Two Republicans joined with Democrats in the Senate on the 16-14 vote in favor of repealing a Civil War-era ban on abortions that the state’s highest court recently allowed to take effect. The ban on all abortions — which provides no exceptions for survivors of rape or incest, and only allows for procedures done to save a patient’s life — would still be active until the fall.

Hobbs said in a statement that she looks forward to quickly signing the repeal, with a ceremony scheduled for Thursday.

“Arizona women should not have to live in a state where politicians make decisions that should be between a woman and her doctor,” Hobbs said. “While this repeal is essential for protecting women’s lives, it is just the beginning of our fight to protect reproductive healthcare.”

The revival of the 19th century law has put Republicans on the defensive, as it’s one of a handful of battleground states that will decide the next president.

“Across the country, women are living in a state of chaos and cruelty caused by Donald Trump,” Vice President Kamala Harris said in a statement on Wednesday. “While Arizona Democrats have worked to clean up the devastating mess created by Trump and his extremist allies, the state’s existing ban, with no exception for rape or incest, remains in effect.”

If the repeal bill is signed, a 2022 statute banning the procedure after 15 weeks of pregnancy would become Arizona’s prevailing abortion law. Still, there would likely be a period when nearly all abortions would be outlawed, because the repeal won’t take effect until 90 days after the end of the legislative session, likely in June or July.

Arizona state Attorney General Kris Mayes called the vote “a win for freedom in our state,” but expressed concern that without an emergency clause, Arizonans would still be subject to the near total-abortion ban for some time.

“Rest assured, my office is exploring every option available to prevent this outrageous 160-year-old law from ever taking effect,” she said.

The near-total ban on abortions predates Arizona’s statehood. In a ruling last month, the Arizona Supreme Court suggested doctors could be prosecuted under the 1864 law, which says that anyone who assists in an abortion can be sentenced to two to five years in prison. Then, last week, the repeal bill narrowly cleared the Arizona House.

Voting on the bill stretched more than an hour on Wednesday, amid impassioned speeches about the motivations behind individual votes.

“This is about the Civil War-era ban that criminalizes doctors and makes virtually all abortions illegal, the ban that the people of Arizona overwhelmingly don’t want,” said Democratic state Sen. Eva Burch. “We’re here to repeal a bad law. I don’t want us honoring laws about women written during a time when women were forbidden from voting because their voices were considered inferior to men.”

Burch made public on the Senate floor in March that she had a non-viable pregnancy and was going to have an abortion. She warned supporters of reproductive rights on Wednesday that they could not yet rest easy, even after the repeal is signed.

“They are going to use every tool in the toolbox to try to do whatever it is they can to interfere with the repeal of this ban,” she said.

There were numerous disruptions from people in Senate gallery Wednesday, as Republican state Sen. Shawnna Bolick explained her vote in favor of repeal, joining with Democrats.

GOP state Sen. Jake Hoffman denounced Republican colleagues for joining with Democratic colleagues, calling it an affront to his party’s principles.

“It is disgusting that this is the state of the Republican Party today,” Hoffman said.

Advocates on both sides of the abortion issue arrived outside the Arizona Senate on Wednesday to emphasize their views. They included people affiliated with Planned Parenthood and faith-based groups opposed to abortion.

A school-age girl kneeled in prayer in front of a table holding a large statute of the Virgin Mary, while a man with a megaphone shouted at passersby to repent.

Outside Phoenix in the satellite town of Gilbert, 26-year-old Anna Kupitz, a middle-school math teacher, expressed disappointment in the Senate vote to overturn a near-total abortion ban.

“It is outrageous that we believe so little in women’s ability to value the life of their child and also value their careers,” she said. “As a country, we believe that human life deserves to be protected.”

Former President Donald Trump, who has warned that the issue could lead to Republican losses, has avoided endorsing a national abortion ban but said he’s proud to have appointed the Supreme Court justices who allowed states to outlaw it.

The law had been blocked since the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1973 Roe v. Wade decision guaranteed the constitutional right to an abortion nationwide.

When Roe v. Wade was overturned in June 2022 though, then-Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich, a Republican, persuaded a state judge that the 1864 ban could again be enforced. Still, the law hasn’t actually been enforced while the case was making its way through the courts. Mayes, who succeeded Brnovich, urged the state’s high court against reviving the law.

Planned Parenthood officials have vowed to continue providing abortions for the short time they are still legal and said they will reinforce networks that help patients travel out of state to places like New Mexico and California to access abortion.

Advocates are collecting signatures for a ballot measure allowing abortions until a fetus could survive outside the womb, typically around 24 weeks, with exceptions — to save the parent’s life, or to protect her physical or mental health.

Republican lawmakers, in turn, are considering putting one or more competing abortion proposals on the November ballot.

A leaked planning document outlined the approaches being considered by House Republicans, such as codifying existing abortion regulations, proposing a 14-week ban that would be “disguised as a 15-week law” because it would allow abortions until the beginning of the 15th week, and a measure that would prohibit abortions after six weeks of pregnancy, before many people know they’re pregnant.

House Republicans have not yet publicly released any such proposed ballot measures.

abortion Apr 24

Arizona state House passes bill to repeal 1864 abortion ban

Arizona Apr 9

Arizona Supreme Court upholds near-total ban on abortions

The lawsuit led by Tennessee and Arkansas comes since finalized federal regulations were published on Monday to provide guidance for employers and workers on how to implement the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act. The language means workers can ask for time off to obtain an abortion and recover from the procedure.

The rules, which the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission adopted on a 3-2 vote along party lines, will go into effect June 18. The lawsuit filed in federal court in Arkansas argues the regulations go beyond the scope of the 2022 law that passed with bipartisan support.

“This is yet another attempt by the Biden administration to force through administrative fiat what it cannot get passed through Congress,” Arkansas Attorney General Tim Griffin said in a statement. “Under this radical interpretation of the PWFA, business owners will face federal lawsuits if they don’t accommodate employees’ abortions, even if those abortions are illegal under state law.”

An EEOC spokesperson referred questions to the Justice Department, which did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

A Better Balance, one of the most vocal advocates for the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, called the lawsuit a baseless attack on the law’s protections.

“This lawsuit represents a bad faith effort to politicize what is a vital protection for the health and economic security of millions of families, and a continuation of the alarming attacks on women’s health and reproductive choice,” Dina Bakst, the group’s co-president, said in a statement. “We are committed to fighting to defend workers’ rights under the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act.”

The EEOC has said the new law does not obligate employers or employer-sponsored health plans to cover abortion-related costs, and that the type of accommodation that most likely will be sought under the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act regarding an abortion is time off to attend a medical appointment or for recovery, which does not have to be paid.

The other states joining the lawsuit are Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah and West Virginia.

After a dizzying course of votes throughout the afternoon, three state House Republicans joined Democrats in approving a repeal of the Civil War-era law that made abortion a felony punishable by two to five years in prison for anyone who performs one or helps a woman obtain one.

Members of the state Senate, where Republicans also hold a narrow majority, voted last week in favor of a motion to introduce a bill that would repeal the abortion ban. Two Republicans joined every Democrat in the chamber on that vote.

The state Senate could vote on the repeal as early as next Wednesday, after the bill comes on the floor for a “third reading,” as is required under chamber rules.

The state Senate is likely to pass a repeal of the law, a source in Arizona familiar with the situation told NBC News. Once that happens, Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs is certain to sign the repeal quickly.

Abortion rights supporters and Democrats — all the way up to the White House — praised Arizona lawmakers for their passage of the repeal.

“That’s a good thing,” White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said of the vote. “We’re moving forward in the right direction.”

The Biden campaign blamed Donald Trump for the turmoil, saying that the former president “is responsible for Arizona’s abortion ban” after appointing three of the U.S. Supreme Court justices who overturned Roe v. Wade.

“If he retakes power, the chaos and cruelty he has created will only get worse in all 50 states,” Biden 2024 campaign manager Julie Chavez Rodriguez said in a statement.

The state House’s vote to repeal came on the chamber’s third attempt since the state Supreme Court ruled earlier this month to uphold the 160-year-old near-total ban.

Following that ruling, Republicans across the U.S. — including Trump, who has said he wants to let states make their own decisions on abortion policies — called on legislators in the state to repeal the ban amid a broader political blowback against the GOP on the issue of reproductive rights in the nearly two years since the U.S. Supreme Court struck down Roe v. Wade.

But Republicans in the Arizona state House, where the party holds a narrow majority, had remained steadfast in not allowing a repeal bill to advance.

But on Wednesday, amid mounting pressure, Republicans in the chamber appeared to finally relent, with three GOP lawmakers — state Reps. Matt Gress, Tim Dunn and Justin Wilmeth — joining the 29 Democrats in the chamber to pass the repeal.

Republican opponents of the repeal pleaded with their colleagues to reject the bill for a third time during remarks they were allowed to make while voting.

abortion Apr 12

More young people choosing permanent sterilization after abortion restrictions

abortion Apr 10

Arizona Republicans distance themselves from state Supreme Court ruling on abortion

Arizona Apr 9

Arizona Supreme Court upholds near-total ban on abortions

“We should not have rushed this bill through the legislative process,” Republican state House Speaker Ben Toma said. “Instead today we are rushing to judgment.”

“It breaks my heart that you’re here to witness this,” said House Speaker Pro Tempore Travis Grantham, before casting a “no” vote. “I’m proud of my Republican caucus that has fought this off as long as it has,” added Grantham, who accused Democrats of having used the issue as a political cudgel.

“To see how this has been turned against one party and used as a weaponization of the issue is disgusting,” he said. At the end of Wednesday’s hearing, Grantham said the vote was an “awful, disgusting situation” and stripped Gress, as well as Democratic Assistant Minority Leader Oscar De Los Santos, of their committee assignments.

Just last week, during the state House’s prior session, Democrats in the chamber introduced a bill to repeal the 160-year-old abortion ban and filed a motion to Republican House leaders requesting an immediate vote. The vote failed, prompting Democrats to move again to force a vote, which also fell short.

Republicans were more easily able to kill that vote because it came under a procedural vote to suspend state House rules. Under Arizona House rules, a majority of the chamber that includes the speaker is required to vote to suspend the rules to hold an immediate vote. Such obstacles didn’t exist on Wednesday because the vote came amid normal House order.

Wednesday’s proceedings marked the latest chapter in the fight over abortion rights in the crucial battleground following the Arizona Supreme Court’s bombshell ruling earlier this month.

The law the conservative-leaning court ruled was enforceable makes abortion a felony punishable by two to five years in prison for anyone who performs one or helps a woman obtain one. The law was codified in 1901 — and again in 1913, after Arizona gained statehood — and outlaws abortion from the moment of conception but includes an exception to save the woman’s life.

The law is set to go into effect as early as June 8, though Democratic Attorney General Kris Mayes has said her office is working to find ways to delay that date. The ban is likely to go into effect for a short period of time — even if the Senate passes it next week and Hobbs signs it shortly thereafter — because under Arizona law, repeals don’t go into effect until 90 days after a legislative session concludes. Last year’s session ended in late July.

“We may still be looking at a period of time when the 1864 [ban] could potentially take effect,” Mayes said in a statement.

A successful repeal of the 1864 ban would likely result in state policy reverting to a 15-week ban on abortions that makes exceptions for medical emergencies but not for rape or incest. 

Some prominent anti-abortion groups called on Republicans to unite behind that law, which was enacted in 2022, following Wednesday’s vote.

“After months of confusion, the people of Arizona will soon have clarity on the state’s abortion laws: a 15-week protection for the unborn,” Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America President Marjorie Dannenfelser said in a statement. “Kari Lake and all GOP candidates and elected officials must bring clarity to Arizona voters by campaigning vigorously in support of Arizona’s 15-week protection with exceptions.”

Despite the continued repeal efforts, voters are likely to have the power this November to decide on the future of abortion rights in the state themselves.

Organizers in the state are likely to succeed in placing a proposed constitutional amendment on the November ballot that would create a “fundamental right” to receive abortion care up until fetal viability, or about the 24th week of pregnancy. If voters approve the ballot measure, it would effectively undo the 1864 ban, which now remains law in the state.

It would also bar the state from restricting abortion care in situations in which the health or life of the pregnant person is at risk after the point of viability, according to the treating health care professional.

But the state Supreme Court decision prompted Republicans to also discuss a series of possible contingencies to upend that effort, including pushing alternative ballot measures to compete with the pro-abortion rights proposed amendment, according to a leaked strategy document circulated among Arizona Republicans.

During a brief state House Rules committee hearing Wednesday, Republicans voted to advance three resolutions — without explaining what they were — that Democrats and abortion rights supporters said were likely the GOP-backed ballot measures.

“I can’t tell you what the subject matter will be,” Grantham, the House Speaker Pro Tempore who led the hearing, said.

Chris Love, a spokesperson for Arizona for Abortion Access, called the resolutions “three dishonest placeholder bills” that served as “the first step toward referring up to three anti-abortion measures to the November ballot aimed at confusing and deceiving voters in hopes of pulling votes from the Arizona Abortion Access Act.”

This story first appeared on NBCNews.com. More from NBC News:

• Mother describes leaving Idaho for an abortion as Supreme Court considers its ban
• Trump campaign, RNC pledge to deploy 100,000 attorneys and volunteers to monitor the vote
• House Speaker Johnson accuses Columbia of allowing ‘lawless agitators’ to takeover campus

The case marks the first time the Supreme Court has considered the implications of a state ban since the nationwide right to abortion was overturned. It comes from Idaho, which is among 14 states that now ban abortion at all stages of pregnancy with very limited exceptions.

While members of the high court’s conservative majority expressed concern about pregnant patients’ ability to get emergency care in the state, it was unclear whether any were swayed by the Biden administration’s argument.

The Justice Department says abortion care must be allowed in emergencies that seriously threaten a woman’s health under a federal health care law that requires hospitals accepting Medicare to provide emergency care regardless of patients’ ability to pay.

“How can you impose restrictions on what Idaho can criminalize, simply because hospitals in Idaho have chosen to participate in Medicare?” said Justice Samuel Alito, who wrote the decision overturning Roe v. Wade.

Justices on the high court’s liberal minority, meanwhile, raised sharp questions about whether Idaho’s law was putting women’s health at risk.

“Within these rare cases, there’s a significant number where the woman’s life is not in peril, but she’s going to lose her reproductive organs. She’s going to lose the ability to have children in the future unless an abortion takes place,” said Justice Elena Kagan.

The Biden administration argues that even in states where abortion is banned, federal health care law says hospitals must be allowed to terminate pregnancies in rare emergencies where a patient’s life or health is at serious risk.

Idaho contends its ban has exceptions for life-saving abortions but allowing it in more medical emergencies would turn hospitals into “abortion enclaves.” The state argues the administration is misusing a health care law that is meant to ensure patients aren’t turned away based on their ability to pay.

The Supreme Court has allowed the Idaho law to go into effect, even during emergencies, as the case played out. It makes performing an abortion a felony punishable by up to five years in prison.

abortion Apr 12

More young people choosing permanent sterilization after abortion restrictions

Dueling protests were taking shape outside the court before the start of arguments on Wednesday. “Abortion saves lives,” read signs displayed by abortion rights supporters. Opponents displayed a sign that read, “Emergency rooms are not abortion clinics.”

Doctors have said Idaho’s abortion ban has already affected emergency care. More women whose conditions are typically treated with abortions must now be flown out of state for care, since doctors must wait until they are close to death to provide abortions within the bounds of state law.

Meanwhile, complaints of pregnant women being turned away from U.S. emergency rooms spiked after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, according to federal documents obtained by The Associated Press.

Anti-abortion groups blame doctors for mishandling maternal emergency cases. Idaho argues the Biden administration overstates health care woes to undermine state abortion laws.

The justices also heard another abortion case this term seeking to restrict access to abortion medication. It remains pending, though the justices overall seemed skeptical of the push.

The Justice Department originally brought the case against Idaho, arguing the state’s abortion law conflicts with the 1986 Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act, known as EMTALA. It requires hospitals that accept Medicare to provide emergency care to any patient regardless of their ability to pay. Nearly all hospitals accept Medicare.

A federal judge initially sided with the administration and ruled that abortions were legal in medical emergencies. After the state appealed, the Supreme Court allowed the law to go fully into effect in January.

The Supreme Court is expected to rule by the end of June.

The paper, published Friday in JAMA Health Forum, is the first to focus specifically on the contraception choices of women and men ages 18 to 30 after the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization ended the constitutional right to abortion. 

Studying this age group is important because they are “much more likely to have an abortion and … to experience sterilization regret relative to their older counterparts,” said co-author Jacqueline Ellison, an assistant professor at the University of Pittsburgh School of Public Health.

A vasectomy is a routine procedure in men that blocks sperm from reaching semen. Tubal ligation or sterilization involves cutting, tying or removing the fallopian tubes to prevent sperm from reaching the eggs. 

It’s difficult to prove the Dobbs decision caused a rise in women and men undergoing permanent birth control. But the new study used a particular statistical approach that, Ellison said, strongly suggested the increase in sterilization procedures flowed from the Supreme Court’s decision and the subsequent actions in 21 states to ban or further restrict access to abortion.

Ellison and her fellow researchers analyzed medical record data from academic medical centers and affiliated clinics nationally from two periods: Jan. 1, 2019, to May 31, 2022, before Dobbs, and from June 1, 2022, to Sept. 30, 2023, after Dobbs.

They found that there were roughly 58 more tubal ligations per 100,000 outpatient visits after Dobbs and 27 more vasectomies per 100,000 visits. 

“There was a lot of fear and anxiety … around whether people were going to be able to get an abortion that they needed or wanted and even fears about being able to access contraception down the road,” she said.

Young women may have felt a greater urgency to act than their male partners in the wake of policy changes because pregnancy disproportionately affects them, said Dr. Angela Liang, a clinical assistant professor of obstetrics and gynecology at the University of Michigan who was not involved in the new study. There are medical risks during pregnancy and during delivery, “such as postpartum hemorrhage and the need for a cesarean section,” Liang said, adding that much of the burden after pregnancy also falls on women.

abortion Apr 10

Arizona Republicans distance themselves from state Supreme Court ruling on abortion

Arizona Apr 9

Arizona Supreme Court upholds near-total ban on abortions

The new study had limitations. For one thing, the data was not broken down by state, which can reveal a more detailed response to policy changes.

In Michigan, for example, the Supreme Court’s decision allowed a 1931 law making all abortions a felony to be enforced. Two and a half months later, a permanent injunction blocked the law, and, two months after that, Michigan voters passed an amendment to the state constitution that established an individual right to reproductive freedom.

Liang and several colleagues analyzed electronic health records at one health care institution in Michigan and found that requests for tubal sterilizations surged in the months after the Dobbs decision and then returned to baseline.

“The decrease back to baseline after 6 months may have been due to the demand being met, a decreased sense of urgency after abortion access was temporarily protected, or crisis fatigue,” they wrote in JAMA last year. 

