ReportWire

Tag: Abortion

  • Russia Faces a Shrinking and Aging Population and Tries Restrictive Laws to Combat It

    [ad_1]

    In 1999, a year before he came to power, the number of babies born in Russia plunged to its lowest recorded level. In 2005, Putin said the demographic woes needed to be resolved by maintaining “social and economic stability.”

    In 2019, he said the problem still “haunted” the country.

    As recently as Thursday, he told a Kremlin demographic conference that increasing births was “crucial” for Russia.

    Putin has launched initiatives to encourage people to have more children — from free school meals for large families to awarding Soviet-style “hero-mother” medals to women with 10 or more children.

    “Many of our grandmothers and great-grandmothers had seven, eight, and even more children,” Putin said in 2023. “Let’s preserve and revive these wonderful traditions. Having many children and a large family must become the norm.”

    At first, births in Russia grew with its economic prosperity, from 1.21 million babies born in 1999 to 1.94 million in 2015.

    But those hard-won gains are crumbling against a backdrop of financial uncertainty, the war in Ukraine, an exodus of young men and opposition to immigration.

    Russia’s population has fallen from 147.6 million in 1990 — the year before the USSR collapsed — to 146.1 million this year, according to Russia’s Federal Statistics Service. Since the 2014 illegal annexation of Crimea, it has included the peninsula’s population of about 2 million, as well as births and deaths there, in its data.

    The population also is significantly older. In 1990, 21.1% was 55 or older, government data said. In 2024, that figure was 30%.

    Since the 2015 peak, the number of births has fallen annually, and deaths are now outpacing births. There were only 1.22 million live births last year — marginally above the 1999 low. Demographer Alexei Raksha reported the number of babies born in Russia in February 2025 was the lowest monthly figure in over two centuries.

    Officials believe such values are “a magic wand” for solving demographic problems, said Russian feminist scholar Sasha Talaver.

    In the government’s view, women might be financially independent, but they should be “willing and very excited to take up this additional work of reproduction in the name of patriotism and Russian strength,” she said.


    Harsh demographic history

    In Russia, as in much of the West, shrinking births are usually linked with economic turbulence. Young couples in cramped apartments, unable to buy their own homes or who fear for their jobs, usually have less confidence they can afford raising a child.

    But Russia is saddled with a harsh demographic history.

    About 27 million Soviet citizens died in World War II, diminishing the male population dramatically.

    As the country was beginning to recover, the Soviet Union collapsed, and births tumbled again.

    The number of Russian women in their 20s and early 30s is small, said Jenny Mathers of the University of Aberystwyth in Wales, leaving authorities “desperate to get as many babies as possible out of this much smaller number of women.”

    Although Russia has not said how many troops have been killed in Ukraine, Western estimates have put the dead in the hundreds of thousands. When the war began, many young Russians moved abroad — some for ideological reasons like escaping a crackdown on dissent or to avoid military service.

    “You’ve got a much-diminished pool of potential fathers in a diminished pool of potential mothers,” Mathers said. That is a particular problem for Putin, who has long linked population and national security, she said.

    Some family-friendly initiatives are popular, like cash certificates for parents that can go toward pensions, education or a subsidized mortgage.

    Others are controversial, such as one-time payments of about $1,200 for pregnant teenagers in some regions. Officials say these aim to support vulnerable mothers, but critics say they encourage such pregnancies.

    Still other programs seem mostly symbolic. Since 2022, Russia has created state holidays like Family, Love and Fidelity Day in July, and Pregnant Women’s Day -– celebrated on April 7 and Oct. 7.

    Last year, Russia’s fertility rate — the average number of children born per woman — was 1.4, state media reported. That’s well below the 2.1 replacement rate for the population, and slightly lower than the U.S. figure of 1.6 released by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

    Some regions have laws making it illegal to “encourage abortions,” while national legislation in 2024 banned the promotion of “child-free propaganda.” The wording in such initiatives is often vague, leaving them open to interpretation, but the change was enough to prompt producers of a reality TV hit “16 and Pregnant” to change the show’s name to “Mommy at 16.”

    For many women, the measures make already sensitive conversations even more fraught. A 29-year-old woman who’s decided not to bear children told The Associated Press she sees a gynecologist at a private Moscow clinic, rather than a state one, to avoid intrusive questions.

    “Whether I plan to have children, whether I don’t plan to have children — I don’t get asked about that at all,” she said, speaking on condition of anonymity because she feared repercussions. It’s “a completely different story” at state-run clinics, she said.

