mothers and their babies.”

There’s that word ‘coercion,’ but it’s actually something else that raised my eyebrows: the idea that coercion is “a new form of domestic violence.” It’s a worrying hint at what the anti-abortion movement might get up to next.

After all, this is a leader at one of the country’s most powerful anti-abortion organizations—a group that’s extremely disciplined with their messaging. This is the organization that brought us ‘minimum national standard,’ for example, and the idea of ‘late abortion’ as anything past 12 weeks. If SBA-PLA is declaring something a “new form” of violence against women, it means they have plans for it.

Republicans have already introduced bills on ‘coercion’—but imagine what that would look like if the anti-abortion movement, with the power of the federal government on their side, decides to launch a full scale campaign on the issue.

Soon enough, we’ll start seeing anti-abortion groups publish papers on this “new form” of violence against women, call for special task forces on the issue, and seek out taxpayer funding for studies (which will undoubtedly be conducted by anti-choice ‘researchers’).

It’s infuriating, I know. Especially since these groups really don’t care about women or girls. But we have the opportunity to be prepared; and pro-choice groups that work on messaging and legislation would do well to get ahead of this strategy.

Now would be the time for Democratic legislators to bring forward bills that remind the country that they’ve been the ones funding and working on domestic violence—including reproductive coercion. Why not host a panel of experts to talk about how reproductive coercion operates: We know, for example, that it’s much more likely victims will be forced into pregnancy than out of it, and that burdensome restrictions don’t help victims of violence—but limit their choices.

I know, It’s frustrating to watch an anti-abortion campaign take shape—but catching it early gives us a chance to do something proactively.

In the States

What’s happening in Wyoming is just wild. The Guardian reports that a new Republican bill seeking to restrict abortion may actually make it impossible for people to get routine surgeries or even chemotherapy.

Let me back up a minute: You may remember that a judge struck down Wyoming’s two abortion bans (yes, two) back in November. Judge Melissa Owens ruled that the bans "impede the fundamental right to make health care decisions for an entire class of people, pregnant women.”

Republicans take particular issue with the argument that abortion is healthcare. In fact, Republican Gov. Mark Gordon announced that the state would appeal Owens’ ruling by arguing to the state Supreme Court that abortion isn’t healthcare because pregnancy isn’t an illness. (As you likely know, this is a very popular anti-abortion argument, despite the fact that pregnancy is deadly—especially in the U.S.)

In keeping with that theme, Republican legislators introduced Senate File 125—a bill “defining health care and protecting the people's welfare.” Essentially they’re trying to codify a definition of healthcare that doesn’t include abortion. What’s interesting, though, is that the bill doesn’t use the word ‘abortion’. Instead, the legislation says that anything that causes ‘harm’ to certain body parts doesn’t constitute healthcare:

“No act, treatment or procedure that causes harm to the heart, respiratory system, central nervous system, brain, skeletal system, jointed or muscled appendages or organ function shall be construed as health care unless documented and medically necessitated to save the life of a pregnant woman or in cases in which a licensed physician has determined and documented that a person has no chance of meaningful recovery.”

But there are all sorts of healthcare procedures that could be considered ‘harm’! Think about surgeries, chemo, radiation, etc. And check out what state Sen. Cheri Steinmetz, who sponsored the bill, said when The Guardian asked her whether she consulted any doctors or medical professionals when drafting the legislation:

“…Steinmetz said that she received the bill from an attorney, and was not sure who the attorney sourced input from.”

“I DUNNO” is quite the response! I’m sure it gives Wyoming voters lots of confidence in their Republican representatives.

The Denver Post reports Colorado Democrats plan to introduce two new bills to expand protections for abortion providers in the state. The move comes in response to the criminal case brought against Dr. Maggie Carpenter in Louisiana, and as fear around potential federal restrictions grow.

One bill would act as a beefed up shield law; the other would add protections guaranteed in the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA) for emergency abortions to Colorado law.

Kiera Hatton of Cobalt Action said, “Bringing these efforts forward right now is a ray of hope in a pretty bleak landscape for abortion access and gender-affirming care across the country.”

In less terrific news out of Colorado, a Republican state senator has introduced legislation that would make it a felony to bring a minor to the state for an abortion or gender-affirming care. In keeping with the ‘abortion trafficking’ legislation we’ve seen in other states, Rep. Scott Bottoms’ bill characterizes bringing teens to Colorado for care as “human trafficking.” But don’t worry, the bill isn’t likely to go anywhere. It does, however, give us yet another clue as to how obsessed the GOP is with legislating teen bodies.

Finally, New York Gov. Kathy Hochul signed an important protection for abortion providers yesterday. As I previously reported, the law will allow providers to keep their names off of prescription labels for abortion medication—protecting them from zealous out-of-state prosecutors. The move comes just days after Louisiana indicted a New York provider.

In response to the signing, Rep. Mike Lawler—the Republican considered a potential challenger for Gov. Hochul’s seat—said, “she has invited New York to be the abortion capital of the world.” (I wish!) But Lawler dodged a question about whether he’d repeal the law if elected—telling us exactly what we need to know

Quick hits:

• Connecticut Gov. Ned Lamont announced a new program today that will allow pharmacists to prescribe birth control directly to patients.