Using medical records to analyze contraception decisions captures the decisions of only patients and not those who have not sought medical care during the time period studied. 

In a recent study, Megan Kavanaugh, the principal research scientist at the Guttmacher Institute, and a colleague analyzed survey data of reproductive-age women in four states, finding an increase in condom use but no significant changes in permanent contraception methods. The report from Guttmacher, a research and policy organization that supports abortion rights, was published in a medical journal in February.

This broader population of women “may not necessarily have very strong attitudes about pregnancy prevention,” said Kavanaugh, who was not involved in the new study.

A more complete examination of contraception choices in the United States will be available at the end of the year when the federally sponsored National Survey of Family Growth releases data from January 2022 through December 2023, Kavanaugh said. The pandemic interrupted the survey, and the latest available data is from 2019.

“It is the gold standard for much of the data we track around sexual and reproductive health care and their outcomes,” she said.

This story first appeared on NBCNews.com. More from NBC News:

• US consumer sentiment falls slightly as outlook for inflation worsens
• Cold case murder of WWII veteran in Florida is solved after more than 50 years
• Biden says he expects Iran strike on Israel 'sooner rather than later'

This story uses functionality that may not work in our app. Click here to open the story in your web browser.

Republicans in the state issued a wave of statements in opposition to Tuesday’s ruling, which came a day after former President Donald Trump said that abortion laws should be decided by states.

Arizona Senate candidate Kari Lake, who two years ago called the 1864 statute “a great law,” said Tuesday that it was “out of step with Arizonans.”

“I oppose today’s ruling,” she said, while also adding, “I wholeheartedly agree with President Trump — this is a very personal issue that should be determined by each individual state and her people.”

Trump has frequently boasted that he is responsible for the U.S. Supreme Court’s overturning Roe v. Wade in 2022. More than a dozen states have imposed abortion bans or no longer have facilities where abortions can be obtained since the Supreme Court eliminated federal protections in 2022.

Rep. David Schweikert, R-Ariz., who in 2021 co-sponsored the Life at Conception Act, which declared the right to life at “the moment of fertilization,” also voiced disapproval of the ruling, saying abortion “should be decided by Arizonans, not legislated from the bench.”

In 2022, Schweikert wrote on X that he was “pleased” with the fall of Roe v. Wade.

Fellow Arizona Republican Rep. Juan Ciscomani said that Tuesday’s ruling was “a disaster for women and providers” and that the Civil War-era law was “archaic.”

Schweikert and Ciscomani are locked in competitive races for re-election that the nonpartisan Cook Political Report has labeled Republican toss-ups.

The campaign arm of House Democrats said Schweikert and Ciscomani “are hell-bent on controlling women and bringing this country backwards.”

“Voters know that Juan Ciscomani and David Schweikert have been working overtime to restrict access to abortion care,” Lauryn Fanguen, a spokesperson for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, said in a statement Tuesday. “Whether it’s voting to restrict medication abortion or co-sponsoring a nationwide abortion ban, time and time again Ciscomani and Schweikert have made it clear that they will side with anti-abortion zealots over Arizona women.”

Republican legislators also blasted the high court’s ruling.State Rep. T.J. Shope called the ruling “disappointing to say the least,” adding that he would work to repeal the law in favor of a 15-week abortion law then-Gov. Doug Ducey signed two years ago.

Ducey, a Republican, said the ruling was “not the outcome I would have preferred.”

The law upheld by the state Supreme Court outlaws abortion from the moment of conception but includes an exception to save the woman’s life. The ruling effectively undoes a lower court’s ruling that the recent 15-week ban from 2022 superseded the 1864 law.

State Rep. Matt Gress, who also backed a 15-week abortion ban, condemned the ruling, saying it “cannot stand.”

“I cannot and will not condemn women, especially the victims of rape and incest, to be forced to carry their pregnancy to term,” Gress said, calling on Arizona Senate President Warren Petersen and House Speaker Ben Toma to bring a measure to the floor to repeal the ban “and restore modern-day protections for Arizona women.”

Petersen and Toma — both Republicans — said in a joint statement that they were looking over the court’s ruling.

“We will be closely reviewing the court’s ruling, talking to our members, and listening to our constituents to determine the best course of action for the legislature,” the statement said.

Reached for comment, a spokesperson for Arizona Senate Republicans did not say whether they would take up a repeal effort.

Adam Edelman and Alex Tabet contributed.

This story first appeared on NBCNews.com. More from NBC News:

• ‘On life support’: Senate Republicans are prepared to sink the child tax credit bill
• Chuck Todd: Politicians need the middle to win. It’s getting harder for them to find it.
• Bipartisan group of lawmakers to introduce bill targeting antisemitism

In a four-and-half-minute video released on his Truth Social media platform, Trump falsely claimed that “we have abortion where everybody wanted it from a legal standpoint” in the wake of the Supreme Court’s 2022 Dobbs decision, NBC News reported. A majority of Americans have consistently said in polling that they favor the Roe vs. Wade protections that the court dismantled.

“My view is, now that we have abortion where everybody wanted it from a legal standpoint, the states will determine by vote or legislation, or perhaps both, and whatever they decide must be the law of the land,” Trump said.

In doing so, he refused to take a position on the national ban that has been promoted by some of his staunchest allies, including Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., and former White House aide Kellyanne Conway. In the past, Trump had hinted that he might embrace a national ban, referring to a 15- or 16-week threshold as a consensus position.

Trump did not say what he would do if he won the presidency and Congress sent him a national ban.

Trump’s silence on the matter upset at least one prominent anti-abortion group in Washington. Susan B. Anthony Pro Life America President Marjorie Dannenfelser, who has pushed Republicans to adopt a weeks-based ban at the national level, said she is “deeply disappointed in President Trump’s position” on the matter.

“Saying the issue is ‘back to the states’ cedes the national debate to the Democrats who are working relentlessly to enact legislation mandating abortion throughout all nine months of pregnancy,” she said. “If successful, they will wipe out states’ rights.”

Graham also criticized Trump’s stance, saying in a statement, “Dobbs does not require that conclusion legally and the pro-life movement has always been about the wellbeing of the unborn child — not geography.”

Democrats in Congress have signed onto a bill that would limit states’ ability to restrict abortion rights. No Democrat in Congress has proposed “mandating abortion.” Unless either party can control the House and 60 votes in the Senate at the same time, the prospects for legislation limiting or expanding abortion rights are dim. It is unlikely that Trump would be presented with an abortion-ban bill.

Over the last quarter of a century, and even since he became a candidate for office in 2015, Trump has been all over the map on how to handle the abortion issue. Since the 2024 campaign began, he’s offered few specifics about which policies he’d back in the post-Roe v. Wade era should he win the White House.

Trump, a Florida resident, hasn’t said where he stands on Florida’s new six-week ban. When he’s teased support for a nationwide ban, his words often appear to contradict formal statements put out by his campaign.

Trump has said he supports exceptions in cases of rape, incest and to protect the life of the mother, a position he reiterated in Monday’s video. But the president does not determine how states make their laws.

Trump has frequently gloated over being responsible for the reversal of Roe v. Wade, which dismantled reproductive rights protections. But he also blamed GOP losses in 2022 on the issue and has said Republicans need to learn how to talk about abortion in a way that doesn’t turn off potential voters. 

Last September, more than a year after abortion protections were reversed, he made a vague overture in an interview with NBC News’ “Meet the Press” that he would be a voice of consensus on abortion — but didn’t specify how.

“Let me just tell you what I’d do,” he said. “I’m going to come together with all groups, and we’re going to have something that’s acceptable.”

At the time, he said he wouldn’t sign a federal abortion ban at 15 weeks.

In recent months, however, Trump moved in the direction of a federal abortion ban even as some of his statements were at odds with his campaign. After reports surfaced that he told allies he was mulling a federal abortion ban at 16 weeks, his campaign dismissed it as “fake news.” Soon after, Republican South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham told NBC News that “Trump is warming up to 16 weeks.” And then Trump himself in an interview suggested he’d support a 15-week ban. 

The prospect of the top of the GOP ticket backing a federal abortion ban at a time when Democrats are elevating the issue as a central point of attack could put swing-state Republicans in a trick box, after some have attempted to moderate their positions. Statements from Trump’s campaign, however, seem to be leaning toward states’ rights and not a federal ban.

“President Trump supports preserving life but has also made clear that he supports states’ rights because he supports the voters’ right to make decisions for themselves,” Brian Hughes, a Trump senior adviser, said in a statement. He added: “President Trump thinks voters should have the last word.”

After offering little clarity, this week, at a campaign rally in Grand Rapids, Mich., Trump said his campaign would be “making a statement next week on abortion” after he was asked if he supported a six-week abortion ban that the Florida Supreme Court just upheld.

President Joe Biden’s campaign has seized on Trump’s varying remarks on abortion, particularly his past boasts of having a hand in overturning Roe v. Wade. 

“Donald Trump doesn’t trust women,” Biden says in a new ad. “I do.” 

This story first appeared on NBCNews.com. More from NBC News:

• Speaker Mike Johnson faces Ukraine aid dilemma and a threat to his job as Congress returns
• Suspect arrested after fire at Bernie Sanders’ Vermont office
• How a network of abortion pill providers works together in the wake of new threats

Amanda Zurawski and Kaitlyn Joshua will travel to North Carolina and Wisconsin over the next two weeks to meet with doctors, local officials and voters. The Biden campaign sees their stories as potent firsthand accounts of the growing medical peril for many women as abortion restrictions pushed by Republicans complicate health care.

“The abortion topic is a very heavy topic, and I understand that, said Joshua, 31, of Baton Rouge, Louisiana. ”But I also understand and believe that the Biden and Harris administration is the only administration that could do anything remotely close to addressing the abortion bans … and then also doing a deeper dive into research and understanding women’s health in general.”

Biden and Democrats see reproductive health as a major driver for the 2024 election as the president and his proxies blame Republican Donald Trump, whose judicial nominations paved the way for the Supreme Court’s conservative majority decision in 2022 that overturned abortion rights codified by Roe v. Wade.

Republicans, including Trump, are struggling to figure out how to talk about the issue, if at all. Trump has both taken credit for the overturning of Roe and suggested abortion should be legal until 15 weeks, and has promised to make a statement outlining his policies this week.

Since the high court’s ruling, voters have approved a number of statewide ballot initiatives to preserve or expand the right to abortion. Support for abortion access drove women to the polls during the 2022 midterm elections, delivering Democrats unexpected success.

About two-thirds of Americans say abortion should generally be legal, according to polling by The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research. Only about one-quarter say abortion should always be legal and only about 1 in 10 say it should always be illegal.

Joshua and her husband were excited to be having a second baby. But she started to experience bleeding and serious pain at about 11 weeks. She suspected she was miscarrying.

At an emergency room in Baton Rouge, doctors examined her but wouldn’t confirm she was miscarrying or discuss medical options, she said. She was sent home to wait. The bleeding worsened, and she went to a second hospital where again, doctors sent her home and told her to contact her doctor in a few days. A midwife eventually confirmed that Joshua had miscarried.

“Something that sounds as simple as dealing with a miscarriage can’t even be met with a true diagnosis anymore,” Joshua said. “It’s kind of wild, right? And it’s really frightening.”

Joshua and Zurawski will be in Raleigh, Durham and Charlotte, North Carolina, on Wednesday, a state Biden hopes to flip. The state has enacted a law banning most abortions after 12 weeks, overriding a veto from the Democratic governor.

The week after that, they will visit Milwaukee, Eau Claire and Madison, Wisconsin, a state Biden won in 2020. Republicans in the state Assembly tried to set up a statewide referendum on the April ballot banning abortion after 14 weeks of pregnancy — more restrictive than current law — but the legislative session ended without a state Senate vote.

Both women said they felt compelled to get into politics after their own experiences.

“People don’t get how bad it is, and they don’t get how bleak it is,” Zurawski said. “And so the more we continue to share our stories. … I think it’s really important to spread awareness and paint this picture.”

Zurawski, 37, of Austin sued Texas last year after she and other women could not get medical care because of the state’s abortion laws. She had been in her second trimester, after 18 months of fertility treatments, when she went into early labor and was told the baby would not survive. Doctors said they could not intervene to provide an abortion because Zurawski wasn’t in enough medical danger.

Zurawski had to wait. Three days later, her condition rapidly worsened and she developed sepsis, a dangerous medical condition in which the body responds improperly to an infection. She stabilized long enough to deliver a stillborn girl, whom she named Willow. Zurawski then spent days in intensive care.

She recently returned from a family trip to Disney World and said, “I thought I’d be coming home from that trip with a 1-year-old and be putting her down for a nap.”

“But instead I’m doing this interview to help campaign for Biden,” Zurawski said. “It’s just the complete opposite world than I ever would have seen myself in.”

Youngkin said in a statement that the measures would undermine the nation’s longstanding legal framework for extraditions. But in a move that surprised some observers, the governor signed separate legislation, which is supported by abortion rights groups, that prohibits the issuance of search warrants, subpoenas or court orders for electronic or digital menstrual health data.

“A mixed message from the Youngkin (administration) tonight,” Tarina Keene, executive director of abortion rights group REPRO Rising Virginia, said on social media.

Proponents said the legislation would protect women’s privacy and prevent such information — often stored in period-tracking apps — from being weaponized in potential prosecutions.

Sponsor Sen. Barbara Favola, a Democrat, said during a hearing that the measure is necessary in a post-Roe v. Wade environment as many Republican politicians — Youngkin among them — have sought new restrictions on abortion. Favola said she wasn’t aware of an example where such data had been sought, but she wanted to be proactive.

Opponents said the measure seemed like a solution in search of a problem.

Youngkin’s press secretary, Christian Martinez, said in a statement that the governor believes the legislation, which nearly all legislative Republicans opposed, “protects a woman’s personal health data without preventing its voluntary use in law enforcement investigations.” Youngkin also appreciates Favola’s work on the legislation, Martinez said.

Similar legislation last year died in the GOP-controlled House of Delegates before reaching the governor’s desk, but the administration made clear back then that Youngkin opposed it.

Some women in states with abortion bans increasingly must travel elsewhere to terminate a pregnancy, a reality that backers of the vetoed anti-extradition measure highlighted in pushing for its passage.

Youngkin said in a veto statement attached to the bill that the United States’ “cooperative extradition system could collapse if individual states were to carve out crimes for which they would not recognize codified laws because of differing political positions.”

The governor also vetoed a bill that would have prohibited state regulators from taking disciplinary action against doctors for abortion care that’s legal in Virginia, “regardless of where such abortion care was provided or received.”

Youngkin said that bill would open the door “to a resurgence of unsafe, risky abortions occurring outside of clinical settings, and it places any unprofessional behavior during an abortion outside the Board’s jurisdiction for disciplinary action.”

Democrats criticized Youngkin’s vetoes.

“His veto of a bill that would have protected women who travel to the Commonwealth to get an abortion from being extradited is just another gross example of how Republicans will not stop until women have no options left,” party chairwoman Susan Swecker said in a statement.

Virginia, the only Southern state that has not enacted new restrictions since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022, is increasingly an outlier in the region for its abortion access. Youngkin tried to implement a 15-week ban but was blocked by Democrats, who control the state Legislature.

Among the other bills he signed Friday were measures reinstating the Virginia Minority Business Commission and expanding a tax credit for secure storage devices for firearms. He vetoed a bill establishing a paid family and medical leave program, noting that some employers already offer such programs and calling the proposal unfair for exempting state government.

The governor also amended 11 bills, according to his office, including one allowing the city of Petersburg to pursue a referendum on establishing Virginia’s fifth casino.

Petersburg’s renewed push for a casino comes after voters in Richmond — which had initially received General Assembly approval to hold a referendum — twice rejected the idea. Youngkin’s change would remove from the bill a requirement that the Legislature take it up again next year.

Youngkin faces a Monday deadline to complete his review of legislation sent to him during the regular session that ended in March.

Lawmakers convene April 17 in Richmond to take up his proposed amendments and could also attempt to override his vetoes. But Democrats hold narrow majorities in both chambers, short of the required two-thirds threshold.

Democratic Sen. Eva Burch of Mesa told fellow lawmakers in a floor speech Monday that she was going to get an abortion because her pregnancy is no longer viable. The first-term lawmaker, who previously worked as a nurse practitioner at a women’s health clinic, described a “rough journey” with fertility and recounted a miscarriage she had suffered.

Burch, 43, also criticized restrictions in Arizona as being out of touch, saying the state law requires an ultrasound that her doctor didn’t order and that she was given what she regards as disinformation about alternatives to abortion.

“It was an opportunity for me to highlight what we’re experiencing here in Arizona and how the laws that we pass in Arizona actually do impact people in practice and not just in theory,” Burch said Tuesday in an interview with The Associated Press in her legislative office.

The abortion that Burch is planning wouldn’t be her first. While running for office in 2022, Burch said she had an abortion because that pregnancy wasn’t viable and even mentioned on the campaign trail that she had undergone the procedure.

abortion Mar 4

France becomes the only country to explicitly guarantee abortion as a constitutional right

abortion Jan 24

64,000 women and girls became pregnant due to rape in states with abortion bans, study estimates

Burch, who previously gave birth to two sons, said she understands why women who have abortions keep that information private. But she said she wants the public to know that the struggles she has experienced are common.

Burch, who is running for re-election this year, also acknowledged that she wanted to shine light on a proposed ballot measure that would create a constitutional right to abortion.

“If the Arizona Legislature is not going to operate in reality, then the people of Arizona need to have an opportunity to be able to take control of some of those decisions for themselves,” Burch said.

Two abortion bills proposed this year by Democrats haven’t received committee hearings, including one that would repeal a pre-statehood law that criminalizes nearly all abortions.

The Arizona Supreme Court is considering the fate of the 1864 law. In a 2022 ruling, a lower court concluded doctors can’t be charged for performing an abortion in the first 15 weeks of pregnancy because other Arizona laws over the years have allowed them to provide abortions.

Apart from their efforts at the Arizona Legislature, abortion rights advocates began a push last summer to ask voters to create a constitutional right to abortion. If proponents collect enough signatures, Arizona would become the latest state to put the question directly to voters.

The proposed constitutional amendment would guarantee abortion rights until a fetus could survive outside the womb, typically around 24 weeks of pregnancy. It also would allow later abortions to save the mother’s life or to protect her physical or mental health.

Organizers of the effort will have to collect 384,000 signatures from registered voters by July to put the question on the November ballot.

France is the first country to explicitly guarantee abortion rights in the national charter.

While abortion is a deeply divisive issue in the United States, it’s legal in nearly all of Europe and overwhelmingly supported in France, where it’s seen more as a question of public health and not politics. French legislators approved the constitutional amendment on Monday in a 780-72 vote that was backed by many far-right lawmakers.

Friday’s ceremony, held on the cobblestones of Vendome Plaza in Paris, is a key event on a day focused on advancing women’s rights globally. Marches, protests and conferences are being held from Jakarta, Indonesia, to Mexico City and beyond.