    An increasing number of laws limit access to abortion. While the procedure remains legal and widely available, more private clinics no longer offer abortion services. New legislation has also curbed the sale of abortion-inducing pills, a move that also affects some emergency contraceptives.

    Women are encouraged to go to state clinics, where waits are longer and some sites refuse to do abortions on certain days. By the time patients have completed compulsory counseling and mandatory waiting periods of between 48 hours and a week, they risk surpassing the time frame for a legal abortion.

    Abortions have steadily decreased under these laws, although experts say the number of procedures already was falling. Still, there hasn’t been a corresponding increase in births, and activists believe restricting abortion will only harm the health of women and children.

    “The only thing you will get from this is illegal abortions. That means more deaths: more children’s deaths and more women’s deaths,” says Russian journalist and feminist activist Zalina Marshenkulova.

    She sees the new government limits as repression for repression’s sake. “They exist just to ban, to block any voice of freedom,” she told AP.

    Russia could increase its population by allowing more immigrants — something the Kremlin is unlikely to adopt.

    Russian officials have recently fomented anti-migrant sentiment, tracking their movements, clamping down on their employment and impeding their children’s rights to education. Central Asians who have traditionally traveled to Russia for work are looking elsewhere, hoping to avoid growing discrimination and economic uncertainty.

    While the war in Ukraine continues, Moscow can promise financial rewards for would-be parents but not the stability needed for gambling on the future.

    When people lack confidence about their prospects, it’s not a time for having children, Mathers said, adding: “An open-ended major war doesn’t really encourage people to think positively about the future.”

    The 29-year-old woman who chose not to have children agrees.

    “The happiest and healthiest child will only be born in a family with healthy, happy parents,” she said.

    Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

    Photos You Should See – Oct. 2025

    [ad_2]

    Associated Press

    Source link

  • More Anti-Abortion Pregnancy Centers Offer Medical Services as Planned Parenthood Clinics Close

    [ad_1]

    Pregnancy centers in the U.S. that discourage women from getting abortions have been adding more medical services — and could be poised to expand further.

    The expansion — ranging from testing and treatment for sexually transmitted infections to even providing primary medical care — has been unfolding for years. It gained steam after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade three years ago, clearing the way for states to ban abortion.

    The push could get more momentum with Planned Parenthood closing some clinics and considering shuttering others following changes to Medicaid. Planned Parenthood is not just the nation’s largest abortion provider, but also offers cancer screenings, STI testing and treatment, and other reproductive health services.

    “We ultimately want to replace Planned Parenthood with the services we offer,” said Heather Lawless, founder and director of Reliance Center in Lewiston, Idaho. She said about 40% of patients at the anti-abortion center are there for reasons unrelated to pregnancy, including some who use the nurse practitioner as a primary caregiver.

    The changes have frustrated abortion-rights groups, who, in addition to opposing the centers’ anti-abortion messaging, say they lack accountability; refuse to provide birth control; and most offer only limited ultrasounds that cannot be used for diagnosing fetal anomalies because the people conducting them don’t have that training. A growing number also offer unproven abortion-pill reversal treatments.

    Because most of the centers don’t accept insurance, the federal law restricting release of medical information doesn’t apply to them, though some say they follow it anyway. They also don’t have to follow standards required by Medicaid or private insurers, though those offering certain services generally must have medical directors who comply with state licensing requirements.

    “There are really bedrock questions,” said Jennifer McKenna, a senior adviser for Reproductive Health and Freedom Watch, a project funded by liberal policy organizations that researches the pregnancy centers, “about whether this industry has the clinical infrastructure to provide the medical services it’s currently advertising.”


    Post-Roe world opened new opportunities

    Perhaps best known as “crisis pregnancy centers,” these mostly privately funded and religiously affiliated centers were expanding services such as diaper banks ahead of the Supreme Court’s 2022 Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization ruling.

    As abortion bans kicked in, the centers expanded medical, educational and other programs, said Moira Gaul, a scholar at the Charlotte Lozier Institute, the research arm of SBA Pro-Life America. “They are prepared to serve their communities for the long-term,” she said in a statement.

    In Sacramento, California, for instance, Alternatives Pregnancy Center in the last two years has added family practice doctors, a radiologist and a specialist in high-risk pregnancies, along with nurses and medical assistants. Alternatives — an affiliate of Heartbeat International, one of the largest associations of pregnancy centers in the U.S — is some patients’ only health provider.

