I Traveled To Texas During The Pandemic To Provide Abortion Care. Here’s What I Saw.
Closing clinics, banning telehealth and enforcing waiting periods is dangerous and burdensome at any time, but especially during this pandemic.
Glenna Martin, M.D., M.P.H.
May 25, 2020
As I flew out of Texas in February, I never imagined the tragedy and upheaval that would take place before I was able to return eight weeks later.
I travel monthly from Seattle to Texas to help provide abortion care. But at the end of March — as the coronavirus pandemic was ramping up —Republican Texas Gov. Greg Abbott issued an executive order halting such care, deeming it nonessential — an order reinforced by the state’s attorney general.
In some states, coronavirus measures are effectively banning abortion
Governors and other officials are declaring abortions to be “nonessential” medical procedures.
by Miranda Yaver
March 31, 2020
As the coronavirus pandemic sweeps the country, physicians and hospitals are canceling elective, nonessential surgeries and procedures to preserve health-care resources, including scarce personal protective equipment, and to limit potential patients’ exposure to the virus.
But what exactly counts as “elective?” A growing number of states are putting abortion in that category. These state efforts could affect women’s rights to terminate pregnancies for a long time to come.
How the Coronavirus Is Affecting Abortion Access in a State Hostile to Abortion Rights
In Texas, abortion access is already threatened as a result of extreme anti-choice legislation—the barriers people face are compounded by the COVID-19 pandemic.
Mar 20, 2020
As abortion providers in Texas, continuing to provide safe reproductive health care amid crisis has always been our top priority. We know the necessity of abortion doesn’t disappear when restrictions are enacted, and the same is true during the coronavirus pandemic.
But Texans are growing concerned they soon won’t be able to access abortion care, and some clinics—including the one where I work—across the state are experiencing an increase in consultations, and abortion funds are hearing from callers who are fearful for the future.
Abortion Access Is Under Threat As Coronavirus Spreads
In many states, abortion clinics are holding on by a thread. The pandemic might put them under.
By Melissa Jeltsen, HuffPost US
Last week, Joe Nelson, a physician who provides abortions in Texas, felt a tickle in his throat. Then he started coughing. His temperature soared. On Monday, at his doctor’s office, he tested negative for the flu. Unable to obtain a coronavirus test there, he is now self-quarantining for 14 days.
In a phone call with HuffPost as he left the doctor’s office, Nelson said he was mostly worried about how his unplanned absence might affect women’s ability to get abortions in the state.
The Future Of Abortion Is In The Hands Of John Roberts
Medically unnecessary laws regulating abortion have been exposed as dishonest attempts to close clinics. Will the Supreme Court still give them legal cover?
By Melissa Jeltsen, HuffPost US
In 2016, Louisiana had six abortion clinics. By 2017, the number had dwindled to three. Soon, there may be only one clinic left to serve nearly 1 million women of reproductive age in the state. Whether or not this happens will likely depend on the outcome of a critical abortion case now with the Supreme Court.
The case centers on a Louisiana law that requires doctors who provide abortions to have “admitting privileges” at a hospital within 30 miles of their clinic, a difficult-to-obtain arrangement that critics say is a sly attempt to wipe out abortion access in the state.
The National Right To Abortion Is Facing An Intense Threat. This Group Has Been Preparing For This Fight For Decades.
The Center for Reproductive Rights will argue in the first major Supreme Court case over abortion in the Trump era, which could gut Roe v. Wade
Ema O'Connor BuzzFeed News Reporter
Posted on March 1, 2020
It is no exaggeration to say that the Center for Reproductive Rights was made for this moment.
Around 30 years ago, Nancy Northup, the center’s current president, was outside an abortion clinic in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, linking arms with the people around her to form a human barricade to protect patients trying to get inside. Hundreds of anti-abortion protesters faced them down, chanting, saying prayers, and attempting to block patients from entering the clinic.
Abortion Clinics Are Getting Nickel-and-Dimed Out of Business
From legal battles to securing vendors to getting the walls painted, every budget line is a struggle.
By Cynthia Koons and Rebecca Greenfield
February 27, 2020
Amy Hagstrom Miller, owner of Whole Woman’s Health in Austin, has faced many existential threats to her business. When Texas passed a law in 2013 requiring abortion providers to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital, she was forced to close the clinic. She fought the measure all the way to the Supreme Court, and in 2016, she prevailed. By a 5–3 decision, the court ruled in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt that the law wasn’t medically justified. There’s an iconic photo of Hagstrom Miller descending the Supreme Court steps afterward, fist raised, smile radiant. Nine months later, she reopened her clinic.
It looked like a happy ending. But a year later the Austin clinic was on the brink again.
End of Roe v Wade? June Medical Services v Gee abortion case could irreversibly weaken landmark judgment
The landmark 1973 Roe v Wade judgment gives pregnant women liberty to choose to have an abortion without excessive government restriction and June Medical Services v Gee poses a threat to abortion rights in the country
By Priyam Chhetri
Jan 28, 2020
Come March, the Supreme Court will hear two consolidated cases, June Medical Services v Gee and Gee v June Medical Services, which is being predicted as the greatest threat to abortion rights in the country in decades. It will also potentially hurt the landmark 1973 Roe v Wade judgment that gives pregnant women liberty to choose to have an abortion without excessive government restriction.
Here's everything you need to know about the case.
The Next Abortion Warriors
Meet the two lawyers who are preparing to argue the first abortion case to come before the Supreme Court since Brett Kavanaugh came aboard.
January 27, 2020 Issue, The New Yorker
(posted online Jan 20)
By Laura Lane
An invitation for a cocktail party honoring lawyers, especially highly skilled ones who are about to argue one of the most momentous cases of the year—the next Supreme Court abortion case—tends to read like a legal document. “Guests are invited to come and go as they please,” noted a message from the Center for Reproductive Rights, a legal-advocacy nonprofit. The party was held in the kitchen at the center’s offices, in a high-rise in the South Street Seaport. The two lead attorneys on June Medical Services, LLC v. Gee (not quite as catchy as Roe v. Wade) whom attendees had come to meet—Julie Rikelman and T. J. Tu—talked with guests while such phrases as “Bogus sham laws!” and “Second-class citizens!” ricochetted around the kitchen island.
SCOTUS 'TRAP law' case and the erosion of abortion rights
BY BRIDGET KELLY, OPINION CONTRIBUTOR
Actress Michelle Williams got some traction when she used her Golden Globe acceptance speech to champion abortion rights, saying she was “grateful to have lived at a moment in our society where choice exists.” But the moment she spoke of may be fleeting.
Three days before Willams’s speech, over 200 members of Congress signed onto an amicus brief urging the Supreme Court to reconsider, if not overturn, Roe v. Wade, the 1973 landmark decision legalizing abortion in the U.S.