The French constitutional amendment has been hailed by women’s rights advocates around the world, including places where women struggle to access birth control or maternal health care. French President Emmanuel Macron called it a direct result of the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in 2022 rescinding long-held abortion rights.

Macron’s critics questioned why he pursued the measure in a country with no obvious threat to abortion rights but where women face a multitude of other problems.

abortion Mar 4

France becomes the only country to explicitly guarantee abortion as a constitutional right

Mar 6

What is International Women's Day and why does it fall on March 8?

France has a persistently high rate of women killed by their partners and challenges remain in prosecuting sexual abuse against women by powerful celebrities and other men. French women also see lower pay and pensions — especially women who are not white.

Macron’s government said the abortion amendment was important to avoid a U.S.-like scenario for women in France, as hard-right groups are gaining ground and seeking to turn back the clock on freedoms around Europe.

Macron will preside over the constitutional ceremony. Justice Minister Eric Dupond-Moretti will use a 100-kilogram (220-pound) press from 1810 to imprint the amendment in France’s 1958 constitution.

It will include the phrase saying, “the freedom of women to have recourse to an abortion, which is guaranteed.” The ceremony will be held outdoors with the public invited, in another first.

France follows in the footsteps of the former Yugoslavia, whose 1974 constitution included the phrase: “A person is free to decide on having children.” Yugoslavia’s successor states retained similar language in their constitutions, though they did not spell out guaranteed abortion rights.

In Ireland, voters will decide on Friday whether to change the constitution to remove passages referring to women’s domestic duties and broadening the definition of the family.

Protesters in Istanbul plan to call attention to violence against women, and rallies are expected in many cities. Protests are often political and, at times, violent, rooted in women’s efforts to improve their rights as workers. This year’s global theme is “Inspire Inclusion.”

Indonesian demonstrators demanded adoption of the International Labor Organization’s Conventions concerning gender equality and eliminating workplace violence and harassment. Labor rights groups in Thailand marched to the Government House to petition for better work conditions, and activists marching against violence in the Philippine capital were stopped by police near the presidential palace, sparking a brief scuffle.

India’s government cut the price of cooking gas cylinders by 100 rupees ($1.20) with Prime Minister Narendra Modi posted on social media that the move was “in line with our commitment to empowering women.”

Officially recognized by the United Nations in 1977, International Women’s Day is a national holiday in some 20 countries including Russia, Ukraine and Afghanistan.

___

Associated Press journalists around the world contributed to this report.

Supporters testified Wednesday that Maryland is seeing a rising demand on its abortion clinics, including from women from out of state, since the U.S. Supreme Court stuck down Roe v. Wade in June 2022. Security concerns, long an issue at clinics, also have been increasing, supporters of the bill told the Maryland Senate Finance Committee at a bill hearing.

Maryland lawmakers have taken steps to expand access to abortion in anticipation of more women arriving for services from other states that have banned or restricted it. Maryland voters will be deciding whether to enshrine the right to abortion in a constitutional amendment in November.

Sen. Ariana Kelly, a Democrat who is sponsoring the legislation, said abortion providers reported increases in assault and battery, burglaries, stalking and bomb threats in 2022.

“This is a real concern that is really impacting peoples’ ability to access care, which is why I’m here today with this legislation,” Kelly said.

Robyn Elliott, who represents the Women’s Law Center of Maryland and the Maryland Affiliate of the American College of Nurse-Midwives, told lawmakers that providers are facing “a crisis,” and she described the measure as “a very innovative way to move forward in Maryland.”

“On behalf of the providers who we represent, their safety and security is something that they do worry about more and more over time, and as well as those for their patients,” Elliott said.

The measure would create a fund by using millions of dollars that have accumulated over the years with insurance carriers, Kelly said. The federal health care law required insurance carriers to collect $1 every month from each person who buys health insurance on a health care exchange that could only be used for abortion care services, she said.

In 2022, the state required insurance carriers to submit a report each year about those funds. Since 2014, the amount has grown to about $18 million, and is expected to grow by about $3 million a year, Kelly said.

The grant program would be run by the state health department. The money would be used for security infrastructure and staffing, such as cameras and lighting to enable staff inside clinics to monitor outside the clinic where protesters interact with patients, sometimes right up to the clinic’s door, Kelly testified.

abortion Mar 1

Walgreens and CVS pharmacies will soon begin dispensing abortion pills

Maryland Feb 19

Abortion rights could complicate Republican Larry Hogan's Senate bid in deep blue Maryland

news Jan 24

Biden guest at State of the Union will be Texas abortion case mom

Lynn McCann is the co-director of Baltimore Abortion Fund, a nonprofit that provides support for people seeking abortion services. She said her organization’s confidential help line has received a big increase in calls and was forced to shut down last month when it ran out of funding.

“As costs and demands skyrocket, our statewide network of abortion funds, clinics and providers who facilitate access to abortion are really being pushed to the brink,” McCann said.

Laura Bogley, executive director of Maryland Right to Life, which opposes abortion, testified against the legislation. She said abortion supporters have created a “manufactured crisis.”

“Abortion activists through the legislature have worked to create Maryland as an abortion tourism destination and now they expect Maryland taxpayers to pay for abortions for women being trafficked in from out of state,” Bogley testified.

Currently, 14 states are enforcing bans on abortion in all stages of pregnancy and two more have bans that kick in after the first six weeks — often before women realize they’re pregnant. Other Republican-controlled states have imposed lighter restrictions.

Meanwhile, most Democrat-controlled states, like Maryland, have taken steps to protect abortion access.

The historic move was proposed by President Emmanuel Macron as a way to prevent the kind of rollback of abortion rights seen in the United States in recent years, and the vote during a special joint session of parliament drew a long standing ovation among lawmakers.

The measure was approved in a 780-72 vote in the Palace of Versailles. Abortion enjoys wide support in France across most of the political spectrum, and has been legal since 1975.

Many female legislators in the hall smiled broadly as they cheered. There also were jubilant scenes of celebrations all over France as women’s rights activists hailed the measure promised by Macron immediately following the Dobbs ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2022.

Both houses of parliament, the National Assembly and the Senate, had already separately adopted a bill — as required — to amend Article 34 of the French Constitution. The measure specifies that “the law determines the conditions by which is exercised the freedom of women to have recourse to an abortion, which is guaranteed.”

The French measure is seen as going a step further in its guarantee of abortion rights than was the case in the former Yugoslavia, whose 1974 constitution said that “a person is free to decide on having children.” Yugoslavia dissolved in the early 1990s, and all its successor states have adopted similar measures in their constitutions that legally enable women to have an abortion, though they do not explicitly guarantee it.

ROE V. WADE Jan 20, 2023

Where Is Abortion Legal? A State-by-State Guide to Current Laws

abortion Mar 1

Walgreens and CVS pharmacies will soon begin dispensing abortion pills

In the lead up to the historic vote, French Prime Minister Gabriel Attal addressed the 925 lawmakers gathered for the joint session in Versailles, and called on them to make France a leader in women’s rights and set an example for countries around the world.

“We have a moral debt to women,” Attal said. He paid tribute to Simone Veil, a prominent legislator, former health minister and key feminist who in 1975 championed the bill that decriminalized abortion in France.

“We have a chance to change history,” Attal said in a moving and determined speech. “Make Simone Veil proud,” he said to a standing ovation.

The Assembly overwhelmingly approved the proposal in January, and the Senate adopted it on Wednesday. A three-fifths majority in the joint session also was required for the measure to be written into the constitution.

None of France’s major political parties have questioned the right to abortion, including Marine Le Pen’s far-right National Rally party and the conservative Republicans.

Le Pen, who won a record number of seats in the National Assembly two years ago, said on Monday that her party planned to vote in favor of the bill but added that “there is no need to make this a historic day.”

A recent poll showed support for abortion rights among the French public at more than 80%, consistent with previous surveys. The same poll also showed that a solid majority of people are in favor of enshrining it in the constitution.

There were scenes of celebrations around France even before the joint parliamentary session began.

Sarah Durocher, a leader in the Family Planning movement, said Monday’s vote is “a victory for feminists and a defeat for the anti-choice activists.”

With the right to an abortion added to the constitution, it will be much harder to prevent women from voluntarily terminating a pregnancy in France, women’s rights and equality activists said.

“We increased the level of protection to this fundamental right,” said Anne-Cécile Mailfert of the Women’s Foundation. “It’s a guarantee for women today and in the future to have the right to abort in France.”

The government argued in its introduction to the bill that the right to abortion is threatened in the United States, where the Supreme Court in 2022 overturned a 50-year-old ruling that used to guarantee it.

“Unfortunately, this event is not isolated: In many countries, even in Europe, there are currents of opinion that seek to hinder at any cost the freedom of women to terminate their pregnancy if they wish,” the introduction to the French legislation says.

The decision by the U.S. Supreme Court to strip women of the right to abortion has reverberated across Europe’s political landscape, forcing the issue back into public debate in France at a time of political upheaval.

Mathilde Philip-Gay, a law professor and a specialist in French and American constitutional law, warned against easing the pressure on legislators for women’s rights as far-right parties — determined to curtail women’s rights — gain political influence and are elected to form governments around Europe and elsewhere.

“It may not be an issue in France, where a majority of people support abortion,” Philip-Gay said. “But those same people may one day vote for a far-right government, and what happened in the U.S. can happen elsewhere in Europe, including in France.”

Inscribing abortion into the French Constitution “will make it harder for abortion opponents of the future to challenge these rights, but it won’t prevent them from doing it in the long run, with the right political strategy,” Philip-Gay added.

“It only takes a moment for everything we thought that we have achieved to fade away,” said Yael Braun-Pivet, the first female president of the French parliament, in her address to the joint session.

Amending the constitution is a laborious process and a rare event in France. Since it was enacted in 1958, the French Constitution has been amended 17 times. The last time was in 2008, when parliament was awarded more powers and French citizens were granted the right to bring their grievances to the Constitutional Court.

Barbara Surk reported from Nice.

Both chains have received certification to dispense the drug in stores under guidelines the Food and Drug Administration issued last year and expect to begin dispensing the pills within a month.

“Walgreens has completed the FDA certification process to dispense mifepristone and expects to begin dispensing within a week, consistent with federal and state laws. We are beginning a phased rollout in select locations to allow us to ensure quality, safety, and privacy for our patients, providers, and team members,” spokesman Marty Maloney said in a statement to NBC News.

CVS told NBC News, “We’ve received certification to dispense mifepristone at CVS Pharmacy and plan to fill prescriptions for this medication in states where legally permissible.”

“We’re working with manufacturers and suppliers to secure the medication and are not yet dispensing it in any of our pharmacies. We’ll begin filling prescriptions for the medication in Massachusetts and Rhode Island in the weeks ahead and will expand to additional states, where allowed by law, on a rolling basis.”

Mifepristone is used in combination with another pill, misoprostol, in a majority of abortions nationwide. It is approved for use up to around 10 weeks of pregnancy.

The certifications are expected to give more people access to the drug at a time when access to abortion services is being hotly debated in statehouses across the country and has become a central focus of the 2024 presidential race.

The Supreme Court is also slated to hear oral arguments on how patients can access mifepristone on March 26 in a case brought by the conservative group Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine challenging policies expanding access to mifepristone. 

abortion Feb 22

Dozens of Idaho obstetricians stopped practicing in the state since abortions were banned, study says

President Joe Biden praised the certification in a statement.

“Today is an important milestone in ensuring access to mifepristone, a drug that has been approved by the Food and Drug Administration as safe and effective for more than 20 years. With major retail pharmacy chains newly certified to dispense medication abortion, many women will soon have the option to pick up their prescription at a local, certified pharmacy — just as they would for any other medication. I encourage all pharmacies that want to pursue this option to seek certification.”

“The stakes could not be higher for women across America,” the statement continued. “In the face of relentless attacks on reproductive freedom by Republican elected officials, Vice President Harris and I will continue to fight to ensure that women can get the health care they need, to defend the Food and Drug Administration’s independent and evidence-based approval and regulation of mifepristone, and to restore the protections of Roe v. Wade in federal law.”

Data compiled by the Idaho Physician Well-Being Action Collaborative also shows that only two obstetricians moved to the state to practice in the last 15 months, the Idaho Statesman reported on Tuesday. Obstetricians provide health care during pregnancy and childbirth.

The number of obstetricians in Idaho decreased from 227 in 2022 to about 176 in 2023, a decline of 51 doctors, the report said. The Idaho Physician Well-Being Action Collaborative was created in 2018 by local doctors to address problems affecting physicians and patients in Idaho communities, according to its website.

The numbers “should concern every person living in or considering a move to Idaho,” the Idaho Coalition for Safe Healthcare said this week in a news release. The coalition is the parent group of the Idaho Physician Well-Being Action Collaborative.

Additionally, the report said two hospital obstetrics programs — at West Bonner General Health in Sandpoint and at Valor Health in Emmett — have closed since Idaho’s law banning abortion took effect, the report said.

Houston Feb 8

Texas attorney sentenced to 180 days in jail, admits to drugging wife's drinks to induce abortion

abortion Jan 24

64,000 women and girls became pregnant due to rape in states with abortion bans, study estimates

A third hospital obstetrics program is in “serious jeopardy” of closing, the report also said.

Only 22 of 44 counties in Idaho have access to any practicing obstetricians, the report said. About 85% of obstetricians and gynecologists in Idaho practice in the seven most populous counties.

Idaho banned nearly all abortions after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022. Idaho makes it a crime with a prison term of up to five years for anyone who performs or assists in an abortion.

Post-Roe, many maternal care doctors in restrictive states are deciding whether to stay or go. They weigh tough questions about medical ethics, their families and whether they can provide the best care without risking their careers or prison time.

Dr. Kylie Cooper, a maternal-fetal specialist, left Idaho last year. She told The Associated Press at the time that it was a very difficult decision but that she and her family needed to be where they felt reproductive health care was protected and safe.

Data also shows Idaho is at the 10th percentile of maternal mortality outcomes, meaning 90% of the country has better maternal and pregnancy outcomes than Idaho.

“In a time when we should be building our physician workforce to meet the needs of a growing Idaho population and address increasing risks of pregnancy and childbirth, Idaho laws that criminalize the private decisions between doctor and patient have plunged our state into a care crisis that unchecked will affect generations of Idaho families to come,” Dr. Caitlin Gustafson, an OB-GYN and the board president of the Idaho Coalition for Safe Healthcare Foundation, said in the news release.

The loss of obstetricians further strains a health system that was already experiencing a physician shortage, the release said. The national average of live births a year per obstetrician is 94 compared to 107 in Idaho, the news release said.

With Maryland voters set to decide whether to enshrine the right to abortion in the state constitution in November, it may be harder for Hogan to reassemble the bipartisan coalition that elected him to the governor’s office in 2014 and kept him there four years later.

His task was laid out vividly by Lynn Johnson Langer, a Democrat walking to lunch in downtown Annapolis several days after Hogan announced his Senate bid. Hogan is likable enough to have won her vote in his second campaign for governor, but the stakes are too high for her to support handing Republicans another win in a closely divided Senate.

“We need more Democrats, so, sorry Hogan,” Langer said. ”I don’t think he’s a bad guy. Like I said, I don’t always agree with him. In fact, a lot I don’t agree with him.”

Hogan’s decision to veto legislation to expand abortion access in Maryland in 2022 lingers with voters like Langer. She supports abortion rights unequivocally and said she probably will back a candidate who doesn’t hedge.

Hogan has said he does not support taking abortion rights away, even though he personally opposes abortion. However, as governor, he vetoed legislation to end a restriction that only physicians provide abortions. When his veto was overridden by Democrats who control the legislature, he used the power of his office to block funding set aside to support training non-physicians to perform them.

Abortion already is protected in Maryland law, but Democrats who control the legislature voted last year to put a state constitutional amendment before voters. In doing so they were following a proven political formula used successfully by several states in the aftermath of the Supreme Court decision.

“This is an issue the Democrats care about, and this is a big thing about Maryland: It doesn’t matter how popular you are with your base, and it doesn’t matter how popular you are among independents, the path to the Senate in Maryland goes through the Democratic Party,” said Mileah Kromer, an associate professor of political science at Goucher College, who has written a book about Hogan. “You need Democratic votes to win, and that’s just the math of the state.”

Hogan attracted national attention during his tenure as governor as one of the rare Republicans willing to criticize Donald Trump, who appointed three conservative justices that created the Supreme Court’s conservative majority that voted to overturn Roe v. Wade in 2022. Now, Hogan could be on the same ballot as the former president, who is favored to win the Republican nomination but is deeply unpopular in Maryland.

Mary Kfoury, a Democrat who lives in Edgewater, Maryland, praised Hogan for speaking out against Trump, though that’s not enough to get her vote.

“I really don’t think we can afford to have a Republican,” Kfoury said. “I want to keep Maryland as blue as possible, especially with things as close as they are, but I think if we had to have a Republican in the Senate he would be a terrific person to have, because he truly states what he thinks and he’s for more traditional Republican values and has bravely spoken against Trump.”

Hogan focused his governorship on pocketbook concerns, largely avoiding social issues and maintaining civility with the Legislature. In a video announcing his candidacy, he highlighted that aspect of his tenure.

“For eight years, we proved that the toxic politics that divide our nation need not divide our state,” Hogan said. “We overcame unprecedented challenges, cut taxes eight years in a row, balanced the budget, and created a record surplus. And we did it all by finding common ground for the common good.”

While Kromer describes Hogan’s Senate candidacy as “an uphill battle,” she said it would be wrong to dismiss a candidate who consistently maintained high approval ratings during his eight years as governor, despite the 2-1 advantage Democrats hold over Republicans in the state.

“For me, it’s not just that Hogan was popular, it was that Hogan was persistently popular for eight years,” said Kromer, who wrote “Blue State Republican: How Larry Hogan Won Where Republicans Lose and Lessons for a Future GOP.”

Democrats running to succeed retiring Sen. Ben Cardin pounced on concerns about abortion rights, after Hogan announced his surprise Senate bid just hours before the state’s filing deadline.

“We know what’s at stake in this election — our fundamental freedoms over our bodies,” said Angela Alsobrooks, the chief executive in Prince George’s County, the state’s second-largest jurisdiction in the suburbs of the nation’s capital.

Alsobrooks, who could make history as Maryland’s first Black U.S. senator, is running in the Democratic primary against U.S. Rep David Trone, the wealthy founder of Total Wine and More who has invested more than $23 million in his own campaign.

Hogan, speaking publicly for the first time since announcing his candidacy last week, told CNN on Wednesday that “I would not vote to support a national abortion ban.”

He also said that while he understands “why this is such an important and emotional issue for women across Maryland and across the country,” he doesn’t believe the constitutional amendment in Maryland is necessary, because abortion rights already are protected in state law.