    When The Associated Press asked to interview a patient who had received only non-pregnancy services, the clinic provided Jessica Rose, a 31-year-old woman who took the rare step of detransitioning after spending seven years living as a man, during which she received hormone therapy and a double mastectomy.

    For the last two years, she’s received all medical care at Alternatives, which has an OB-GYN who specializes in hormone therapy. Few, if any, pregnancy centers advertise that they provide help with detransitioning. Alternatives has treated four similar patients over the past year, though that’s not its main mission, director Heidi Matzke said.

    “APC provided me a space that aligned with my beliefs as well as seeing me as a woman,” Rose said. She said other clinics “were trying to make me think that detransitioning wasn’t what I wanted to do.”


    Pregnancy centers expand as health clinics decline

    As of 2024, more than 2,600 anti-abortion pregnancy centers operated in the U.S., up 87 from 2023, according to the Crisis Pregnancy Center Map, a project led by University of Georgia public health researchers who are concerned about aspects of the centers. According to the Guttmacher Institute, 765 clinics offered abortions last year, down more than 40 from 2023.

    Over the years, pregnancy centers have received a boost in taxpayer funds. Nearly 20 states, largely Republican-led, now funnel millions of public dollars to these organizations. Texas alone sent $70 million to pregnancy centers this fiscal year, while Florida dedicated more than $29 million for its “Pregnancy Support Services Program”

    Planned Parenthood said its affiliates could be forced to close up to 200 clinics.

    Some abortion-rights advocates worry that will mean more health care deserts where the pregnancy centers are the only option for more women.

    Kaitlyn Joshua, a founder of abortion-rights group Abortion in America, lives in Louisiana, where Planned Parenthood closed its clinics in September.

    She’s concerned that women seeking health services at pregnancy centers as a result of those closures won’t get what they need. “Those centers should be regulated. They should be providing information which is accurate,” she said, “rather than just getting a sermon that they didn’t ask for.”

    Thomas Glessner, founder and president of the National Institute of Family and Life Advocates, a network of 1,800 centers, said the centers do have government oversight through their medical directors. “Their criticism,” he said, “comes from a political agenda.”

    In recent years, five Democratic state attorneys general have issued warnings that the centers, which advertise to people seeking abortions, don’t provide them and don’t refer patients to clinics that do. And the Supreme Court has agreed to consider whether a state investigation of an organization that runs centers in New Jersey stifles its free speech.


    Pregnancy centers don’t offer exactly the same services as Planned Parenthood

    Choices Medical Services in Joplin, Missouri, where the Planned Parenthood clinic closed last year, moved from focusing solely on discouraging abortion to a broader sexual health mission about 20 years ago when it began offering STI treatment, said its executive director, Karolyn Schrage.

    The center, funded by donors, works with law enforcement in places where authorities may find pregnant adults, according to Arkansas State Police and Schrage.

    She estimates that more than two-thirds of its work isn’t related to pregnancy.

    Hayley Kelly first encountered Choices volunteers in 2019 at a regular weekly dinner they brought to dancers at the strip club where she worked. Over the years, she went to the center for STI testing. Then in 2023, when she was uninsured and struggling with drugs, she wanted to confirm a pregnancy.

    She anticipated the staff wouldn’t like that she was leaning toward an abortion, but she says they just answered questions. She ended up having that baby and, later, another.

    “It’s amazing place,” Kelly said. “I tell everybody I know, ‘You can go there.’”

    The center, like others, does not provide contraceptives — standard offerings at sexual health clinics that experts say are best practices for public health.

    “Our focus is on sexual risk elimination,” Schrage said, “not just reduction.”

    Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

    Photos You Should See – Oct. 2025

    [ad_2]

    Associated Press

    Source link

  • Newsom bails out Planned Parenthood with $140M to keep 100 clinics open after Trump cuts

    [ad_1]

    NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

    California officials are giving Planned Parenthood $140 million to keep 109 clinics open and offset the financial strain from cuts imposed by Republicans in Washington, Democrat Gov. Gavin Newsom announced.

    Newsom said the move affirms the state’s continued commitment to abortion access for women in the Golden State amid efforts by President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans to shut down Planned Parenthood.

    “California is a reproductive freedom state, and this latest investment continues to show our belief in protecting access to essential health care in times of distress,” Newsom said in a statement on Thursday. “Trump’s efforts to defund Planned Parenthood put all our communities at risk as people seek basic health care from these community providers.”

    State lawmakers will also address the issue when the legislature reconvenes in January.

