Why this law could be a bigger threat to Roe v. Wade than near-total abortion bans
An Arkansas law is less sweeping than bans on abortion in places like Alabama. It could be more dangerous for Roe v. Wade.
By Anna North
Jul 24, 2019
Near-total bans on abortion in Alabama and elsewhere around the country have gotten a lot of coverage in recent months.
But an Arkansas law requiring physician certification could have nearly the same effect without banning the procedure outright — and it might have a better shot at surviving a court challenge
Millions of Women Already Live in a Post-Roe America: A Journey Through the Anti-Abortion South
January 18 2019
Video by Maisie Crow, Lauren Feeney
I met Danielle in the counseling room of the Jackson Women’s Health Organization in Jackson, Mississippi, which sits on a busy corner in the city’s arts district. Its vibrant pink paint job has earned it the name “the Pink House,” and it is the state’s only remaining abortion clinic.
Dressed in gray sweatpants and a T-shirt, Danielle looked pensive as she sat in a narrow room in the back of the building alongside 12 other women there for abortion care. Betty Thompson, a counselor who has worked at the clinic for 24 years, stood before the women, ready to walk them through the necessary paperwork and go over next steps.
Reproductive Rights at Risk With or Without Roe
In much of the country, access to abortion has already been blocked by state governments, especially for women in poverty. And if Roe goes, access will be scarcer still.
January 11, 2019
Recent discussions of abortion rights have been understandably chock-full of apocalyptic imagery and language. Some protesters at the U.S. Capitol in the Trump era have dressed as handmaids à la The Handmaid’s Tale, Margaret Atwood’s story of an ultra-conservative totalitarian government that compels women to have the children of the wealthy and powerful. After Brett Kavanaugh was confirmed to the Supreme Court, many — on both the left and right — assumed that Roe v. Wade was soon to fall. “Roe v. Wade is doomed,”CNN’s Jeffrey Toobin pronounced last June to much media fanfare.
The other abortion ban
I wanted to provide abortions for my patients. My med school wouldn’t teach me how.
By Stephanie Ho
January 4, 2019
Last year brought one of the toughest moments I’d ever faced as a family doctor. A woman had shown up for her appointment after a three-hour drive to one of our clinics in Arkansas, and we had to turn her away. A state restriction had gone into effect, requiring that abortion providers contract with a physician who has hospital-admitting privileges. It works by weaponizing antiabortion attitudes within the medical community.
My staff and I had been attempting to comply with the law since it was passed in 2015. We reached out to every OB/GYN we could find. Receptionists would hang up on us or refuse to take a message. The doctors who did answer said that while they might personally support a woman’s right to choose, their colleagues did not. One told me that for him to sign on as a backup, he’d need permission not only from his hospital administrator but also from the Diocese of Little Rock — “and after that,” he added, “the pope.” We finally found a willing obstetrician in November.
The Last Clinics Standing
These six states show how the Supreme Court could end abortion access without overruling Roe v. Wade
by Jessica Arons
Oct 22, 2018
Following Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court, there was much discussion about the future of reproductive rights in the United States and whether his appointment could result in the overturning of Roe v. Wade. While that prospect remains a real threat, abortion could be made as good as illegal for millions of people long before that happens.
In 2016, the Supreme Court struck down abortion restrictions that would have closed most abortion clinics in Texas. Justice Anthony Kennedy was the swing vote in that case. With Kavanaugh confirmed as his replacement, the court could use the next abortion-rights case to eviscerate abortion access without explicitly overruling Roe.
It may still be legal, but women's access to abortion is under attack in America
The restrictive measures put on clinics under the Trap laws are designed to make access to abortion not only more complicated, but also more traumatic, in order to make women think again about their reproductive choices
June 3, 2018
In the US, the pivotal legal case of Roe v Wade in 1973 legalised abortion, establishing that the decision to terminate a pregnancy was between a woman and her doctor, and was protected under the constitutional right to privacy. Since its inception, there have been over 1000 restrictive state laws to limit these rights afforded to women to make the process of acquiring an abortion more painful, challenging, and in some cases, impossible. There is no murkiness here – women have a right to have an abortion if they wish. Yet, in the US, a woman’s access to abortion is very much decided by where she lives alongside her financial resources and physical capacity.
Donald Trump has flirted with punishing women for their abortions. But some already are prosecuted under a variety of laws in what is murky legal territory
by Molly Redden
Tuesday 22 November 2016, The Guardian
In late March, Donald Trump sat down for a town hall-style interview with Chris Matthews. The candidate at the time was still crisscrossing himself on abortion rights – should Planned Parenthood be defunded? Was Roe v Wade settled law? – and Matthews made several attempts to pin him down.
“If you say abortion is a crime or abortion is murder, you have to deal with it under law,” Matthews said. “Should abortion be punished?… Do you believe in punishment for abortion, yes or no, as a principle?”
[continued at link]
Source: The Guardian