The state approved legislation in 1991 to protect abortion rights if the Supreme Court were to allow abortion to be restricted. Voters showed their support for the law the following year, when 62% backed it in a referendum.

“I think Democrats put this on the ballot to try to make it a political issue, and voters can make their decision on whether they think it’s important or not, but it’s not going to change anything in our state,” Hogan told CNN.

Alsobrooks said Hogan’s comments echoed years of Republican rhetoric asserting that public policy on abortion had been “settled law.”

“That’s what they told us right up until the day they overturned Roe v. Wade and took away a 50-year precedent that had protected our rights,” Alsobrooks said in a statement.

The Maryland legislation approved in 2022 to expand abortion access was passed after supporters contended the measure was needed because the state didn’t have enough providers. They also said the state needed to be prepared to respond to a growing number of women coming to Maryland for abortions after bans in other states.

After his veto was overridden, Hogan, who is Catholic, refused to release $3.5 million in the state budget to help fund training. One of Democratic Gov. Wes Moore’s first actions as governor last year was to release the money that Hogan had withheld.

Hogan entered a GOP primary with seven other candidates, none as well known politically as the former governor. One of the candidates, Robin Ficker, garnered national attention years ago as an acid-tongued sports heckler at basketball games for Washington’s NBA team when it played in Landover, Maryland.

A Republican has not won a U.S. Senate election in Maryland since 1980.

Similar bills that would establish a right to obtain and use a detailed list of contraception approved by the federal government — including oral medications, intrauterine devices, condoms and the Plan-B morning-after pill — have cleared both the House of Delegates and the Senate. The legislation also creates a right to sue over violations of its provisions.

“I think the overturning of Roe was a first step on the assault on reproductive health care,” said Sen. Ghazala Hashmi of Chesterfield, the sponsor of one of the measures.

The court’s June 2022 majority opinion overturning the 1973 Roe decision said it applied only to abortion. But Hashmi noted conservative Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas’ separate concurring opinion that said the court “should reconsider” other precedents, including decisions legalizing same-sex marriage, striking down laws criminalizing gay sex and establishing the right of married couples to use contraception.

“I didn’t hear any of his other conservative member justices challenge him on that. And so if he’s saying this, I think we ought to believe him,” Hashmi said.

abortion Jan 24

64,000 women and girls became pregnant due to rape in states with abortion bans, study estimates

Virginia Jan 23

Biden and Harris paint Trump as freedom's enemy at abortion rally in Virginia

Maryland Jan 22

Abortion rights supporters launch campaign for Maryland constitutional amendment

Hashmi and Democratic Del. Cia Price of Newport News, the sponsor of the House bill, emphasized the importance of access to contraception not only for family planning but to prevent sexually transmitted infections and to help manage other medical conditions, including endometriosis and polycystic ovary syndrome.

Similar efforts have been made in other states around the country. Thirteen states had enacted some kind of legal protections for the right to contraception as of October and more were pending, according to research from KFF, a nonprofit that studies health care issues.

In Congress, a measure to enshrine the right to use contraceptives passed the House of Representatives in July 2022 but failed to advance in the Senate.

While Price’s version of the legislation picked up a handful of Republican votes on the House floor, the bills have been advancing largely along party lines. And they have drawn opposition from religious and socially conservative groups, who have raised a range of objections, particularly over the lack of an exemption for health care workers who may have a religious or moral objection to offering contraception.

The bill is “designed to restrict the conscience rights of medical providers,” said Jeff Caruso, executive director of the Virginia Catholic Conference.

Other opponents raised concerns that the bill was written broadly enough that it could protect access to abortifacient drugs.

Price said that’s unfounded, noting that the bill defines contraception as “an action taken to prevent pregnancy.” The definition also covers sterilization procedures.

“This is not a conversation about abortion,” she said in a committee hearing.

During discussion on the Senate floor, Sen. David Suetterlein of Roanoke, a Republican with an independent voting streak, said that while he supports the “spirit” of the legislation, he had concerns about creating an “affirmative legal right.”

“I think that we need to continue making sure that we expand contraceptive coverage and access. I think abortion is a tragedy, and I think one of the greatest things we can do to reduce the likelihood of those occurring is make sure that we have contraceptives available to people across this Commonwealth,” he said.

The measures are supported by associations representing health care providers — the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the American College of Nurse Midwives — along with the American Civil Liberties Union of Virginia and Planned Parenthood Advocates of Virginia.

The bills are almost certain to reach final passage in the coming weeks. But it’s not clear how Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin will act on them. Asked for comment, his press office said only that he will review all legislation that reaches his desk.

If Youngkin does not sign the legislation, “he’ll need to explain to Virginians why he thinks contraception ought not to be protected,” Hashmi said.

The research letter, published by JAMA Internal Medicine and headed up by the medical director at Planned Parenthood of Montana, estimated that nearly 520,000 rapes were associated with 64,565 pregnancies across 14 states, most of which had no exceptions that allowed for terminations of pregnancies that occurred as a result of rape.

Texas topped the list, with about 45% of the rape-related pregnancies occurring within the state, researchers estimated. Ninety-one percent of the estimated rape-related pregnancies took place in states without exceptions for rape, according to the researchers.

"Few (if any)" of the women and girls who became pregnant due to rape "obtained in-state abortions legally, suggesting that rape exceptions fail to provide reasonable access to abortion for survivors," the research letter said.

Abortion rape exceptions can be rendered “virtually meaningless” because of rape reporting requirements, said Dr. David Himmelstein, who co-authored the research and teaches at the School of Urban Public Health at Hunter College.

The researchers used data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Bureau of Justice Statistics and the FBI to create their estimates.

Read the full story on NBCNews.com.

This story uses functionality that may not work in our app. Click here to open the story in your web browser.

Members of the Freedom in Reproduction Maryland ballot committee announced the effort in front of the state Capitol. Last year, Maryland lawmakers voted to put the constitutional amendment on the ballot after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe in 2022 and ended the nationwide right to abortion.

“Immediately after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, too many states have turned their backs to women,” Maryland first lady Dawn Moore said at a news conference with supporters, including Maryland House Speaker Adrienne Jones, a Democrat. “While states like our neighbor West Virginia passed a near-total abortion ban and closed their doors on reproductive rights, Maryland has opened ours.”

The overturning of Roe left it to states to decide on abortion’s legality. Some have severely restricted it while others have strengthened abortion access or are considering doing so.

Maryland law already protects the right to abortion. The state approved legislation in 1991 to protect abortion rights if the Supreme Court were to allow abortion to be restricted. Voters showed their support for the law the following year, when 62% backed it in a referendum. Democrats outnumber Republicans 2-1 in the state.

Those behind the proposed constitutional amendment say it would make it even harder for opponents to try to strip away abortion rights in the future.

“If we vote ‘yes’ on reproductive freedom, our rights will be protected well into the future, no matter who’s in office, but if we fall short, if we don’t get it done, I promise there’s always going to be someone out there looking to turn back the clock,” Moore said.

Maryland officials have said the state already is seeing an increase in patients from other states.

Since the high court overturned Roe, roughly 25 million women live in states with some type of ban in effect. The impacts are increasingly felt by women who never intended to end their pregnancies yet have had emergency medical care denied or delayed because of the new restrictions.

A ballot committee called Health Not Harm MD opposes Maryland’s proposed amendment.

“If approved by voters in November 2024, the ‘Reproductive Freedom’ Amendment will mandate that Maryland taxpayers fully fund these radical elective procedures, enriching politicians who seek to impose this radical agenda on Maryland families,” the group said on its website.

In addition to putting the constitutional amendment on the ballot, Maryland lawmakers also approved a package of measures last year to protect abortion rights.

Those laws protect patients and providers from criminal, civil and administrative penalties relating to abortion bans or restrictions in other states. Lawmakers also approved a separate data-privacy bill to protect medical and insurance records on reproductive health in electronic health information exchanges that can be shared across state lines.

The meeting marks the fourth time that his task force on reproductive health care access has come together since the fall of Roe roughly a year and a half ago.

Biden on Monday railed against the Supreme Court’s 2022 decision to overturn the landmark ruling, calling it “a fundamental right ripped away.”

“I said…on that day that Roe was overturned, the health and lives of women in this nation would now be at risk,” Biden said during his remarks. “And that has unfortunately proven to be true. They’ve been at risk.”

The president also reiterated his call for Congress to codify protections that had been provided by Roe, adding that if a bill were passed, he would “immediately” sign it into law.

“Stop playing politics with the women’s lives and freedom. Let doctors do their job,” Biden said.

Read the full story on NBCNews.com.

It’s one of numerous cases involving abortion restrictions that have played out in state and federal courts after the U.S. Supreme Court ended abortion rights in 2022. The administration issued guidance that year saying hospitals “must” provide abortion services if there’s a risk to the mother’s life, citing the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act of 1986, which requires emergency rooms to provide stabilizing treatment for anyone who arrives at the emergency room.

Abortion opponents have challenged the guidance in multiple jurisdictions. In Texas, the state joined abortion opponents in a lawsuit to stop the guidance from taking effect and won at the district court level. The Biden administration appealed to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which has jurisdiction in Texas, Louisiana and Mississippi. But a unanimous three-judge panel rejected the appeal in Tuesday’s ruling.

The ruling said the guidance could not be used to require emergency care abortions in Texas or by members of two anti-abortion groups that filed suit — the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians & Gynecologists and the Christian Medical & Dental Associations. The California-based 9th Circuit has allowed the use of the guidance to continue in an Idaho case, which is pending at the U.S. Supreme Court.

Opponents of the guidance said Texas law already allows abortions to save the life of the mother but that the federal guidance went too far, calling for abortions when an emergency condition is not present and eliminating obligations to treat the unborn child.

The 5th Circuit panel sided with Texas. The opinion said language in the 1986 emergency care law requires hospitals to stabilize the pregnant woman and her fetus.

“We agree with the district court that EMTALA does not provide an unqualified right for the pregnant mother to abort her child especially when EMTALA imposes equal stabilization obligations,” said the opinion written by Judge Kurt Engelhardt.

In the appellate hearing last November, a U.S. Justice Department attorney arguing for the administration said the guidance provides needed safeguards for women and that the district court order blocking the use of the guidance was an error with “potentially devastating consequences for pregnant women within the state of Texas.”

The panel that ruled Tuesday included Engelhardt and Cory Wilson, nominated to the court by former President Donald Trump, and Leslie Southwick, nominated by former President George W. Bush.

Texas Abortion Law

Dec 8, 2023

Texas Supreme Court pauses lower court's order allowing pregnant woman to have an abortion

Medication abortion accounts for more than half of all abortions in the U.S., and typically involves two drugs: mifepristone and misoprostol. A research letter published Tuesday in JAMA Internal Medicine looked at requests for these pills from people who weren’t pregnant and sought them through Aid Access, a European online telemedicine service that prescribes them for future and immediate use.

Aid Access received about 48,400 requests from across the U.S. for so-called “advance provision” from September 2021 through April 2023. Requests were highest right after news leaked in May 2022 that the Supreme Court would overturn Roe v. Wade — but before the formal announcement that June, researchers found.

Nationally, the average number of daily requests shot up nearly tenfold, from about 25 in the eight months before the leak to 247 after the leak. In states where an abortion ban was inevitable, the average weekly request rate rose nearly ninefold.

“People are looking at looming threats to reproductive health access, looming threats to their reproductive rights, and potentially thinking to themselves: How can I prepare for this? Or how can I get around this or get out ahead of this?” said Dr. Abigail Aiken, an associate professor at the University of Texas at Austin and one of the letter’s authors.

Daily requests dropped to 89 nationally after the Supreme Court decision, the research shows, then rose to 172 in April 2023 when there were conflicting legal rulings about the federal approval of mifepristone. The Supreme Court is expected to rule on limits on the drug this year.

Co-author Dr. Rebecca Gomperts of Amsterdam, director of Aid Access, attributed this spike to greater public awareness during times of uncertainty.

Researchers found inequities in who is getting pills in advance. Compared with people requesting pills to manage current abortions, a greater proportion were at least 30 years old, white, had no children and lived in urban areas and regions with less poverty.

Advance provision isn’t yet reaching people who face the greatest barriers to abortion care, said Dr. Daniel Grossman, an OB-GYN at the University of California, San Francisco, who was not involved in the research.

“It’s not surprising that some people would want to have these pills on hand in case they need them, instead of having to travel to another state or try to obtain them through telehealth once pregnant,” he added in an email, also saying more research is needed into the inequities.

Recently, Aiken said, some other organizations have started offering pills in advance.

“It’s a very new idea for a lot of folks because it’s not standard practice within the U.S. health care setting,” she said. “It will actually be news to a lot of people that it’s even something that is offered.”

Read more:

Wyoming Dec 15, 2023

Wyoming judge to rule on abortion laws, including first-in-the-nation ban on abortion pills

Supreme Court Dec 13, 2023

Supreme Court agrees to hear case over limits to commonly used abortion pill mifepristone

Oral arguments were scheduled for Wednesday in Santa Fe. At least four state supreme courts are grappling with abortion litigation this week in the aftermath of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision last year to rescind the constitutional right to abortion.

In New Mexico’s Lea and Roosevelt counties and the cities of Hobbs and Clovis, where opposition to abortion runs deep, officials argue that local governments have the right to back federal abortion restrictions under a 19th century U.S. law that prohibits the shipping of abortion medication and supplies. They say the local abortion ordinances can’t be struck down until federal courts rule on the meaning of provision within the “anti-vice” law known as the Comstock Act.

Attorney General Raúl Torrez has argued that the recently enacted local laws violate state constitutional guarantees — including New Mexico’s equal rights amendment that prohibits discrimination based on sex or being pregnant.

abortion Dec 11, 2023

Texas Supreme Court rules against Dallas woman who sought abortion; her attorneys say she left state to get procedure

Dec 8, 2023

Texas Supreme Court pauses lower court's order allowing pregnant woman to have an abortion

Since the court case began, additional local ordinances have been adopted to restrict abortion near Albuquerque and along the state line with Texas.

New Mexico is among seven states that allow abortions up until birth, and it has become a major destination for people from other states with bans, especially Texas, who are seeking procedures.

A pregnant Texas woman whose fetus has a fatal condition left the state to get an abortion elsewhere before the state Supreme Court on Monday rejected her unprecedented challenge of one of the most restrictive bans in the U.S.

In 2021, the New Mexico Legislature repealed a dormant 1969 statute that outlawed most abortion procedures as felonies, ensuring access to abortion even after the U.S. Supreme Court rolled back guarantees last year.

Earlier this year, New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham signed a bill that overrides local ordinances aimed at limiting abortion access and enacted a shield law that protects abortion providers from investigations by other states.

On Tuesday, the Arizona Supreme Court grilled lawyers about a pre-statehood ban in 1864 on nearly all abortions and whether it has been limited or made moot by other statutes enacted over the past 50 years.

Arizona’s high court is reviewing a lower-court decision that said doctors couldn’t be charged for performing the procedure in the first 15 weeks of pregnancy because other, more recent laws have allowed them to provide abortions.

Kate Cox, a 31-year-old mother of two, had spent nearly a week seeking court permission in Texas to end her pregnancy, but her attorney said she could not wait any longer and left the state. Her baby has a condition known as trisomy 18, which has low survival rates, and her lawsuit argued that continuing the pregnancy jeopardized both her health and ability to have more children.

Texas’ abortion ban makes narrow exceptions when the life of the mother is in danger but not for fetal anomalies. Republican Attorney General Ken Paxton argued that Cox had not shown that any of the complications in her pregnancy rose to the level of threatening her life.

“Her health is on the line. She’s been in and out of the emergency room and she couldn’t wait any longer,” said Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights, which was representing Cox.

The organization did not disclose where Cox went. On Monday, she would have been 20 weeks and six days pregnant.

Hours after Cox’s attorneys announced she had left Texas, the state Supreme Court issued its decision that ruled against Cox. It came three days after the court temporarily halted a lower judge’s ruling that gave Cox permission to get an abortion.

“No one disputes that Ms. Cox’s pregnancy has been extremely complicated. Any parents would be devastated to learn of their unborn child’s trisomy 18 diagnosis,” the court wrote. “Some difficulties in pregnancy, however, even serious ones, do not pose the heightened risks to the mother the exception encompasses.”

Cox, who lives in the Dallas area, was believed to be the first woman in the U.S. to ask a court for permission for an abortion since Roe v. Wade was overturned last year. Her lawsuit quickly became a high-profile test of bans in Texas and a dozen other GOP-controlled states, where abortion is prohibited at nearly all stages of pregnancy.

Days after Cox filed her lawsuit, a pregnant woman in Kentucky also asked a court to allow an abortion. There has been no ruling yet in that case.

In Texas, Paxton mounted an aggressive defense to try to prevent Cox from having an abortion. He sent three Houston hospitals letters warning of legal consequences — both criminal and civil — if they allowed Cox’s physician to provide the procedure. He also argued that Cox had not demonstrated that her life was at imminent risk, including noting that she was sent home after her multiple visits to emergency rooms.

Cox had cesarean surgeries during her first two pregnancies. Her lawsuit argued that inducing labor would carry a risk of a uterine rupture because of her prior C-sections, and that another one at full term would would endanger her ability to carry another child. But Paxton contended those arguments still fell short.

“Rather, the only question is whether Ms. Cox’s condition meets the exception, regardless of how long the child is expected to live,” Paxton’s office told the court in a filing over the weekend.

Dr. Leilah Zahedi-Spung, a maternal fetal medicine specialist in Colorado and a fellow with Physicians for Reproductive Health, said when lethal fetal anomalies are diagnosed “there’s only risk to that pregnant person and no benefit unfortunately for that innocent child.”

“You are putting your body through risks without any benefit because prolonging the pregnancy doesn’t change the survival rate,” Zahedi-Spung said.

Doctors told Cox that her fetus has a condition known as trisomy 18, which is when a baby has an extra copy of chromosome 18. The diagnosis has a very high likelihood of miscarriage or stillbirth, and low survival rate. Doctors told Cox that inducing labor or carrying the baby to term could jeopardize her ability to have another child.

Trisomy 18 occurs in approximately 1 in 2,500 diagnosed pregnancies, according to the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine. There is no live birth in about 70% of pregnancies involving the diagnosis that proceed past 12 weeks gestational age, according to a legal filing that the two groups submitted to the court.

The termination of pregnancies because of fetal anomalies or other often-fatal medical problems is seldom discussed in national debates over abortion. There are no recent statistics on the frequency of terminations for fetal anomalies in the U.S. but experts say it’s a small percentage of total procedures.

It has long been at the forefront of strict abortion laws in the U.S., and even now, there are ongoing efforts to make it harder for pregnant women to leave Texas for states where the procedure is legal. This year, a federal judge in Texas ruled that the bans do not apply to helping women get abortions out of state.

Under Texas’ bans, doctors who provide an abortion can face criminal charges that carry punishments of up to life in prison. They could also face lawsuits from private citizens, who are empowered to sue a person who helps a woman obtain an abortion, such as the doctor’s staff. The laws do not threaten the mother with any legal consequences.

