Texas banned me from providing abortions — using coronavirus as an excuse
The desperation we heard from patients was visceral. Some say they’ll go out of state for their procedures.
By Amna Dermish
April 4, 2020
As the coronavirus has destabilized the lives of millions, some government officials saw a political opportunity. In Texas, our governor and attorney general effectively banned almost all abortion procedures, citing the pandemic, and states including Oklahoma, Ohio and Alabama have taken similar actions. We indeed face an unprecedented public health crisis, one that makes my patients’ ability to access reproductive health care especially urgent. But my state officials have suddenly declared that abortion care is not medically necessary. Any doctor who the state claims violated that executive order faces a $1,000 fine or up to 180 days of jail time.
The Next Big Abortion Case Comes Down to John Roberts
By Irin Carmon, The Intelligencer
Feb. 28, 2020
Almost four years ago, I sat on a cable-news set waiting for the Supreme Court to hand down a ruling on a Texas abortion law that, reputable medical organizations agreed, amounted to a bogus justification for shutting down abortion clinics. The live feed was trained on candidate Hillary Clinton’s Cincinnati rally, featuring Elizabeth Warren, who had just endorsed her.
Alike in blonde bobs and jewel tones, if not much else, the two raised their clasped hands to the sky in a show of party unity and the hint of an all-female ticket, or at least a future in which reproductive autonomy, along with everything else, didn’t depend on the whims of a tiny number of white men. The particular man we were waiting on that day was Justice Anthony Kennedy. Minutes later, the networks cut away to announce that his vote in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt would keep the clinics open, ruling that the Texas law placed an unconstitutional burden on women.
U.S. appeals court upholds Trump administration’s abortion rules
By Gene Johnson, The Associated Press
Posted February 24, 2020
SEATTLE — A U.S. appeals court on Monday upheld Trump administration changes that include additional hurdles for those seeking abortions through a federal program that helps low-income women.
The 7-4 ruling by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned decisions issued by judges in Washington, Oregon and California. The court had already allowed the administration’s changes to begin taking effect while the government appealed those rulings
“Parental Involvement” Mandates for Abortion Harm Young People, But Policymakers Can Fight Back
Sophia Naide, Guttmacher Institute
First published online: February 19, 2020
Young people deserve access to the full spectrum of sexual and reproductive health care, including abortion care. Yet, states have long imposed special barriers by forcing minors to involve their parents in their decision to have an abortion. These parental involvement mandates are unnecessary, deny young people’s bodily autonomy, and can add logistical and financial burdens to abortion care.
States are increasingly looking to young people’s access as they move in diverging directions on abortion rights. In 2020 so far, new parental involvement mandates have been introduced in three states, while bills to repeal existing requirements have been introduced in four states. States should repeal these requirements as one step toward a commitment to reproductive rights that centers the needs of marginalized groups.
'Game on': Republicans ramp up efforts to restrict abortion in 2020
By Caroline Kelly, CNN
Sat January 4, 2020
Abortion laws around the globe (2018) 01:33
(CNN)Abortion has resurfaced as a major issue in American politics with a flurry of measures making their way through state legislatures around the country -- just as the Supreme Court is set to hear arguments in the first reproductive rights case since Justice Brett Kavanaugh was confirmed.
In addition to passing bans on abortion earlier in pregnancy, Republican lawmakers and activists in states from Alabama to Utah have looked to further regulate the procedure, sometimes beyond what is medically possible, according to medical experts.
The Louisiana Clinic At The Center Of Abortion Case Before Supreme Court
December 29, 2019
On a recent Saturday morning at Hope Medical Group for Women in Shreveport, La., Kathaleen Pittman was preparing for a day of procedures, as a couple dozen patients sat quietly in the waiting area.
Her clinic is challenging a law passed by Louisiana's state legislature in 2014, which requires doctors who perform abortions to have admitting privileges at a local hospital in case of an emergency. The case, June Medical Services, LLC v. Gee, is scheduled to go before the U.S. Supreme Court next year, and the court's decision has the potential to chip away at existing precedent protecting abortion rights.
Unproven, Unethical and Dangerous: Counseling Requirements on Stopping a Medication Abortion Threaten Patients and Providers
Olivia Cappello, Guttmacher Institute
December 16, 2019
Patients obtaining a medication abortion from a health care provider expect to have a conversation about the pills they need to take for the procedure, a treatment that has been proven safe over 20 years of use and is more than 95% effective. Their provider will tell them about expected side effects and potential complications, which are similar to those of a miscarriage.
But in an increasing number of states, their provider is forced to tell them about medication abortion “reversal”—an unproven and medically unsupported treatment that can allegedly stop a medication abortion after the patient takes the first pill in the abortion regimen, mifepristone. This counseling is mandated under the guise of providing patients with options. In reality, it uses flawed research to undermine personal reproductive health choices.
One of Supreme Court’s most important abortion cases has just begun
By CBS News -
November 26, 2019
The lawsuit that will decide the future of abortion access in Louisiana – and the rest of the country – is officially underway.
A 63-page opening brief was filed late Monday night by the Center for Reproductive Rights (CRR) in a Supreme Court case that could leave Louisiana without access to legal abortion and provide a roadmap for other anti-abortion access states to follow.
Louisiana could become the first state without abortion access as soon as next year
By Kate Smith, CBS News
October 18, 2019
Louisiana could become the first state not to have legal abortion access since the procedure was legalized in 1973. Depending on the outcome of an upcoming Supreme Court case next spring, the state could see abortion access effectively eliminated, even though Roe v. Wade — the case that legalized the procedure — would stay intact.
Louisiana's "Unsafe Abortion Protection Act" is at the heart of the Supreme Court case. The law, not currently in effect, would require doctors performing abortions to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital. Supporters of the law say the regulation would assist with "continuity of care" in the event of an emergency.
Medication abortion reversal is "devoid of scientific support," judge rules in North Dakota
By Kate Smith
September 10, 2019
A judge in North Dakota ruled against the state's recent law requiring physicians to tell patients that their medication abortions may reversed, a claim he called "devoid of scientific support, misleading, and untrue."
In a 24-page decision issued Tuesday morning, Judge Daniel Hovland granted the American Medical Association and Red River Women's Clinic — North Dakota's only abortion provider — a preliminary injunction against North Dakota House Bill 1336, which would have required physicians to tell patients "that it may be possible to reverse the effects of an abortion-inducing drug if she changes her mind, but time is of the essence," according to the law's text.