Conservatives could build on abortion restrictions that point to “scientific uncertainty.”
By Mary Ziegler
July 1, 2020
The Supreme Court’s recent abortion ruling shows that Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. means it when he says that “the legal doctrine of stare decisis requires us, absent special circumstances, to treat like cases alike.” Casting the deciding vote Monday in June Medical Services v. Russo, he ruled against an abortion restriction that Louisiana claimed protected women against unscrupulous doctors. The state even asked the court to prevent abortion providers from suing on behalf of their patients, claiming a conflict of interest. If these arguments were new, the chief justice almost certainly would have accepted them both. The problem was that the Supreme Court had heard them before: In 2016, the justices invalidated an identical Texas law. Roberts couldn’t distinguish the two statutes enough to make a different ruling — not while respecting precedent.
How Six-Week Abortion Bans Are Fueling a 'Radical' Year for Abortion Law
The bans mark an unprecedented year for abortion legislation—and a potential political turning point.
Apr 12, 2019
The projected political reckoning of abortion rights has arrived. Abortion bills, as expected, dominated state legislatures in early 2019, pushing the issue ever closer to the United States Supreme Court.
Among the 28 states considering abortion bans in the first four months of the year, a handful of the most conservative are aiming to ban abortion at just six weeks' gestation—when an embryonic "heartbeat" (doctors use the term cardiac activity, and embryos don't have hearts so much as tissues that will become the heart) can be detected. Abortion rights groups say the measures are so extreme that they effectively amount to outright abortion bans, since few women who want abortions would be able to access them before the cut-off, or perhaps even know they're pregnant.
Legislative Lowlights: Lawmakers in Ten States Have Introduced ‘Heartbeat’ Bans This Year
Feb 11, 2019
Rewire.News tracks anti-choice and anti-LGBTQ legislation as it works its way through state legislatures. Here’s an overview of the bills we’re watching.
Arkansas and Tennessee lawmakers are planning for the fall of Roe v. Wade, Republicans in multiple states are still obsessed with bathrooms, and legislators in at least ten states have introduced measures this year to ban abortion once a fetal heartbeat has been detected.
When Your President Calls You a Murderer
I have had a third-trimester abortion. And I am not alone.
Feb 6, 2019
It’s a hell of a thing to hear your president call you a murderer.
That’s not quite the whole picture, though, of what President Donald Trump did to later abortion patients during the State of the Union speech Tuesday night. After he invoked the Madonna, a “beautiful image of a mother holding her infant child,” women abruptly vanished for the rest of the time he took to throw enough red meat to the anti-choice base to keep money from the evangelical coffers flowing. Instead, we disappeared into the “womb” from which “beautiful” babies are “ripped moments before birth;” we are nothing more than the “womb” in which “children … can feel pain.”
Why Trump spent so much time criticizing abortion during the State of the Union
He may see it as a winning issue for 2020.
By Anna North
Feb 5, 2019
“Let us work together to build a culture that cherishes innocent life,” said President Donald Trump during his State of the Union speech on Tuesday night. “And let us reaffirm a fundamental truth: All children — born and unborn — are made in the holy image of God.”
In uncharacteristically extensive comments on the subject, Trump criticized efforts to loosen abortion restrictions in New York and Virginia. He also called for federal anti-abortion legislation.
The Abortion Wars Have Become a Fight Over Science
Forty-six years after Roe, the two camps increasingly disagree on basic facts about abortion — and who has the authority to determine them.
By Mary Ziegler
Jan. 22, 2019
It was perhaps, at first glance, an unusual feature of the 2019 March for Life that it downplayed what many have come to think of as the central claim of the anti-abortion movement: that the unborn have a constitutional right to life.
Instead, march organizers focused on proclaiming that science was on their side. They circulated material on “when human life begins,” whether abortions are ever medically necessary and when fetal life becomes viable. They praised legal restrictions based on what science supposedly says about fetal pain.
Six Facts About Abortion to Counter March for Life’s Junk Science
Jan 16, 2019
This year's March for Life claims that “being pro-life is not in opposition to science," though many of its positions fly in the face of evidence.
The 46th annual March for Life in Washington, D.C., has adopted “Unique from Day One” as its theme, an apparent declaration of the extreme anti-choice position that life begins at conception. The event not only asserts this view as a moral position but also claims that “being pro-life is not in opposition to science.”
This co-opting of science is in line with a strategy and infrastructure that the anti-choice movement has been building for some time.
Unconstitutional, Trump-Backed 20-Week Abortion Ban Goes Down in Senate
Jan 29, 2018
An unconstitutional 20-week abortion ban notable for attempting to legitimize junk science and foist onerous reporting requirements on rape and incest survivors came to a halt on Monday in the U.S. Senate.
The perennial GOP-sponsored legislation (S 2311) failed, 51-46, to reach the Senate’s 60-vote threshold typically required to advance controversial legislation around a filibuster. GOP Sens. Susan Collins (ME) and Lisa Murkowski (AK), who have mixed voting records on abortion rights, voted against the 20-week ban. Three Democrats—Sens. Joe Manchin (WV), Joe Donnelly (IN), and Bob Casey (PA)—crossed party lines to vote for it. Manchin and Donnelly both serve on the federal advisory board of Democrats For Life of America, an anti-choice group that uses conservative talking points and medically unsupported falsehoods about reproductive health care.
The House just passed a 20-week abortion ban. Opponents say it's “basically relying on junk science.”
The bill is based on claims about fetal pain that aren’t supported by research.
Updated by Anna North Oct 3, 2017
The House voted on Tuesday to pass a bill that would make abortion after 20 weeks illegal in every state in the country. Called the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, it’s based on the idea that a fetus at 20 weeks’ gestation can feel pain.
“The Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act will protect the voiceless, the vulnerable, and the marginalized," said Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA), the House majority leader, in a statement last month. "It will protect those children who science has proven can feel pain.” President Donald Trump has promised to sign the bill if it passes; during the campaign, he said such a bill “would end painful late-term abortions nationwide.”
Continued at source: https://www.vox.com/identities/2017/10/3/16401826/abortion-ban-pain-capable-unborn-child-protection-act
House Republicans Want To Ban Abortion After 20 Weeks
Sep 28, 2017
In the latest attack on reproductive rights, House Republicans plan to vote next week on a bill that would ban abortion after 20 weeks nationwide.
House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy announced that the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act will be brought to the floor for a vote on Tuesday, October 3. The legislation proposes banning abortion procedures after 20 weeks of gestation, except in cases of rape, incest, or danger to the mother's life. At least 17 states already have some kind of 20-week ban, but the House bill would extend it nationwide.
Continued at source: The Refinery: http://www.refinery29.com/2017/09/174028/house-bill-banning-abortion-20-weeks