Dr. Christina Bourne, medical director for abortion provider Trust Women, which operates clinics in Oklahoma City and Wichita, Kansas, said that whether someone’s life is at risk can be subjective.

Doctors are now operating in a confusing atmosphere, Bourne said,

“If you are a pregnant person in a legally restrictive state, I am concerned about your health outcomes,” she said.

TEXAS ABORTION FIGHT

Texas abortion law Dec 7, 2023

Judge grants pregnant Texas woman permission to get an abortion despite state's ban

The lawsuit filed by Kate Cox, a 31-year-old mother of two from the Dallas area, is believed to be the first of its kind in the nation since the U.S. Supreme Court last year overturned Roe v. Wade, according to the Center for Reproductive Rights, which is representing Cox.

Since that landmark ruling, Texas and 12 other states rushed to ban abortion at nearly all stages of pregnancy. Opponents have sought to weaken those bans — including an ongoing Texas challenge over whether the state’s law is too restrictive for women with pregnancy complications — but until now, a woman has not gone to court seeking approval for an immediate abortion.

“I do not want to continue the pain and suffering that has plagued this pregnancy or continue to put my body or my mental health through the risks of continuing this pregnancy,” Cox wrote in an editorial published in The Dallas Morning News. “I do not want my baby to arrive in this world only to watch her suffer.”

Although Texas allows exceptions under the ban, doctors and women have argued that the requirements are so vaguely worded that physicians still won’t risk providing abortions, lest they face potential criminal charges or lawsuits.

Texas abortion law Dec 5, 2023

Pregnant Texas woman asks court to let her have abortion under exceptions to state's ban

news Dec 1, 2023

Sandra Day O'Connor's legacy on the bench includes deciding votes on affirmative action, abortion

The lawsuit was filed against the Texas attorney general’s office, which has defended the ban in court, and the state’s medical board. Republican Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton’s office has not responded to requests for comment.

Cox is 20 weeks pregnant and has been told by doctors that her baby is likely to be stillborn or live for a week at most, according to the lawsuit filed in Austin. The suit says doctors told her their “hands are tied” under Texas’ abortion ban.

The lawsuit was filed a week after the Texas Supreme Court heard arguments about whether the ban is too restrictive for women with pregnancy complications. That case is among the biggest ongoing challenges to abortion bans in the U.S., although a ruling from the all-Republican court may not come for months.

Cox, a mother of two, had cesarean sections with her previous pregnancies. She learned she was pregnant for a third time in August and was told weeks later that her baby was at a high risk for a condition known as trisomy 18, which has a very high likelihood of miscarriage or stillbirth and low survival rates, according to the lawsuit.

Doctors told Cox that if the baby’s heartbeat were to stop, inducing labor would carry a risk of a uterine rupture because of her prior cesareans, and that another C-section at full term would would endanger her ability to carry another child.

In July, several Texas women gave emotional testimony about carrying babies they knew would not survive and doctors unable to offer abortions despite their spiraling conditions. A judge later ruled that Texas’ ban was too restrictive for women with pregnancy complications, but that decision was swiftly put on hold after the state appealed.

More than 40 woman have received abortions in Texas since the ban took effect, according to state health figures, none of which have resulted in criminal charges. There were more than 16,000 abortions in Texas in the five months prior to the ban taking effect last year.

The Justice Department filed a statement of its position in consolidated lawsuits against Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall, arguing that such prosecutions would be unconstitutional. The lawsuits, filed by an abortion fund and former providers, seek a court ruling clarifying the state can’t use conspiracy statutes to prosecute people who help Alabama women travel elsewhere to obtain an abortion. Marshall has not prosecuted anyone for providing such assistance, but he has made statements saying that his office would “look at” groups that provide abortion help.

The Justice Department argued in the filing that the U.S. Constitution protects the right to travel. The department said that just as Marshall cannot stop women from crossing state lines to obtain a legal abortion, “neither can he seek to achieve the same result by threatening to prosecute anyone who assists that individual in their travel.”

Alabama is one of several states where abortion is almost entirely illegal after the U.S. Supreme Court, in a decision known as Dobbs, handed authority on abortion law to the states. Alabama bans abortion at any stage of pregnancy with no exceptions for rape and incest. The only exemption is if it’s needed because pregnancy seriously threatens the pregnant patient’s health.

“As I said the day Dobbs was decided, bedrock constitutional principles dictate that women who reside in states that have banned access to comprehensive reproductive care must remain free to seek that care in states where it is legal,” Attorney General Merrick B. Garland said in a statement.

The Justice Department asked a federal judge to consider its view as he decides the issue. Marshall indicated he welcomed the fight.

“Attorney General Marshall is prepared to defend our pro-life laws against this most recent challenge by the Biden Administration and, as always, welcomes the opportunity,” Marshall’s office said in a statement Thursday evening.

The legal dispute in Alabama comes as several Texas counties have enacted ordinances, which would be enforced through private lawsuits, seeking to block travel on local roads to get to where abortion is legal. The measures would not punish women who are seeking an abortion but would present legal risks to people who help transport them to get the procedure.

Nov 7, 2023

Ohio voters enshrine abortion rights in state constitution

Oct 11, 2023

Report finds more than 3 million financially insecure Latinas live in states where abortion is or may be banned 

The two Alabama lawsuits seek a ruling clarifying that people and groups can assist women leaving the state for an abortion. One lawsuit was filed by the Yellowhammer Fund, a group that stopped providing financial assistance to low-income abortion patients because of prosecution concerns. The other was filed by an obstetrician and two former abortion clinics that continue to provide contraception and other health services.

Speaking at a legislative hearing on funding requests for the upcoming budget cycle, Bob Anderson, who leads the Mississippi Department of Human Services, said the upward trend in voucher enrollment means the agency might “hit a wall with state and federal money,” forcing parents to undergo a waiting period for child care assistance.

The department counted 31,532 families receiving those vouchers as of this month, up from 24,500 last October.

“That is on track with what we were told to expect when Dobbs happened,” Anderson said, referring to Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the Mississippi case in which the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the five-decade-old protection of abortion rights established by Roe v. Wade.

After Dobbs, a Mississippi law went into effect banning abortion only if the woman’s life is in danger or if a pregnancy is caused by a rape that has been reported to law enforcement.

Voucher enrollment further accelerated in May after Gov. Tate Reeves, a Republican, approved a recommendation from a council of early childhood administrators to do away with a 19-year-old policy that had forced single parents and guardians to seek child support from the other parent to be eligible for assistance through the Child Care Payment Program, which offers help to low-income parents.

Advocates had sought to change that policy for years, saying it deterred many single mothers from applying for assistance because, among other reasons, they feared identifying their former partners would lead to abuse. They also said that when parents couldn’t find child care, it prevented them from getting back to work.

Lt. Gov. Delbert Hosemann, also a Republican, disputed the idea that the abortion ban has had an impact on child care voucher enrollment. He said the increase cannot be tied to Dobbs because “we actually have less live births than we did before,” and the spike results instead from the May policy change.

“It’s clear to me it’s not the Dobbs decision. It’s the fact that we made this policy decision that’s been approved by the governor and that you’re seeing thousands of people become eligible because of that,” Hosemann said. “And the other side of that coin has to be that you will see less fathers responsible because they’re not being disclosed by an individual.”

Anderson said more children are being born in Mississippi than there would have been had abortion still been legal, leading to increased demand for services.

“Whether that’s a direct corollary from Dobbs, I don’t know. We can debate that,” Anderson said.

In a statement, Reeves’ office said the May decision was made because the governor “is always looking for more ways to make state government more effective and efficient.”

“He listened to the experts and made the decision based on their recommendation that a change in this policy would allow more mothers to enter the workforce without being penalized,” said Cory Custer, the governor’s deputy chief of staff. “If it is determined that the previous policy is a better path to prosperity, we will be happy to return.”

___

Michael Goldberg is a corps member for the Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative. Report for America is a nonprofit national service program that places journalists in local newsrooms to report on undercovered issues. Follow him at @mikergoldberg.

New details behind the 2022 arson at Wellspring Health Access in Casper, delaying the clinic’s opening by almost a year, emerged as Lorna Roxanne Green, 22, was sentenced to five years in prison and three years probation.

In addition, Green will have to pay “very, very substantial” restitution that is yet to be determined but will be “well over $280,000,” U.S. District Judge Alan Johnson said.

Green said little at the hearing but through her attorney, Ryan Semerad, told the court she acted alone, accepted responsibility and didn’t intend to cause fear or make a political statement but failed to handle her strong emotions about the clinic.

“You are a talented and gifted person,” Johnson told her. “You are entitled to your opinions, whatever they may be, but those opinions do not justify in any respect the terror that was caused.”

Prosecutors and Green’s attorney said in the hearing they agreed to the mandatory minimum sentence.

As many as 20 supporters of Green turned out for the hearing. Green looked to them with a slight smile after entering the courtroom but neither she nor they reacted emotionally during the proceedings. Two women and a man who sat among Green’s supporters during the proceedings said her family had no comment.

Johnson said he received a “remarkable” outpouring of letters in support of Green from family, friends and community members.

Green faced up to 20 years in prison and a $250,000 fine after pleading guilty in July. At her plea hearing, she said she was sorry for what she did.

Green told investigators she opposed abortion and that anxiety and nightmares about the clinic caused her to burn it. Johnson urged Green to get treatment for her obsessive-compulsive disorder, anxiety and depression described in a “lengthy report” from a psychologist.

“You are a complex person,” Johnson told her.

The judge related details from pre-sentencing reports about her now-distant relationship with “helicopter” parents after a childhood in which she was regularly spanked up to age 18. Her mother once struck and gave her sister a bloody nose, Johnson said, referring to the documents.

Green experienced “emotional and physical abuse” and “control and manipulation by her parents” who “talked down” to her, Johnson said.

The pre-sentencing reports have not been made available to the public. Green’s parents, who had no listed number, did not return a phone message left through Semerad’s office seeking comment on the allegations.

The fire happened weeks before the clinic was to open. Extensive damage to the building being remodeled for the clinic kept it from opening for almost a year.

Green admitted to breaking in, pouring gasoline around the inside of the building and lighting it on fire, according to court documents.

The Casper College mechanical engineering student showed no sign of anti-abortion views on social media but told investigators she opposed abortion.

She told a U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives agent she bought gas cans and aluminum pans the day before the fire, drove to Casper, and carried the cans and pans to the clinic in a bag, matching security video and a witness account, according to a court filing.

She admitted using a rock to break glass in a door to enter and pouring gasoline into the pans in several rooms and on the floor before lighting it, according to the document.

Investigators said they made little progress finding who started the fire until a reward was increased to $15,000 in March, leading several tipsters to identify Green.

The arson was one of hundreds against abortion clinics in the U.S. since the 1970s, Wellspring founder and President Julie Burkhart said in the hearing.

Burkhart said she had a daughter about Green’s age, however, and felt sorry that she had derailed her life by burning the clinic.

“In a way, my heart breaks for the defendant. She made a terrible choice and committed a heinous crime,” Burkhart said.

Burkhart once worked closely with Dr. George Tiller, a Wichita, Kansas, abortion doctor who was assassinated at church in 2009. Four years after his murder, Burkhart helped to reopen Tiller’s clinic.

The clinic, which opened in April, provides surgical and pill abortions, making it the first of its kind in the state in at least a decade. Only one other clinic in Wyoming — in Jackson, some 250 miles (400 kilometers) away — provides abortions, and only by pill.

Laws passed in Wyoming in 2022 and 2023 sought to make abortion in the state illegal but a judge has kept abortion legal while a lawsuit challenging the new laws proceeds. One of the new Wyoming laws to ban any drug used to cause an abortion would be the nation’s first explicit ban on abortion pills.

Teton County District Judge Melissa Owens has expressed sympathy with arguments that a 2012 state constitutional amendment guaranteeing Wyoming residents’ right to make their own health care decisions conflicted with the bans.

Though abortion in Wyoming has remained legal, women in the rural state often go to nearby states, including Colorado, for abortions.

A recent flurry of Democratic-sponsored ads and mailers in battleground districts expected to determine political control of the General Assembly have warned that Republicans would use a newfound legislative majority to ban abortion, including in cases where the pregnancy resulted from rape or a mother’s life was at risk. Virginia, currently under divided political control, now allows elective abortions in the first and second trimesters and is the only Southern state that has not implemented new restrictions since the end of Roe v. Wade.

In their messaging, Democrats have cited recent strict bans enacted in other GOP-led states, along with Republican candidates’ legislative records, past public statements and news articles, to bolster their claims. Republicans, who are largely campaigning on GOP Gov. Glenn Youngkin’s proposed ban on abortions after 15 weeks with exceptions for rape, incest and the life of the mother, say their opponents are misrepresenting those sources or candidates’ past statements in an exploitative effort to drive turnout.

“With no vision to offer the Commonwealth in this election and nothing to inspire Virginians to vote for their extreme candidates, Virginia Democrats are reverting to their tired tactics of overt falsehoods and flagrant fearmongering,” Youngkin’s political action committee said in a news release Tuesday.

Every General Assembly seat is on the ballot this year, with early voting already underway, in an election cycle that will determine partisan control of the House of Delegates, now GOP-led, and the Democratic-controlled Senate. Virginia’s narrow political divide and unusual off-year schedule mean the contests typically draw outsized national attention and are often viewed as a possible bellwether for the coming year’s federal elections.

Republican staffers and campaign operatives in Virginia have been arguing for weeks that Democrats are overreaching or outright lying in their messaging. But the conversation escalated Tuesday after Joel Griffin, the Democratic nominee in a competitive Fredericksburg-area Senate race, publicized a new ad criticizing his Republican opponent, Tara Durant.

“Tara Durant supports letting Virginia ban abortions with no exceptions. … She supports letting Virginia force a 10-year-old rape victim carry to term,” female speakers warned in the video.

Reproductive rights Aug 28, 2023

Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin hopes to pass 15 week abortion ban

Virginia Aug 28, 2023

Virginia Gov. Youngkin eyes a 15-week abortion ban as a ‘consensus' voters would back

Included as citations for both statements was a 2022 Facebook post from Durant praising the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade.

Durant, a current member of the state House who has said she backs the governor’s 15-week proposal, responded by saying Griffin had “crossed a line” with the new ad.

The ad “smears Tara Durant — a mother of two young women — as wanting to force a 10-year-old victim of rape to carry a child. Such an unnerving, unfounded charge warrants nothing but clear-cut condemnation,” her campaign said in a statement.

Griffin then responded in part by pointing out a flier from Durant’s competitive primary that called Durant “a proven champion for the unborn” and “100% pro-life.”

Republicans are suddenly moderating their rhetoric and long-standing opposition to abortion access at the advice of pollsters, House Democratic Leader Don Scott argued in an interview Wednesday. Anti-abortion groups have seen a string of losses in statewide ballot fights since the U.S. Supreme Court ended constitutional protections for abortion last year.

Scott and other Democrats also say they are skeptical that a Republican majority would not seek to go further than Youngkin’s 15-week proposal — which would still accommodate most abortions, according to the latest available federal data. They frequently invoke The Washington Post’s reporting last year that Youngkin told a conservative audience he would “happily and gleefully” sign “any bill … to protect life.”

Youngkin’s press office did not directly answer questions Wednesday from The Associated Press about whether the governor would sign a stricter ban, or legislation that did not contain exceptions, though spokeswoman Macaulay Porter reiterated Youngkin’s support for the 15-week legislation.

House Speaker Todd Gilbert said he did not believe a measure more restrictive than the governor’s current proposal could clear the Legislature.

“Let’s use me as an example. I am no less a pro-life member of the Legislature than I’ve ever been. But I understand that that’s not where the majority of Virginians are on this issue,” he said in an interview, calling the governor’s proposal an attempt to find consensus.

He added that if Republicans retain their House majority, “there will be no deviating” from the campaign platform. Democrats in recent years have shown they are the extremists on the issue, Gilbert said, both for their support for the removal of limits on abortion later in pregnancy and their advocacy for a proposal that called for enshrining “a fundamental right to reproductive freedom” in the state constitution.

In other swing districts around the state, debates like the Griffin-Durant exchange have also played out.

In a competitive suburban Richmond state Senate race, Democratic nominee Schuyler VanValkenburg’s campaign ran an ad featuring a woman who said his Republican opponent, Sen. Siobhan Dunnavant “wants to ban abortion, take away a woman’s choice.”

Dunnavant, a practicing OB-GYN, carried legislation this session that would have added limits on third-trimester abortions and has since said she supports legal abortion through 15 weeks and afterward only in cases of rape, incest, to save the mother’s life and in cases of severe fetal anomalies.

“I don’t support an abortion ban. Period,” Dunnavant said in an ad that aired soon after.

Jessica Burgess, 42, pleaded guilty in July to tampering with human remains, false reporting and providing an abortion after at least 20 weeks of gestation, which is illegal in Nebraska. Madison County District Judge Mark Johnson sentenced her Friday to one year in prison for each count, with the first two to run concurrently. The sentence for the abortion count was ordered to run after the first two, amounting to a two-year sentence.

Her attorney, Brad Ewalt of Norfolk, sought probation, but the judge balked at that request. He said Burgess demonstrated that she knew she was breaking the state’s abortion law by initially lying to investigators about it and by going to “extraordinary means” to obtain the pills online instead of through a Nebraska medical provider, according to the Norfolk Daily News.

“I shudder to think, Ms. Burgess, that you have such disrespect for a — call it a human fetus, call it a stillborn child — that you would treat it like yesterday’s trash and not give it some respect in its treatment and disposal,” the judge said. “Our society expects more; it demands more.”

Burgess, of Norfolk, Nebraska, admitted at her plea hearing to helping her then-17-year-old daughter end her pregnancy. As part of her plea, charges of concealing the death of another person and abortion by someone other than a licensed physician were dismissed.

news Sep 14, 2023

Planned Parenthood will resume abortions in Wisconsin after court rules against 1849 ban

Virginia Aug 28, 2023

Virginia Gov. Youngkin eyes a 15-week abortion ban as a ‘consensus' voters would back

Her daughter, Celeste Burgess, who is now 19, was sentenced in July to 90 days in jail and two years of probation for burning and burying the fetus. She was released from jail on Sept. 11.

Both Jessica Burgess and her daughter, who was in the courtroom Friday, wept as the elder woman was taken away in handcuffs to begin serving her sentence, the Daily News reported. She will be eligible for release after about a year.

The abortion, well into the teen’s third trimester, violated Nebraska law at the time that banned abortion after 20 weeks of gestation. Officials have said Jessica Burgess ordered abortion pills online and gave them to her daughter in the spring of 2022.

Norfolk police opened an investigation into the abortion following a tip, according to an arrest affidavit. Police secured a search warrant to gain access to Facebook messages between the two, where prosecutors say the women discussed terminating the pregnancy and destroying the evidence. Police then found the burned fetal remains buried in a field north of Norfolk.