    APPEALS COURT HEARS MEDICAID FRAUD CASE THAT COULD COST PLANNED PARENTHOOD $1.8 BILLION

    California officials are giving Planned Parenthood $140 million to keep 109 clinics open. (AP/Mark Schiefelbein)

    Planned Parenthood had announced it would eliminate primary care at clinics in Orange and San Bernardino counties starting in December. Five other clinics in the Bay Area, Santa Cruz and Central Valley, also shuttered in recent months over federal efforts to defund the organization.

    Dr. Janet Jacobson, medical director of the Orange and San Bernardino counties clinics, told CalMatters the federal actions are “destroying our primary care program.”

    “It’s inhumane to take away people’s health care,” Jacobson said. “Folks that have Medi-Cal should be able to see the provider of their choice for primary care.”

    Planned Parenthood needs about $27 million a month to operate all its local facilities, Jodi Hicks, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California, told CalMatters.

    “The Planned Parenthood affiliates in California are grateful to Governor Newsom and our allies in the Legislature for taking this necessary step to keep Planned Parenthood health centers open and able to provide critical services as they weather the impacts of the federal defund,” Hicks said in a statement.

    California is the fourth state to allocate public funds to support Planned Parenthood, joining Washington, Colorado and New Mexico. Lawmakers in Oregon and New York are also considering giving public money to the organization.

    DEMOCRATS ESCALATE ANTI-TRUMP LAWFARE BY TARGETING CONGRESS IN PLANNED PARENTHOOD FUNDING FIGHT

    Planned Parenthood sign

    California is the fourth state to allocate public funds to support Planned Parenthood. (REUTERS/Lucas Jackson)

    Republicans in the nation’s capital and across the country have targeted Planned Parenthood over abortion services. Trump’s spending bill signed over the summer prohibited Planned Parenthood from receiving Medicaid money for its services, including abortions, mammograms, pap smears, birth control and sexually transmitted infection testing.

    Facilities in GOP-led states with abortion restrictions have also been forced to cease the procedures following the 2022 Supreme Court decision that overturned Roe V. Wade and returned the power to make laws regarding abortion back to the states.

    Planned Parenthood facilities have been shuttering in various states across the country, including California and New York. Planned Parenthood Mar Monte — which operates 30 health centers along the California coast, Central Valley and Nevada — shuttered five health centers in July after Trump blocked Planned Parenthood’s funding.

    Mar Monte Chief of Staff Andrew Adams said the organization is working on ways to maintain its financial stability. Adams said the closures helped keep services at the organization’s other clinics until the end of the year but that it could be met with a “financial cliff” in the new year.

    PRO-LIFE GROUP ‘ELATED’ AFTER PLANNED PARENTHOOD SHUTTERS HOUSTON FACILITIES: ‘TREMENDOUS VICTORY’

    Planned Parenthood protesters pray

    Republicans in the nation’s capital and across the country have targeted Planned Parenthood over abortion services. (REUTERS/Gaelen Morse)

    “We are planning for an environment where there is no federal funding,” Adams told CalMatters. “What that looks like is having to potentially charge patients some amount of money for services we provide.”

    The organization has claimed that abortions make up only 3% of its services, but pro-life groups contend that the clinics’ closures in states with abortion bans prove that to be false.

    CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

    “If that were true, they wouldn’t be closing all these facilities in pro-life states where you can’t do abortions. So that’s hardly believable anymore in 2025,” 40 Days for Life CEO and founder Shawn Carney told Fox News Digital in August.

    Newsom, California lawmakers and Planned Parenthood have spent much of the year searching for a solution to keep the organization afloat without federal dollars, according to CalMatters. 

    But with a multibillion-dollar state deficit, that has been a challenging goal.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Fairfax County schools deny allegation social worker arranged, funded student abortions – WTOP News

    [ad_1]

    Fairfax County Public Schools is denying allegations made by one of its teachers that a social worker employed by the school system facilitated student abortions.

    Fairfax County Public Schools is denying allegations made by one of its teachers that a social worker employed by the school system facilitated student abortions, and said its investigation has determined the teacher fabricated the accusation, likely as retaliation against the social worker.

    The Northern Virginia school district opened its investigation into the allegations after a teacher at Centreville High School went public with them in August. The teacher alleged that, in 2021, a social worker at Centreville encouraged and helped students get abortions without involving their parents.

    That teacher also appears to have coerced students, or manipulated their statements, to support her allegations against the social worker, according to the school system’s initial investigation. Lawyers for the teacher called the school district’s probe “a thin coating of whitewash over very serious, detailed and documented charges,” in a statement to WTOP.