• Massachusetts is strengthening protections for nurses who provide abortions.

• And a Kansas bill seeks to establish fetal personhood by mandating child support start at conception.

Criminalizing Care

Speaking of that Louisiana case, we have yet to confirm exactly how police got involved in a teen’s abortion. But this week, the Louisiana Illuminator gives us a clue:

“A police officer who responded to the call initially thought the teen was experiencing a miscarriage but ‘found out’ she had taken abortion pills provided from an out-of-state clinic, the district attorney said.”

The officer “found out” that she had taken abortion medication, huh? How did he do that? And why in the world was a police officer involved in a teen’s miscarriage to begin with?

We know that most of the time someone is criminalized over a pregnancy outcome, it’s a health care provider that’s contacted law enforcement. I’ll be curious to see if that’s the case here. By the way, make sure to follow Louisiana reporter Lorena O’Neil, who has been doing incredible work on this case.

For more info on the stakes in this case, read law professor Mary Ziegler over at Slate, who writes about the legal complications around extradition, or listen to her talk to NPR podcast “Here & Now.”

And if you’re furious over pregnancy-related criminalization check out and donate to Pregnancy Justice, a group that’s been working on this issue for years.

Attacks on Privacy

I’m sorry to say that after a drawn-out court battle, the Indiana Department of Health (IDOH) has settled with an anti-abortion group and agreed to release individual abortion reports as public records and “not designate the reports as confidential medical records.”

That’s right, under the very limited circumstances abortion is permitted in Indiana, a detailed report of that abortion will be made public to anyone who requests it.

Read this for a refresher, but the short version is that Voices for Life sued IDOH when they stopped releasing individual abortion reports. The reports don’t include patient names, but there were so few abortions happening after the state ban that IDOH said the information could still be used to reverse engineer someone’s identity.

What made this suit even more serious was that it was supported by Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita, who said he needed the reports to be public so that groups like Voices for Life could search them for evidence of wrongdoing—information he could use to prosecute abortion providers.

It’s been a shit show beginning to end, especially just under two weeks ago when the new Republican governor of Indiana signed an executive order supporting Rokita and directing IDOH to hand over the reports.

And while the settlement agreement made yesterday says that IDOH will redact certain identifying information, the document makes clear that the government agency cannot redact information like the patient’s age, the date of the abortion, reason for the abortion, the kind of abortion, and on and on. Hopefully, that’s not enough to identify a patient, but I just don’t know.

If you’ve been reading Abortion, Every Day for a while, you know what this is all about: It’s not just that Republicans want the ability to prosecute providers, but that they want to scare the shit out of women considering an abortion. The point is to instill fear.

Read more about Republicans’ attacks on privacy and data, check out our explainer on Project 2025 and read below:

Killing Confidentiality

In the Nation

There were rumors flying around today that Elon Musk and his incel brigade were poking around at the department for Veterans’ Affairs—part of Musk’s move to cut government funding and brag about it on Twitter. Musk and his team have been given access to all sorts of files and data in various government agencies, sparking understanding alarm across the federal government.

If Musk’s newly-formed “Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE)” gets access to VA files, though, it means that he’d be able to see veteran’s private health records. That includes information on who takes birth control, for example, or who has had an abortion. I truly can’t think of anyone I’d want looking at my medical records less.

We know that abortion records, data and privacy are all a central part of the Trump administration’s anti-abortion strategy, so any move like this sends a preemptive chill down my spine.

Speaking of truly chilling: RFK just cleared a key hurdle in his bid to lead HHS, passing a committee vote. Now, his confirmation heads to the full Senate, where all signs suggest he’ll get the job.

Kennedy faced serious opposition from former vice president Mike Pence, who lobbied against Trump’s pick along with his anti-abortion group. But both RFK and major anti-abortion groups fell in line with what Trump wanted: Kennedy repeated over and over against that he’d do whatever Trump wanted when it came to abortion rights, and organizations like Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America now say they’re “encouraged” by Kennedy’s answers on abortion.

The short version? They’re all a bunch of cowards.

If Kennedy does end up leading HHS, Abortion, Every Day will lay out exactly what we need to be on the lookout for. In the meantime, check out what Kennedy revealed about how the Trump administration is thinking about restrictions:

RFK Jr. Accidentally Reveals Trump's Plan on Abortion

Keep An Eye On

I don’t know that anyone has more of a hard-on for criminalizing abortion than Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton. And now, Republican-sponsored legislation would give Paxton exactly what he wants: the ability to prosecute abortion cases himself.

The Austin American-Statesman reports that legislation in the Texas House and Senate would expand Paxton’s power, giving him the ability to pursue criminal voter fraud and abortion cases. This is something I’ve warned about before: Texas Republicans are super eager to punish people for abortions, so for the last few years they’ve proposed bills that would allow Paxton to punish or remove local prosecutors who don’t prioritize abortion cases.

The Statesman writes that this latest legislation would “dangerously centralize power in the executive branch” and “open the floodgates” for abortion prosecutions. So I’ll be keeping a close eye on Senate Bill 846 and House Bill 1004.