In one of the Facebook messages, Jessica Burgess instructed her daughter on how to take the pills to end the pregnancy, according to court records.

During the legislative session that ended in June, Nebraska lawmakers who opposed Republicans’ efforts to severely restrict abortion access repeatedly cited the Norfolk case, saying it shows state prosecutors would target women who seek abortions for criminal prosecution.

Republicans in the officially nonpartisan Nebraska Legislature failed this year to enact a six-week ban on abortions, but later passed a 12-week ban after adding it as an amendment to another bill limiting gender-affirming care for transgender youth. The American Civil Liberties Union has sued to overturn the abortion ban and transgender care bill, citing a Nebraska constitutional requirement that legislative bills stick to a single subject.

Both the legislative action and the sentencings in the Norfolk case came in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision last year to overturn Roe v. Wade, which for 50 years had established a constitutional right to abortion.

A special International Profile in Courage Award will honor South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol and Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida for working to improve relations between their countries despite domestic opposition.

During the filibuster the senators – Republicans Katrina Shealy, Sandy Senn, and Penry Gustafson, Democrat Margie Bright Matthews, and independent Mia McLeod — took turns “describing the complexities of pregnancy and the reproductive system, the dangers of lack of access to contraception, and inadequate privacy laws,” award officials said in written release.

Officials noted that members of the coalition, who became known as the “sister senators,” were heckled by anti-abortion activists and the three Republicans were also met with strong opposition from their own party – including censures and promises of primary challenges in 2024.

Despite the filibuster, the South Carolina Legislature was later able to approve the measure that would ban most abortions after around six weeks of pregnancy — before most people know they are pregnant.

“We in the South Carolina Legislature are not God. We do not know what’s going on in somebody else’s life. We do not have the right to make decisions for someone else,” Shealy said at the time, urging other members of her party to adopt a 12-week abortion ban instead.

U.S. Ambassador to Australia Caroline Kennedy said the goal of the Profile in Courage awards is to honor leaders who took stands of conscience and risked their careers by putting the public interest ahead of their own political standing.

“The women of the South Carolina Senate set an example for those seeking justice and individual freedom at all levels of government,” she said in a statement. “President Yoon and PM Kishida are doing the hard work of reconciliation in pursuit of a more peaceful world.”

Kennedy and her children Jack Schlossberg and Tatiana Schlossberg, members of the Profile in Courage Award Committee, will present the awards on Oct. 29 at the John F. Kennedy Presidential Library in Boston.

President Kennedy’s book, “Profiles in Courage,” recounts the stories of eight U.S. senators who risked their careers by taking principled stands for unpopular positions. The award was created by the John F. Kennedy Library Foundation in 1989.

Previous winners have included Presidents Barack Obama, Gerald Ford and George H.W. Bush.

Last year, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy was among five people named as recipients of the award for his efforts to protect democracy.

The court filing from the Justice Department sets the stage for a possible final resolution to a contentious legal fight mounted by abortion rights opponents over federal approval of the drug mifepristone. The dispute lands at the Supreme Court in time for the justices to potentially take it up, hear oral arguments and issue a decision by next summer.

In urging the Supreme Court to intervene, Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar wrote that the case marked the first time a court has ever second-guessed the “expert judgment” of the FDA in approving a drug.

If lower court rulings were left in place, they “would impose grave harms on the government, mifepristone’s sponsors, women seeking medication abortions, and the public,” Prelogar added. Among other things, access to the pill by mail — which the FDA formally approved in 2021 — would be curtailed.

Danco — the maker of Mifeprex, the brand version of mifepristone — filed a similar appeal Friday.

For more on this story, go to NBC News.

That earlier ruling had set off a grinding process of decriminalizing abortion state by state. Last week, the central state of Aguascalientes became the 12th state to decriminalize the procedure. Judges in states that still criminalize abortion will have to take account of the top court’s ruling.

The Supreme Court wrote on X, the platform formerly known as Twitter, that it had decided that “the legal system that criminalized abortion in the Federal Penal Code is unconstitutional, (because) it violates the human rights of women and people with the ability to gestate.”

The court’s sweeping decision Wednesday comes amid a trend in Latin America of loosening restrictions on abortion, even as access has been limited in parts of the United States. Some American women were already seeking the help of Mexican abortion activists to obtain the pills used to end their pregnancies.

Mexico City was the first Mexican jurisdiction to decriminalize abortion 15 years ago.

The Information Group for Chosen Reproduction, known by its Spanish initials as GIRE, said the court decided that the portion of the federal penal code that criminalized abortion no longer has any effect.

abortion Aug 20, 2023

Where do the 2024 presidential candidates stand on abortion? Take a look

news Aug 9, 2023

Abortion rights keep winning on the ballot in conservative states — Florida and Arizona could be next

“No woman or pregnant person, nor any health worker will be able to be punished for abortion,” the non-governmental organization said in a statement.

The impact also means that the federal public health service and any federal health institution must offer abortion to anyone who requests it, GIRE said. The court ordered that the crime of abortion be removed from the federal penal code.

Across Latin America, countries have made moves to lift abortion restrictions in recent years, often referred to as a “green wave.”

After decades of work by feminist activists across the region, the wave picked up speed in Argentina, which in 2020 legalized the procedure. In 2022, Colombia, a highly conservative country, also decriminalized abortion.

Many organizers worry, however, that the lifting of restrictions may not translate to expanded access in highly conservative and religious countries.

This story uses functionality that may not work in our app. Click here to open the story in your web browser.

Lauren Handy of Virginia was part of a group accused of violating federal law when they blocked access to the Washington Surgi-Clinic in October 2020. Handy and four others — John Hinshaw and William Goodman of New York, Heather Idoni of Michigan and Herb Geraghty of Pennsylvania — were all found guilty Tuesday, the Post said. A trial for four others involved in the blockade begins next week.

Members of the group, known as the Progressive Anti-Abortion Uprising, were prosecuted under a federal law known as the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act, or the FACE Act, which prohibits physically obstructing or using the threat of force to intimidate or interfere with a person seeking reproductive health services.

In court documents, prosecutors said Handy called the clinic pretending to be a prospective patient and scheduling an appointment. Once there, on Oct. 22, 2020, another member started a live feed on Facebook as the rest of the group lined up outside the clinic, the indictment said.

When a worker opened the door for patients, eight of the suspects pushed their way inside and began blocking the doors, and five of them chained themselves together on chairs to block the treatment area, according to court papers. Others blocked the employee entrance to stop other patients from coming inside, while another suspect blocked people from coming into the waiting room, the indictment stated.

abortion Apr 1, 2022

Anti-Abortion Activist: Aborted Fetuses Given Funeral, Names

abortion Mar 31, 2022

Who Is Lauren Handy, the Woman With 5 Fetuses Found in Her DC Home?

abortion Mar 31, 2022

DC Police Find 5 Fetuses in Home of Anti-Abortion Activist Lauren Handy

The defendants face up to 11 years in prison.

In March 2022, just after Handy and the others were indicted, police found five fetuses in a house in Southeast Washington where she was staying. The Metropolitan Police Department said officers were responding to a tip about “potential bio-hazard material” when they located the fetuses.

The group claimed the fetuses came from medical waste being disposed by the Washington clinic. Members said they contacted the police to collect the fetuses in hopes that an autopsy would prove that the clinic was conducting federally illegal late-stage abortions. Authorities have not charged anyone in that matter, the Post reported.

Virginia is the last state in the South without significant restrictions on abortion rights, and advocates see it as the next big battleground on the issue.

Passing a ban on abortion after 15 weeks, with exceptions for rape, incest and saving the life of the mother, would be a legislative priority for Youngkin if his party succeeds in the November legislative elections, the sources familiar with his plans said. The governor and his campaign team believe that 15 weeks is a “consensus” limit — one that many Virginians across political ideologies can agree upon. And they’re betting the measure is modest enough to avoid spikes in Democratic turnout more stringent bans have triggered in other states.

Their view is informed by the all-women focus groups they conducted on abortion throughout the summer as part of GOP efforts to hold the Virginia House and win the Senate, NBC News has learned. Zack Roday, the coordinated campaigns director, for Youngkin’s state PAC Spirit of Virginia, said the women’s views on abortion were “complicated” and “nuanced.” But, he said, “15 weeks with exceptions, is a place where a lot of people start nodding their head.”

Read the full story on NBCNews.com here.

Some of the division among the candidates has come over whether there should be a national ban on the practice — and after how many weeks — now that the justices have returned specific debate over abortion legality to the states.

A look at how the issue of abortion is playing out among Republican and Democratic candidates:

Donald Trump

The former president, the current GOP front-runner, has often sidestepped the issue of abortion, even as Republicans across the country have celebrated the Supreme Court’s decision.

In April, a major anti-abortion group assailed Trump on the issue, saying his contention that abortion restrictions should be left up to individual states, not the federal government, is a “morally indefensible position for a self-proclaimed pro-life presidential candidate.”

The Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America group has said it would not support any White House candidate who did not at a minimum support a 15-week federal abortion ban.

Trump, who has referred to himself as “the most pro-life president in American history, has pointed to his successful nomination of three conservatives justices, a move that tilted the court to the conservative majority that overturned Roe v. Wade. Earlier this year, he characterized as “too harsh” a measure signed into law by fellow contender Gov. Ron DeSantis that would ban abortions in Florida after six weeks of pregnancy.

Ron DeSantis

While DeSantis has been governor, Florida passed an abortion ban after six weeks of pregnancy. But DeSantis, who says he is “pro-life,” has suggested that individual states should decide the issue, adding in a recent interview that he is “running on doing things that I know I can accomplish.”

Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, criticized DeSantis for not supporting a national ban on the procedure, calling DeSantis’ position “unacceptable” as he runs for president.

Mike Pence

The former vice president supports a federal ban on abortion at six weeks, before many women even know they’re pregnant.

And he has advocated pulling from the market one of two widely used abortion pills — a medication with a better safety record than Viagra and penicillin. Sensing that such a position may be viewed as too extreme in a general election, no other major presidential candidate has joined his calls.

In a recent Associated Press interview, Pence went even further, saying abortion should be banned, even when a pregnancy is deemed nonviable. Such a standard would force women to carry pregnancies to term even when doctors have determined there is no chance a baby will survive outside the womb.

Earlier this month while touring the Iowa State Fair, Pence said he was expecting to use the debate as an opportunity to call out Trump and DeSantis for not insisting on a national abortion ban.

Tim Scott

The South Carolina senator has long voiced his opposition to abortion, pledging that as president “I would sign the most conservative pro-life legislation you can bring to my desk.”

He has signaled support for a federal ban on the practice for as early as 12 weeks and also support for a bill sponsored by Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., that would ban abortions nationally after 15 weeks.

In 2021, Scott also co-sponsored legislation that would have established a constitutional right to life from “the moment of fertilization.”

Nikki Haley

Haley, the sole woman in the GOP field, pledged in May that she would sign a federal abortion ban if elected president.

But Haley has not specified a time frame for after how many weeks she feels abortion should be outlawed, noting that passing such a measure would be highly unlikely without more Republicans in Congress, and advocating for “consensus” around the issue. She’s said she would “absolutely” sign a 15-week federal ban.

The former South Carolina governor and U.S. ambassador to the United Nations said “no one has been honest” about how difficult a ban could be to achieve, in a closely divided federal government.

Haley campaign spokesman Ken Farnaso said in June that she would “sign pro-life legislation that includes exceptions for rape, incest, and for the life of the mother,” suggesting she may be opposed to an exception for non-viable pregnancies — but declining to clarify.

As governor, Haley signed an abortion ban after about 20 weeks. That law is still in effect while a six-week ban, passed by state lawmakers, is held up in the courts.

Vivek Ramaswamy

The wealthy biotech entrepreneur and author of “Woke, Inc.” has said he would not support a federal ban on abortion because ”the federal government should stay out of it.” He has voiced support for states that have passed six-week bans.

Like some other hopefuls, he has pushed for more policies that encourage adoption and better child care.

Chris Christie

The former two-term New Jersey governor has argued that the issue of abortion should be carried out in the states, not at the federal level.

In a CNN town hall, Christie said that “the federal government should not be involved unless and until there’s a consensus around the country from the 50 states making their own decisions about what it should be.”

Seeking local office in the 1990s, Christie identified himself as “pro-choice,” saying he changed his position after hearing his daughter’s heartbeat at 13 weeks.

As governor, he vetoed millions in state funding for Planned Parenthood and other family planning clinics. Before the Supreme Court’s decision that overturned Roe, Christie joined Dannenfelser in meetings other GOP governors to discuss the issue and how it might play out at the state level.

Asa Hutchinson

The former two-term Arkansas governor has said the issue of abortion should stay in the states without a Republican supermajority in Congress.

As governor in 2021, Hutchinson signed a near-total ban on abortions that did not include rape and incest exceptions.

Doug Burgum

In April, the two-term North Dakota governor signed one of the strictest anti-abortion laws in the country. The measure would allow abortions up to six weeks’ gestation in cases of rape or incest, or medical emergencies. After that marker, no exceptions aside from some medical emergencies, such as ectopic pregnancies, are allowed at any stage of pregnancy.

Burgum has mostly said the issue of abortion should be left to the states and has indicated he would not support a federal ban.

Larry Elder

The conservative talk radio host opposes abortion but has said he would not support a federal ban.

Perry Johnson

The businessman describes himself as “pro-life.” When he ran for Michigan governor in 2022, Johnson told reporters “two wrongs don’t make a right” when asked if he would rule out banning abortion in cases of sexual assault.

Francis Suarez

The Miami mayor has said that he would support a national ban on abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy, with some exceptions, including rape, incest and the mother’s health.

Will Hurd

The former Texas congressman has said he would sign a 15-week federal abortion ban, although he has said that he doesn’t see it as realistic that Congress would pass such a measure.

While in the House, Hurd twice voted in favor of a 20-week ban.

Joe Biden

The president supports abortion access and has said he would veto a national ban on the practice. As a senator, Biden supported abortion restrictions like the 1976 Hyde Amendment — which states that Medicaid won’t pay for abortions unless the woman’s life is in danger or the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest — but said during the 2020 campaign he had shifted course.

The aftermath of last year’s Supreme Court ruling has framed much of Biden’s presidency on abortion. He signed an executive order designed to strengthen and promote access to contraception.

Mounting a rallying cry to 2022 midterms voters to seat more Democratic lawmakers who could possibly codify abortion access nationally, Biden has also directed his administration to take steps to protect access to abortion care. This includes making mifepristone — one of two pills used in medication abortions — easier to obtain, and ensuring members of the military can access reproductive health care.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

The author and environmental lawyer has spoken in favor of “bodily autonomy” and describes himself as “pro-choice.”

A nephew of President John F. Kennedy and son of Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy, he has also said “it’s a woman’s choice, and it’s solely up to the woman” in terms of how a pregnancy should be handled in its first trimester.

Marianne Williamson

The self-help author’s campaign website describes her as “one hundred percent pro-choice.” Williamson has also noted that she believes the decision to have an abortion or not “lies solely with a pregnant woman, according to the dictates of her conscience and in communion with the God of her understanding.”

Levonorgestrel, often called Plan B, is the most widely available type of emergency contraception. It works by preventing or delaying ovulation.

Scientists estimate that it is about 95% effective when taken within a day after unprotected sex, dropping to 58% or lower within three days. The new study, published by the medical journal Lancet, suggests levonorgestrel can remain highly effective up to three days after unprotected sex when it is taken with piroxicam, an anti-inflammatory pain medication typically prescribed for arthritis.

“It’s really exciting and very timely that we could have a more effective emergency contraceptive option,” said Kelly Cleland, executive director for the American Society for Emergency Contraception, who was not part of the Lancet study.

Scientists tracked 836 women at a Hong Kong clinic between 2018 and 2022 who had unprotected sex and requested emergency contraception within three days. Half the women received a dose of levonorgestrel and piroxicam while the other half got the contraceptive pill plus a placebo.

Doctors calculated that 95% of pregnancies among the women who got the combination with piroxicam were prevented, compared with 63% of those who got the placebo combination.

The most common side effects in both groups were fatigue, nausea, abdominal pain, dizziness and headache. No funding was provided for the study. The researchers used a Hong Kong brand of the contraceptive that it is sold over-the-counter in the U.S. under several names, including Plan B One-Step.

The authors acknowledged that because the research was done in mostly Asian women weighing less than 70 kilograms (154 pounds), it was unclear if the results could be extrapolated to other populations. There is some evidence levonorgestrel doesn’t work as well in heavier women.

Piroxicam is in the same class of anti-inflammatories as ibuprofen and paracetamol. It requires a prescription in many countries, including the U.S. and the U.K.

“It’s fascinating that they found this already existing medication really increases the efficacy of Plan B,” said Dr. Beverly Gray, a Duke University associate professor of obstetrics and gynecology who was not part of the new study. “But any medication that requires a prescription is going to be one more barrier, so what we really need is an over-the-counter medication that people can use in conjunction with Plan B.”

Dr. Kristina Gemzell Danielsson, head of Women and Children’s Health at Sweden’s Karolinska Institute and one of the Lancet study authors, said similar anti-inflammatory drugs could have the same effect. She said there would be no risk to women who took over-the-counter ibuprofen with Plan B, though it might not prove as effective as longer-acting piroxicam.

Piroxicam can cause bleeding in the stomach or severe skin reactions and increases the risk of heart or kidney disease in people susceptible to those conditions. Still, experts said using the drug once would be less likely to cause harm, particularly for the mostly younger women who would be most likely to use emergency contraception.

Gemzell-Danielsson said further studies could examine whether anti-inflammatories boost the effectiveness of the other main emergency contraceptive pill, ellaOne.

She recommended that women keep some form of emergency contraception at home, especially in places with highly restrictive abortion policies.

“It is a simple, effective and really smart solution to have,” Gemzell-Danielsson said. “You don’t buy (Band-Aids) because you plan to cut yourself, but you have it because you think it might happen.”

___

The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Science and Educational Media Group. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

The decision by three judges on the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans overturned part of a lower court ruling that would have revoked the Food and Drug Administration’s 23-year-old approval of mifepristone. But it left intact part of the ruling that would end the availability of the drug by mail, allow it to be used through only the seventh week of pregnancy rather than the 10th, and require that it be administered in the presence of a physician.

Those restrictions won’t take effect right away because the Supreme Court previously intervened to keep the drug available during the legal fight.

The panel’s ruling would reverse changes the FDA made in 2016 and 2021 that eased some conditions for administering the drug.

“In loosening mifepristone’s safety restrictions, FDA failed to address several important concerns about whether the drug would be safe for the women who use it,” Judge Jennifer Walker Elrod wrote for a panel of three 5th Circuit judges. She was joined by Judge Cory Wilson. Judge James Ho dissented, arguing to fully uphold a Texas-based federal judge’s April ruling that would revoke the drug’s approval, which the FDA granted in 2000.