    The teacher also said the school’s principal at the time, Chad Lehman, knew about the allegations and swept them under the rug. Promptly after the teacher went public in August, Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin directed state police to launch an investigation. His office told WTOP that probe remains ongoing.

    U.S. Sen. Bill Cassidy, chair of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pension Committee, also sent a request to Fairfax County Public Schools requesting more information, as did the Department of Education.

    In its response Friday to those two federal inquiries, the school district said its external investigation is ongoing, and that it had compiled its initial findings and conclusions to comply with Senate and Education Department deadlines for information, Oct. 17.

    Americans United for Life, which describes itself as a pro-life organization and is representing the teacher, said it’s preparing its own response to the Senate and Education Department.

    “And we are confident that Fairfax County will come to regret their decision to rush through this so-called ‘investigation,’” the organization said in its statement to WTOP.

    According to “the facts presently known to FCPS,” the accused social worker “did not encourage, facilitate, or pay for any student abortion,” and former Centreville High School principal Chad Lehman “did not ‘cover up’ any such allegations or related facts; he promptly investigated” the allegations made by the Centreville teacher.

    When Lehman first learned of the teacher’s claims in 2022, years before the teacher went public with them, he looked into them and found they were not supported by facts, according to the school district’s letters to the Senate committee and Education Department.

    In 2023, the school system said the teacher prepared a complaint for Virginia Attorney General Jason Miyares detailing the allegations of school-facilitated abortions, and that Miyares’ office may have known about the accusations a year or more ago and declined to investigate.

    The school system also contends Youngkin himself may have known of the allegations for more than a year before calling for state police to investigate. In a statement to WTOP, Youngkin’s office denies that.

    “The Governor learned of the allegations in August 2025 when they became public and immediately initiated this investigation,” the statement reads.

    ‘Originated as a response to disciplinary measures’

    According to Fairfax County Public Schools’ initial findings, the teacher pushing the allegations faced a complaint in 2022 that she purchased pregnancy tests for a Centreville student, which is in violation of school policies. The school looked into it, and in that investigation, the social worker was a witness. The school eventually determined the teacher violated school district policy.

    In a written report provided by Fairfax County Public Schools regarding the teacher’s pregnancy test controversy, the social worker reported to school officials that the teacher was pressuring a student to say that she did not buy her a pregnancy test, and the student told the teacher she did not want to lie.

    Then, the school system said, the teacher procured handwritten notes from the student to defend herself. In one note, the student writes she got a pregnancy test from a friend.

    The other note reads, in part, “She is very good teacher our friend and also a very good person, she is my best teacher of the school year she has helped me a lot in my studies, I think the other teachers are jealous of her because she has a very good relationship with the students and they love her.”

    According to the school district, school officials questioned whether the teacher coerced or manipulated the student to provide the handwritten notes. The teacher said she did not approach the student for the notes, but rather the student’s guardian came to her. Both the student and her guardian contradicted that claim, the school system said.

    Ultimately, the teacher was cited for unprofessional conduct in the pregnancy test incident, which “incensed” her.

    In an act of apparent retaliation, the school system said in its letter responding to federal inquiries, the teacher began raising the abortion allegations against the social worker and Lehman, the school’s then-principal.

    The teacher “has a documented history of making aggressive complaints against school staff and administrators whom she feels wronged by in some way,” the letter reads.

    In the teacher’s own words, the letter said, her discovery that the social worker “even might have some involvement in facilitating student abortions was a “godsend” because it was “evidence” she could use “against the woman who set me up with a pregnancy test,” the letter continues.

    By her own admission, from this point forward the teacher “actively conducted her own ‘investigation’ in an effort to compile ‘evidence’ against” the social worker, Fairfax County Public Schools said in its letter.

    Centerpiece supporting abortion claims is fake, FCPS says

    At the heart of the teacher’s retaliatory accusations, according to the school district, is a written and signed statement from the student who the teacher maintains got an abortion that was arranged and paid for by the Centreville High social worker.

    The teacher said she got it by confronting the student in November 2022 at the Thai restaurant she worked in. According to the school system’s handwriting analysis, the teacher actually wrote the statement and either coerced the student to sign it or falsified her signature.

    The statement, written in Spanish, says, in part, that the social worker “scheduled the appointment for me at the abortion clinic in Fairfax, paid the costs of that medical procedure, and kept everything quiet without informing my family.”