The Biden administration said it would appeal. “As the attorney general has said before, the Justice Department is committed to defending the FDA’s scientific judgment and protecting Americans’ access to safe and effective reproductive care,” a statement from the Justice Department said.

The Center for Reproductive Rights said the ruling, if upheld, would “make it much more difficult for patients to get abortion care in most states.”

Abortion opponents hailed the ruling, although they, too, might appeal to seek full revocation of the FDA’s approval of the drug.

“Mail-order abortion pills put thousands of women and girls at risk of serious complications from abortion pills every year,” said a statement from Katie Daniel of the anti-abortion group Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America.

Erin Hawley, an attorney for the Alliance Defending Freedom, which filed the Texas lawsuit, said her organization had not yet decided whether to appeal to the Supreme Court to try to get mifepristone’s approval fully revoked. The conservative Christian legal group was also involved in the Mississippi case that led to the June 2022 Supreme Court ruling overturning Roe v. Wade and the nationwide right to abortion.

There is virtually no precedent for a U.S. court overturning the approval of a drug that the FDA has deemed safe and effective. While new drug safety issues often emerge after FDA approval, the agency is required to monitor medicines on the market, evaluate emerging issues and take action to protect U.S. patients. Congress delegated that responsibility to the FDA — not the courts— more than a century ago.

An attorney for drugmaker Danco Laboratories, which argued in favor of upholding the FDA approval and revisions, did not immediately respond to an email from The Associated Press seeking comment. Drugmaker GenBioPro, which was not part of the lawsuit, noted that the ruling would keep its generic mifepristone available, subject to the restrictions.

Elrod’s opinion said the full revocation of FDA’s approval of the drug was likely barred by legal time limits. Ho argued that the approval violated the 19th century Comstock Act. He also said the FDA gave the green light to mifepristone under a law that allows approval for drugs that treat serious or life threatening illness. “Pregnancy is not an illness,” Ho wrote.

During a May 17 hearing, the 5th Circuit panel pushed back frequently against assertions that U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk’s April 7 ruling was unprecedented and unwarranted.

Kacsmaryk, Ho and Wilson are all appointees of former President Donald Trump. Elrod was appointed to the 5th Circuit by former President George W. Bush. All of the judges have a history of supporting abortion restrictions.

Mifepristone is one of two pills used in medication abortions. The other drug, misoprostol, is also used to treat other medical conditions. Health care providers have said they could switch to misoprostol if mifepristone is no longer available or is too hard to obtain. Misoprostol is somewhat less effective in ending pregnancies.

The defeat of Issue 1 keeps in place a simple majority threshold for passing future constitutional amendments. It would have raised that to a 60% supermajority, which supporters said would protect the state’s foundational document from outside interest groups.

Texas Aug 5, 2023

Judge rules Texas' abortion ban is too restrictive for women with pregnancy complications

abortion Jul 12, 2023

Few US adults support full abortion bans, even in states that have them, an AP-NORC poll finds

While abortion was not directly on the special election ballot, the result marks the latest setback for Republicans in a conservative-leaning state who favor imposing tough restrictions on the procedure. Ohio Republicans placed the question on the summer ballot in hopes of undercutting a citizen initiative voters will decide in November that seeks to enshrine abortion rights in the state.

Dennis Willard, a spokesperson for the opposition campaign One Person One Vote, called Issue 1 a “deceptive power grab” that was intended to diminish the power of the state’s voters.

“Tonight is a major victory for democracy in Ohio,” Willard told a jubilant crowd at the opposition campaign’s watch party. “The majority still rules in Ohio.”

A major national group that opposes abortion rights, Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, called the result “a sad day for Ohio” while criticizing the outside money that helped the opposition. In fact, both sides relied on national groups and individuals in their campaigns.

Other states where voters have considered abortion rights since last year’s Supreme Court ruling have protected them, including in red states such as Kansas and Kentucky.

Interest in the special election was intense, even after Republicans ignored their own law that took effect earlier this year to place the question before voters in August. Voters cast nearly 700,000 early in-person and mail ballots ahead of Tuesday’s final day of voting, more than double the number of advance votes in a typical primary election. Early turnout was especially heavy in the Democratic-leaning counties surrounding Cleveland, Columbus and Cincinnati.

One Person One Vote represented a broad, bipartisan coalition of voting rights, labor, faith and community groups. The group also had as allies four living ex-governors of the state and five former state attorneys general of both parties, who called the proposed change bad public policy.

In place since 1912, the simple majority standard is a much more surmountable hurdle for Ohioans for Reproductive Rights, the group advancing November’s abortion rights amendment. It would establish “a fundamental right to reproductive freedom” with “reasonable limits.”

Voters in several states have approved ballot questions protecting access to abortion since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, but typically have done so with less than 60% of the vote. AP VoteCast polling last year found that 59% of Ohio voters say abortion should generally be legal.

The result came in the very type of August special election that Republican Secretary of State Frank LaRose, a candidate for U.S. Senate, had previously testified against as undemocratic because of historically low turnout. Republican lawmakers just last year had voted to mostly eliminate such elections, a law they ignored for this year’s election.

Voters’ rejection of the proposal marked a rare rebuke for Ohio Republicans, who have held power across every branch of state government for 12 years.

Ohio Right to Life, the state’s oldest and largest anti-abortion group and a key force behind the special election measure, vowed to continue fighting into the fall.

The ruling was the first to undercut Texas’ law since it took effect in 2022 and delivers a major victory to abortion rights supporters, who see the case as a potential blueprint to weaken restrictions elsewhere that Republican-led states have rushed to implement.

However, the injunction was immediately blocked by an appeal to the Texas Supreme Court, the state attorney general’s office said.

”The trial court’s injunction is ineffective, and the status quo remains in effect,” spokesperson Paige Willey said in an email.

State District Judge Jessica Mangrum’s ruling granted a temporary injunction that prevents Texas from enforcing the ban against physicians who in their “good faith judgment” end a pregnancy that, because of complications, creates a risk of infection or is otherwise unsafe for the woman to continue.

The injunction also applies to women who have a condition “exacerbated by pregnancy” who can’t be effectively treated during their term. It also covers cases where the fetus has a condition that makes it unlikely to survive after birth.

ROE V. WADE Jul 1, 2023

Plan B vending machines are becoming college campus staples across US post-Roe

Supreme Court Jun 23, 2023

Where abortion laws stand in every state a year after the Supreme Court overturned Roe

“For the first time in a long time, I cried for joy when I heard the news,” lead plaintiff Amanda Zurawski said in a statement. “This is exactly why we did this. This is why we put ourselves through the pain and the trauma over and over again to share our experiences and the harms caused by these awful laws.”

Mangrum’s decision said the injunction would run until the completion of the case, which is scheduled for a trial to begin next March 25.

However, the state’s immediate appeal “stays an activist Austin judge’s attempt to override Texas abortion laws pending a ruling by the Texas Supreme Court,” said a statement from First Assistant Attorney General Brent Webster.

The immediate impact of Mangrum’s decision also was unclear in a state where all abortion clinics have shuttered in the past year.

The challenge to the state law is believed to be the first in the U.S. brought by women who have been denied abortions since the Supreme Court last year overturned Roe v. Wade, which for nearly 50 years had affirmed the constitutional right to an abortion.

In a six-page ruling, the judge found that portions of the abortion law violated the rights afforded to pregnant people under the Texas Constitution.

The court found that the patients challenging the law each experienced “emergent medical conditions” during pregnancy that risked their health or lives “and required abortion care.”

However, they were delayed or denied access to such care because of widespread uncertainty about the impact on physicians, the ruling said.

“Today’s ruling should prevent other Texans from suffering the unthinkable trauma our plaintiffs endured,” said Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights, which helped bring the lawsuit.

During two days of emotional testimony in an Austin courtroom, women gave wrenching accounts of learning their babies would not survive birth and being unable to travel long distances to states where abortion is still legal.

The challenge, filed in March, does not seek to repeal Texas’ abortion ban, but instead aims to force more clarity on when exceptions are allowed under the law, which is one of the most restrictive in the U.S.

Under the law in Texas, doctors who perform abortions risk life in prison and fines of up to $100,000. Opponents say that has left some women with providers who are unwilling to even discuss terminating a pregnancy.

The majority of U.S. adults, including those living in states with the strictest limits on abortion, want it to be legal at least through the initial stages of pregnancy, according to a poll released in late June by The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research.

Celeste Burgess, of Norfolk, was sentenced in Madison County after pleading guilty earlier this year to concealing or abandoning a dead body. Two other misdemeanor charges of false reporting and concealing the death of another person were dropped, in an agreement with prosecutors.

Wyoming Jul 20, 2023

Woman accused of burning a Wyoming abortion clinic is set to take a plea deal

abortion Jul 19, 2023

Texas women denied abortions give emotional accounts in court, ask judge to clarify law

“The Court specifically finds that while probation is appropriate, confinement is necessary because without this confinement, it would depreciate the seriousness of the crime or promote disrespect for the law,” the judge’s order read.

Burgess and her mother, 42-year-old Jessica Burgess of Norfolk, are accused of working together to end the pregnancy. The abortion, well into her third trimester, violated Nebraska law at the time that banned abortion after 20 weeks of gestation. Officials have said Jessica Burgess ordered abortion pills online, which she gave to her then-17-year-old daughter in the spring of 2022.

Jessica Burgess pleaded guilty earlier this month to providing an illegal abortion, false reporting and tampering with human skeletal remains. In exchange for her plea, charges of concealing the death of another person and abortion by someone other than a licensed physician were dismissed. She faces sentencing on Sept. 22.

Norfolk police detective opened an investigation into the abortion following a tip, according to an arrest affidavit. Police secured a search warrant to gain access to Facebook messages between the two, in which prosecutors say the women discussed terminating the pregnancy and destroying the evidence. Police then found the burned fetal remains buried in a field north of Norfolk.

In one of the Facebook messages, Jessica Burgess instructed her daughter on how to take the pills to end the pregnancy, according to court records. In another, Celeste Burgess wrote, “I will finally be able to wear jeans,” according to the documents.

The U.S. Supreme Court’s last year overturned Roe v. Wade, which for 50 years had established the constitutional right to abortion. Nebraska lawmakers who opposed Republican’s efforts to severely restrict abortion access in the legislative session that ended in June, repeatedly cited the Norfolk case, saying it shows state prosecutors would target women who seek abortions with criminal penalties.

Republicans in the officially nonpartisan Nebraska Legislature failed this year to enact a six-week ban on abortions, but later passed a 12-week ban after adding it as an amendment to another bill to limit gender-affirming care for transgender youth. Opponents say that violated a Nebraska constitutional requirement that legislative bills stick to a single subject.

The ACLU has sued to overturn the abortion ban and transgender care bill.

“I see this, and I think the (defense secretary) does as well, as taking care of our soldiers, and it’s the right thing to do, and I don’t think we’re going to change it,” Wormuth told NBC News’ Courtney Kube at an event at the Aspen Security Forum.

Since the Supreme Court’s Dobbs v. Jackson decision removed the constitutional right to abortion last year, more than 40% of female service members stationed in the United States have no access, or severely restricted access, to abortion services, according to the Rand Corporation think tank.

Wormuth said the policy also was important to ensure that the Army can retain female troops who might leave the military if they cannot get access to abortion services. “I see this as a retention issue,” Wormuth said.

The policy also ensures women in the military have access to in vitro fertilization, since it is not necessarily available in the areas where troops are posted, Wormuth said.

Wormuth said she had not seen data on how many female troops had traveled across state lines for abortion services or the amount of Defense Department funds spent on it so far.

Read the full story on NBCNews.com here.

Lorna Roxanne Green, 22, told investigators she broke in and used gasoline to set fire to the Wellspring Health Access clinic in Casper because it was giving her anxiety and nightmares, according to court documents.

Green is scheduled to appear in court for a change-of-plea hearing Thursday before U.S. District Judge Alan Johnson in Cheyenne. Details of her proposed deal with prosecutors have been off-limits to the public pending Johnson’s approval of the agreement.

Charged with arson, Green faces up to 20 years in prison and a $250,000 fine, though a plea deal could bring a lighter sentence. Green has been free from jail since March while her case proceeds, and she pleaded not guilty at a court hearing in June.

abortion Jul 19, 2023

Texas women denied abortions give emotional accounts in court, ask judge to clarify law

Iowa Jul 17, 2023

Abortion in Iowa is legal again, for now, after a judge blocks new restrictions

Her deal with prosecutors, revealed by court documents filed last week, suggests she’s now willing to plead guilty or no contest to arson or possibly some other charge. Johnson will accept or reject the plea agreement at the hearing or decide to rule later.

At the time of the fire in May 2022, the clinic was being renovated with plans to open within the next several weeks. The fire delayed the clinic almost a year; Wellspring Health Access finally opened April 20 of this year.

Though Green told investigators she opposed abortion, the Casper College student showed no sign of anti-abortion views or activism on social media. Green is from Casper and was living in Laramie at the time of the fire.

She told a U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives agent she bought gas cans and aluminum pans the day before the fire, drove to Casper, and carried the cans and pans to the clinic in a bag, matching security video and a witness’ account, according to a court filing.

She admitted to using a rock to break glass in a door to enter and pouring gasoline into the pans in several rooms and on the floor before lighting it, according to the document.

Investigators said they made little progress finding who started the fire until a reward was increased to $15,000 in March, leading several tipsters to identify Green.

While Green has remained publicly quiet about her views, many other clinic opponents have not. Protesters gather outside the clinic regularly, and in May, Casper Mayor Bruce Knell apologized for a Facebook post about the clinic some interpreted as sympathizing with the fire attack.

Wellspring Health Access provides surgical and pill abortions, making it the first of the kind in the state in at least a decade. Before it opened, only one other clinic in Wyoming — one in Jackson, some 250 miles (400 kilometers) away — provided abortions, and only by pill.

The fire and plans for Wellspring Health Access — led by longtime abortion advocate Julie Burkhart, a former associate of assassinated Kansas abortion doctor George Tiller — occurred amid a contentious backdrop for abortion in Wyoming. Women in the rural state often go to Colorado and other nearby states for abortions.

Abortion remains legal in Wyoming after a series of court rulings suspending new state laws seeking to make abortion illegal pending the outcome of a lawsuit challenging the bans.

Last summer, Teton County District Judge Melissa Owens suspended an abortion ban that took effect after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the landmark Roe v. Wade decision. Wyoming’s ban stood to harm women and their doctors who sued to contest the ban, Owens ruled.

Since then, Owens has suspended a new abortion ban written to try to overcome the first ban’s legal shortcomings, as well as Wyoming’s first-in-the-nation explicit ban on abortion pills, which had been set to take effect July 1.

Owens has expressed sympathy with arguments that a 2012 state constitutional amendment guaranteeing Wyoming residents’ right to make their own health care decisions conflicted with the bans.

___ Bedayn is a corps member for the Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative. Report for America is a nonprofit national service program that places journalists in local newsrooms to report on undercovered issues.

Their detailed accounts in a crowded Austin courtroom were often emotional. At one point, the judge called a recess when a woman whose daughter died within hours of birth became ill and overcome on the witness stand.

“I survived sepsis and I don’t think today was much less traumatic than that,” said Amanda Zurawksi, one of more than a dozen Texas women who are suing the state.

The lawsuit is among the numerous legal battles still flaring nationwide over abortion access more than a year after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the constitutional right to abortion. What sets the Texas case apart, however, is that the women are believed to be the first in the U.S. to sue a state and testify over being denied abortion following newly enacted bans.

Their challenge does not seek to repeal Texas’ abortion ban but to force more clarity on when exceptions are allowed under the law, which is one of the most restrictive in the U.S.

It is not clear how quickly state District Judge Jessica Mangrum will rule. The state is seeking to dismiss the lawsuit and a lawyer for the Texas attorney general’s office called doctors’ fears of being prosecuted baseless.

Under the law in Texas, doctors who perform abortions risk life in prison and fines of up to $100,000. Opponents say that has left some women with providers who are unwilling to even discuss terminating a pregnancy.

Amy Pletscher, an attorney for the state, said the lawsuit was brought by women and doctors who “simply do not like Texas’ restrictions on abortion.“

“The purpose of this court is not to legislate,” she said.

The lawsuit was filed in March, and since then, several of the women have spoken extensively to reporters and lawmakers about the catastrophic ends to their pregnancies. But Molly Duane, an attorney for the Center for Reproductive Rights that helped bring the lawsuit, said they believe Wednesday was the first time in decades that women who were denied abortions have testified in a court about a state’s abortion ban.

Samantha Casiano testified she was halfway through her pregnancy when she found out during an appointment that her daughter had a rare diagnosis of anencephaly, where much of the skull and brain is missing. Doctors told her they could not provide her an abortion in Texas, and when a caseworker was called into the room, Casiano was handed funeral home information.

“I felt like I was abandoned,” Casiano said. “I had this funeral home paper and this is just supposed to be a scan day.”

Although Texas’ ban narrowly allows exceptions when the patient’s life is in danger, opponents say the the law is so vaguely worded that doctors remain afraid to perform abortions even under those circumstances.

The proceedings were expected to continue through Thursday.

Sixteen states, including Texas, do not allow abortions when a fatal fetal anomaly is detected, while six do not allow exceptions for the mother’s health, according to an analysis by KFF, a health research organization.

The lawsuit in Texas comes as abortion restrictions elsewhere in the U.S. continue to face challenges. On Monday, an Iowa judge temporarily blocked the state’s new ban on most abortions after about six weeks of pregnancy, just days after Gov. Kim Reynolds signed the measure into law.

The majority of U.S. adults, including those living in states with the strictest limits on abortion, want it to be legal at least through the initial stages of pregnancy, according to a poll released in late June by The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research.

Their testimony was often emotional, and at one point, the judge called a recess after one woman whose child died shortly after being born was overcome while recounting the catastrophic end to her pregnancy.

The women are believed to be the first in the U.S. who have sued over being denied an abortion since Roe was overturned last year. Their challenge in Texas does not seek to repeal the state’s ban but to force more clarity on when exceptions are allowed under the law, which is one of the most restrictive in the U.S.

Samantha Casiano testified she was halfway through her pregnancy when she found out during an appointment that her daughter had a rare diagnosis of anencephaly, where much of the skull and brain is missing. Doctors told her they could not provide her an abortion in Texas, and when a caseworker was called into the room, Casiano was handed funeral home information.

“I felt like I was abandoned,” Casiano said. “I had this funeral home paper and this is just supposed to be a scan day.”

Although Texas’ ban narrowly allows exceptions when the patient’s life is in danger, opponents say the the law is so vaguely worded that doctors remain afraid to perform abortions even under those circumstances.

Texas doctors who perform abortions risk life in prison and fines of up to $100,000, leaving many women with providers who are unwilling to even discuss terminating a pregnancy.

Amy Pletscher, an assistant Texas attorney general, defended the law as written and called fears of prosecution baseless.

Those bringing the lawsuit “simply do not like Texas’ restrictions on abortion,” Pletscher said. “The purpose of this court is not to legislate.”

The proceedings were expected to continue through Thursday. It is not clear how quickly state District Judge Jessica Mangrum will rule on the women’s request for an injunction.

Sixteen states, including Texas, do not allow abortions when a fatal fetal anomaly is detected, while six do not allow exceptions for the mother’s health, according to an analysis by KFF, a health research organization.

The lawsuit in Texas comes as abortion restrictions elsewhere in the U.S. continue to face challenges. On Monday, an Iowa judge temporarily blocked the state’s new ban on most abortions after about six weeks of pregnancy, just days after Gov. Kim Reynolds signed the measure into law.

The majority of U.S. adults, including those living in states with the strictest limits on abortion, want it to be legal at least through the initial stages of pregnancy, according to a poll released in late June by The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research.

Senators in both parties — including Republican Leader Mitch McConnell — have pushed back on Tuberville’s blockade, but Tuberville is dug in. He says he won’t drop the holds unless majority Democrats allow a vote on the policy.

For now, the fight is at a stalemate. Democrats say a vote on every nominee could tie up the Senate floor for months. And they don’t want to give in to Tuberville’s demands and encourage similar blockades of nominees in the future.

marines Jul 10, 2023

Republican's hold on nominations leaves Marines without Senate-confirmed leader for 1st time in 100 years

Congress Jul 15, 2023

Congress may make it harder for you to see the total cost of your next airline ticket

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer has said that holding up the promotion of military leaders, most of whom have dedicated their lives to protecting the country, “is one of the most abominable and outrageous things I have ever seen in this chamber, witnessed by the fact that no one has ever had the temerity, the gall to do this before.”

Here’s what to know about the clash over Pentagon policy.

Approving military nominations and promotions has long been one of the most bipartisan duties of the Senate. But the Alabama Republican shattered that norm with his blanket hold, which the Pentagon says has already stalled more than 260 nominations of senior officers and could balloon to 650 by the end of the year.

Tuberville, a former college football coach who has closely aligned himself with former President Donald Trump since he was elected in 2020, has showed few signs of letting up.

Democrats have repeatedly gone to the Senate floor to try and call up the nominations. But Tuberville has objected each time.

Tuberville says he won’t drop the holds until there is a vote on the Pentagon policy. But he hasn’t introduced legislation to overturn it and insists that debate on amendments to change the policy wouldn’t count.

Instead, he has proposed a very specific, unusual strategy: Democrats should introduce their own bill on the policy and hold a vote.

Democratic leaders such as Schumer, who support the existing policy, say it’s up to the GOP.

“The onus is on Republican senators to prevail on Senator Tuberville and get him to back off his reckless pursuit,” Schumer said this week.

In the Senate, one senator can hold up nominations or legislation even if the other 99 want it to move forward.

Generally, leaders in the majority party get around this by holding a series of votes to move a measure and dispense of the hold. It just takes some additional time on the Senate floor.

But Tuberville’s blockade is unique because there are hundreds of military nominations and promotions, and Democratic leaders would have to hold roll call votes on every single one of them to get around the hold. It’s a decades-long tradition for the Senate to group military promotions together and approve them by voice vote, avoiding lengthy roll calls.

So Tuberville has put the Senate in a bind. The chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I., said this week that voting on the more than 260 military nominations through the regular procedure would take 27 days with the Senate working “around the clock” or 84 days if the Senate worked eight hours a day.

In addition to hundreds of one-, two- and three- star generals and admirals, the holds delay the confirmation of the Pentagon’s top leaders — who make up the Joint Chiefs of Staff, including the chairman.

Already, the U.S. Marine Corps is without a confirmed leader for the first time in a century. And by law, the current Joint Chiefs chairman, Army Gen. Mark Milley, will step down at the end of September, and the current Army chief will leave his post in early August. The nominees to succeed them have hadhearings, but no votes.

The Pentagon and lawmakers opposed to Tuberville’s actions say the holds create a trickle-down effect that is hurting military readiness, preventing scores of officers from moving to new jobs, either as nominees or staff members. They argue that less experienced leaders are being forced to step in.

Speaking this week about the acting commandant of the U.S. Marine Corps, Gen. Eric Smith, Tuberville says he believes the holds will have “minimal effect” on his ability to lead in an acting capacity.

“There may be a delay in his planning guidance, and yet he cannot move into the commandant’s residence, but there is little doubt about General Smith’s ability to lead effectively,” Tuberville said.

After the Supreme Court overturned the nationwide right to abortion, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin issued new policy last October that he said would ensure all troops have access to reproductive health care.

In a memo, Austin said service members and their families were worried they may not get equal access to health care, including abortions. And as many states began to impose more abortion restrictions, he noted that service members who often must move for various missions or training would be forced to travel further, take more time off work and pay more to access reproductive health care.

The problem, Austin said, would create extraordinary hardship and “will interfere with our ability to recruit, retain, and maintain the readiness of a highly qualified force.”

He ordered the department to allow troops and dependents, consistent with federal law, to take time off and use official travel to get to other states for reproductive care not available locally. That care includes in vitro fertilization and other pregnancy aids that also may not be accessible close by.

The policy does not fund abortions. Under federal law, Defense Department facilities can perform abortions only when the life of the mother is at risk or in cases of rape or incest, and those instances have been extremely rare. According to the department, there were 91 abortions performed in military medical facilities between 2016 and 2021.

The impasse in confirmations fueled sharp debates this week during Senate Armed Services Committee hearings. A parade of lawmakers also took to the Senate floor to complain.

At a hearing this week for Air Force Gen. CQ Brown Jr., Biden’s pick to replace Milley as the next Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Sen. Tim Kaine warned that service members may choose to leave the military if they see their careers blocked.

“I would urge all of my colleagues to turn away from the path that we’re on where we are disrespecting and punishing people because we’re unhappy with policies in the military that these individuals had nothing to do with,” said Kaine, D-Va.

Tuberville has faced opposition from his side of the aisle, as well.

McConnell said in May that he opposes Tuberville’s blockade. And several Republican senators said this week that they were hoping to find a way to persuade the senator to drop the holds.

“I think all of us are concerned — we want to get these key positions filled,” said South Dakota Sen. John Thune, the No. 2 Senate Republican.

In the House, Republicans passed a wide-ranging defense bill on Friday that would reverse the new abortion policy. But Tuberville has said that’s not enough to get him to drop the holds.

Austin called Tuberville on Friday to discuss the holds, shortly after President Joe Biden told reporters that Tuberville is jeopardizing national security and being “ totally irresponsible.”

Through a spokeswoman, Tuberville said he was “grateful” for the call and he would discuss the matter with Austin again next week.

It’s unclear, though, if they can find compromise. Tuberville has said repeatedly that he will keep his hold until there is a vote.

“We need a vote on this policy on the floor,” he said Wednesday. “I don’t know whether it would pass. It may. I don’t care. I just want the American people to have a say-so in this, not the Pentagon.”

The poll was conducted in late June, one year after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, undoing a nationwide right to abortion that had been in place for nearly 50 years. It comes as state lawmakers in Republican-led states have moved to drastically limit abortion access and as GOP presidential candidates wrestle with how to approach the issue.

While the laws have changed over the past year, the poll found that opinions on abortion remain much as they were a year ago: complex, with most people believing abortion should be allowed in some circumstances and not in others. Overall, about two-thirds of Americans say abortion should generally be legal, but only about a quarter say it should always be legal and only about 1 in 10 say it should always be illegal.

By 24 weeks of pregnancy, most Americans think their state should generally not allow abortions.

That’s true for 34-year-old Jaleesha Thomas, of Chicago. “I’d rather the person abort the baby than harm the baby or throw the baby out or anything,” she said in an interview. But she said that around 20 weeks into pregnancy, she thinks abortion should not usually be an option. “When they’re fully developed and the mother doesn’t have any illnesses or anything that would cause the baby or her to pass away, it’s like you’re killing another human,” she said.

Thomas’ state allows abortion until the fetus would be viable, generally considered to be around 24 weeks, and has become a destination for people from neighboring Kentucky, Missouri, Wisconsin and other places with travel bans for abortions.

The poll finds that 1 in 10 Americans say they know someone who has either been unable to get an abortion or who has had to travel to get one in the last year, since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade — and that this is especially common among young people, people of color and those living in states where abortion is banned at all stages of pregnancy.

Nearly half the states now allow abortion until between 20 and 27 weeks but bar it later than that in most cases. Before the end of Roe, almost every state fell in that range. Now, abortion is banned — with varying exceptions — at all stages of pregnancy in 14 states, including much of the South.

The poll found that 73% of all U.S. adults, including 58% of those in states with the strictest bans, believe abortion should be allowed at six weeks of pregnancy. Just one state currently has a ban in effect that kicks in around then. That’s Georgia, where abortion is banned once cardiac activity can be detected — around six weeks and before women often know they’re pregnant. Ohio and South Carolina have similar bans that are not being enforced because of court action, and Florida has one that hasn’t taken effect. Iowa lawmakers late Tuesday passed a bill that would add it to those ranks once it is signed by Republican Gov. Kim Reynolds later this week.

About half of Americans say abortions should be permitted at the 15-week mark, though 55% of those living in the most restrictive states say abortion should be banned by that point.

And by 24 weeks, about two-thirds of Americans, including those who live in states with the fewest restrictions, say it should be barred.

While most GOP-controlled state governments have been pushing for more abortion restrictions, the poll finds that there’s not always support for doing so. Nationally, about 4 in 10 people said it was too difficult to access abortion in their community, compared with about a quarter who think it’s too easy.

Robert Green, an 89-year-old politically independent rancher in Wyoming, where a judge has put on hold a ban on abortion throughout pregnancy, said he’s supported abortion rights since before the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision. “There’s a lot of reasons,” he said. “Not the least of which: The people who don’t want kids and go on and have them — the kids usually suffer for it.”

People in states with the strictest bans were slightly more likely to say abortion was too difficult to access compared with those living in the least restrictive states. Overall, about half of Democrats say it’s too difficult, compared with 22% of Republicans.

And women were more likely to say access was too challenging in their area. For both Republicans and Democrats, there was not much of a gender divide on the topic: About half of both Democratic men and women found it too challenging, and around 2 in 10 GOP men and women did. But nearly half of independent women thought so, compared with about one-third of independent men.

___

The poll of 1,220 adults was conducted June 22-26 using a sample drawn from NORC’s probability-based AmeriSpeak Panel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. population. The margin of sampling error for all respondents is plus or minus 3.9 percentage points.

A pro-abortion rights rally calling for the preservation of and expanded access to the procedure started at Columbus Circle by Union Station and ended at the U.S. Supreme Court. People carried signs that read “mom by choice mom for choice” and “abort government from my uterus.”

Meanwhile, anti-abortion rights activists held the first ever National Celebrate Life Day at the Lincoln Memorial. Activists said the ruling was a victory, and pledged to seek further restrictions and bans across the country.

ROE V. WADE Jun 24, 2023

One year later, the Supreme Court's abortion decision is both scorned and praised

Supreme Court Jun 23, 2023

Roe V. Wade overturned: Impact of decision 1 Year later

ROE V. WADE Jun 23, 2023

As Biden rallies for abortion rights, conservatives a mile away are pushing a 15-week national ban

Former Vice President Mike Pence spoke at the event.

“One year ago today, because of your work and because of your prayers, the Supreme Court of the United States sent Roe v. Wade to the ash heap of history where it belongs and gave America a new beginning for life,” he said.

Vice President Kamala Harris spoke at the Grady Cole Center in Charlotte, North Carolina. 

“And so, over the past 365 days, the women of our nation have suffered under the consequences of these laws, laws that in design and effect have created chaos, confusion and fear, laws that have denied the women of our country care even when their life and health were at risk,” she said. 

In the time since Roe v. Wade was overturned, more than a dozen states have banned abortion outright and others have severely restricted access. The issue is expected to play a critical role in the race for the White House in 2024.

Advocates on both sides marched at rallies Saturday in Washington and across the country to call attention to the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization ruling on June 24, 2022, which upended the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision.

“I’m absolutely livid that people think that they can interfere with medical decisions between a woman and her doctor,” said Lynn Rust, of Silver Springs, Maryland, at a Women’s March rally in Washington.

Anti-abortion groups take the opposite view: “We celebrate one year of momentous progress in the fight for life,” Susan B. Anthony Pro Life America President Marjorie Dannenfelser said in a statement.

Republican National Committee Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel praised the ruling, which was made possible by former President Donald Trump’s adding three conservative justices to the Supreme Court during his term in office.

“The decision has saved countless lives and set America on a positive course after decades of shameful abortion on-demand practices that put us in a category with China and North Korea,” McDaniel said in a statement.

The decision made abortion an unavoidable campaign issue and deepened policy differences between the states.

Most Republican-controlled state have imposed bans , including 14 where laws in effect now block most abortions in every stage of pregnancy, with varying exceptions for the life and health of the women and for pregnancies resulting from rape or incest. Most Democrat-led states have taken steps to protect abortion access, particularly by seeking to protect doctors and others from prosecution for violating other states’ abortion bans.

On Friday, President Joe Biden released a statement criticizing what he called “extreme and dangerous abortion bans that put the health and lives of women in jeopardy.”

Vice President Kamala Harris spoke about the impact of the Dobbs ruling in Charlotte, North Carolina.

“We knew this decision would create a healthcare crisis in America,” she said, pointing to women who were initially denied abortion access even during miscarriages because hospitals were concerned about legal fallout.

The laws restricting abortion “in design and effect have created chaos, confusion and fear,” Harris said.

While there’s far from a universal consensus among voters, public opinion polls have consistently found that the majority oppose the most restrictive bans but also oppose unchecked abortion access at all stages of pregnancy.

Biden has pushed for a national law to reinstate abortion access. Republicans have called for a national ban. This week, former Vice President Mike Pence, who is seeking the 2024 GOP presidential nomination, is calling for his party’s presidential candidates to join him in backing a ban after 15 weeks of pregnancy.

But with Democrats controlling the presidency and U.S. Senate and Republicans holding the House, no federal change is imminent.

Nikki Haley, another GOP presidential candidate and former ambassador to the United Nations, said she backs a federal ban but it doesn’t have enough support to advance. Speaking at the Faith and Freedom Conference in Washington, Haley said both parities should instead look to goals such as limiting abortion later in pregnancy. Only a half-dozen states allow abortion at any point in pregnancy, and abortions after 21 weeks or so are very rare.

“We need to make sure that our country stops demonizing this issue and we humanize this issue,” Haley said. “This is personal for everyone.”

These policies have vast practical implications.

In states with the deepest bans, the number of abortions has plummeted to nearly zero. There have been more abortions in states where access has been maintained — especially those closest to those with bans, as women travel for care they used to be able to get closer to home.

There’s also been a rise in use of networks that distribute abortion pills.

But because of lags and gaps in official reporting — and because some of the pill use goes unreported, the impact on the total number of abortions in the U.S. is not clear.

And while abortions have continued, advocates say there’s an equity problem: Black women and lower-income women especially, they say, are those who were expected to lose access.

“Seeing how it impacts every one in the country, but especially the people who are already at a disadvantage and don’t have that access is really scary,” Larkin O’Gorman, a Washington resident, said at the Women’s March event.

___

Mulvihill reported from Cherry Hill, North Carolina. Associated Press journalists Stephanie Scarbrough and Will Weissert in Washington contributed to this article.

Attorneys for Wyoming failed to show that the ban wouldn’t harm the plaintiffs before their lawsuit is resolved, Teton County Judge Melissa Owens ruled after hearing arguments from both sides. Meanwhile, those plaintiffs “have clearly showed probable success on the merits,” Owens said.

While other states have instituted de facto bans on the medication by broadly prohibiting abortion, only Wyoming has specifically banned abortion pills. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in April that access to one of the two pills, mifepristone, may continue while litigants seek to overturn the Food and Drug Administration’s approval of it.

Wyoming’s pill ban is being challenged by four women, including two obstetricians, and two nonprofit organizations. One of the groups, Wellspring Health Access, opened as the state’s first full-service abortion clinic in years in April following an arson attack in 2022.

They’re are also suing to stop a near-total ban on abortion enacted in Wyoming in March. Owens has suspended that law, too, and combined the two lawsuits.

Because abortion remains legal in Wyoming, banning abortion pills would require women to get more invasive surgical abortions instead, Marci Bramlet, an attorney for the ban opponents told Owens in Thursday’s hearing.

“It effectively tells people you must have open-heart surgery when a stent would do,” Bramlet said.

A state constitutional amendment enacted in 2012 also came into play in court arguments. The amendment passed in response to the Affordable Care Act, former President Barack Obama’s health care law, says Wyoming residents have the right to make their own health care decisions.

Wyoming’s new abortion laws allow exceptions to save life and for cases of rape or incest that are reported to police. But abortion for other reasons isn’t health care under the amendment, Jay Jerde, an attorney for the state, argued.

“It’s not restoring a woman’s body from pain, injury or physical sickness,” Jerde said. “Medical services are involved, but getting an abortion for reasons other than health care, it can’t be a medical decision.”

Pregnancy involves pain and sickness, Owens pointed out. But women don’t get abortions for that reason, countered Jerde.

Attorneys for the plaintiffs later questioned how the state could know the motives of women getting abortions.

Wyoming’s new laws were enacted after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down Roe v. Wade last year. Since then, some 25 million women and teenagers have been subjected to either stricter controls on ending their pregnancies or almost total bans on the procedure.

In central Wyoming, services at Wellspring Health Access include pill abortions — a method for ending pregnancy that is used in more than half of all U.S. abortions, said Julie Burkhart, Wellspring’s president, in a statement.

“Medication abortion is safe, effective, and has been approved by the FDA for more than two decades,” Burkhart said.

Previously only one other clinic in Wyoming — a women’s health center in Jackson, some 250 miles (400 kilometers) away — offered pill abortions.

Wyoming officials didn’t immediately return a request for comment but previously have promised to vigorously defend the legality of the new laws.

In recent years, abortions using two kinds of pills, usually taken days apart, have become the preferred method for ending pregnancy in the U.S., in part because the process offers a less invasive alternative to surgical abortions. Until Wyoming Gov. Mark Gordon signed the legislation outlawing medication abortions, no state had passed a law specifically prohibiting abortion pills, according to the Guttmacher Institute, a research group that supports abortion rights.

However, 13 states enacted blanket abortion bans that included medical abortions and 15 states already had limited access to the pills.

Starting with an abortion ban that was set to take effect last summer, Owens has now blocked three abortion bans signed into law by Gordon, the Republican governor who appointed her.

She serves GOP-dominated Sublette and Fremont counties as well as Teton County, an ultra-wealthy and not-so-Republican area many Wyomingites don’t see as representative of their state.