    According to comments and interviews from the teacher herself cited by the school system, the teacher had no knowledge to support those claims.

    Why now?

    Fairfax County Public Schools, in its letter to federal officials, suggested the promotion of the story years after the accusations were first leveled may be political.

    The teacher began raising the allegations of school-arranged and school-funded abortions in 2022, concerns the school district said Lehman, Centreville’s principal, looked into and dismissed. Lehman did not notify school district leaders, nor was he required to.

    Throughout his inquiry into the teacher’s accusations, Lehman followed up with her, asking if she had more information to share, the school district said, to which the teacher responded she did not.

    At the time of that correspondence, the teacher, by her own account, claimed to have a statement from the student saying the Centreville social worker scheduled and paid for her abortion, according to the school district.

    The teacher did not share that purported statement with Lehman.

    Shortly after Lehman looked into her accusations, the teacher prepared a complaint for Virginia Attorney General Jason Miyares’ office in March 2023. Additionally, in 2022 and 2023, figures active in Republican politics in Virginia, including the Virginia Project, a political action committee, posted on social media hinting at accusations of school-funded abortions.

    Then, in August of this year, the teacher shared the story with a news outlet called W.C. Dispatch. The story breaking the news, “Bolted Doors and Broken Laws,” sits behind a paywall on that website.

    After that story was published, the teacher appeared on television and in several interviews, further spreading the accusations.

    “FCPS finds it very disturbing that so many of the individuals who are now (in the weeks leading up to a hotly contested election) shining a spotlight on these dated (and, our investigation shows, likely false) allegations have known about these same allegations for years. If those individuals believed these serious allegations had merit and thus believed that CHS students were truly at risk … presumably they would have taken action sooner,” the school system’s letter states.

    The teacher remains actively employed as a teacher at Centreville High School, while the social worker and Lehman, now a regional executive principal in the school system, have been placed on administrative leave pending the conclusion of investigations into the abortion allegations.

    Attorneys representing the teacher stand by her accusations in a statement to WTOP.

    “Fairfax County Public Schools’ preliminary response to Senate and U.S. Department of Education investigations into allegations of abortion trafficking made by our client … is just the usual papering-over job by an expensive Washington, D.C. law firm. Fairfax County taxpayers now have what they likely paid hundreds of thousands of dollars, if not millions, for — a thin coating of whitewash over very serious, detailed and documented charges that school personnel enabled minor girls to get abortions without their parents or guardians knowing or consenting,” the statement from Americans United for Life reads.

    “AUL will have a detailed response to the Senate and DOE in the next few days, and we are confident that Fairfax County will come to regret their decision to rush through this so-called ‘investigation.’”

    WTOP will report on that response when it is made available.

    Fairfax County Public Schools’ full letter to the Department of Education, which was sent through legal counsel and describes more details from its investigation, can be found on the school system’s website.

    Get breaking news and daily headlines delivered to your email inbox by signing up here.

    © 2025 WTOP. All Rights Reserved. This website is not intended for users located within the European Economic Area.

    [ad_2]

    Thomas Robertson

    Source link

  • Fact-checking Rick Scott on ACA subsidies and abortion

    [ad_1]

    U.S. Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla., said Democrats have shuttered the federal government over hyper-partisan issues: abortion and immigration.

    “Democrats are shutting down the government and harming American families because they want to waste another trillion of your dollars on liberal priorities like health care for illegal aliens and funding for free abortions,” Scott posted Oct. 2 on X. He reshared a post by anti-abortion nonprofit group Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America.

    Democrats aren’t seeking to fund health care for immigrants in the U.S. illegally. We previously rated that False. Immigrants in the country illegally are largely ineligible for federally funded health care. 

    Scott’s other point, about federal funding for free abortions, is also wrong. Federal law prohibits federal funds for abortions, and Democrats’ Sept. 17 proposal to temporarily extend government funding wouldn’t change this. The discussion is centered around a fight over a longstanding process in some Affordable Care Act plans that separates federal funds from money paid by patients for abortion care coverage.

    The Democratic proposal to temporarily fund the government calls for extending pandemic-era enhanced ACA subsidies that are set to expire at the end of the year. Without congressional action, researchers estimate insurance premiums will rise by more than 114% on average for enrollees who use subsidies, leading to an estimated 3.8 million more people becoming uninsured over the next 10 years.

    Democrats also seek to roll back about $1 trillion in Medicaid cuts in Republicans’ tax and spending bill that President Donald Trump signed into law in July. The Democrats’ legislation would restore access to certain health care programs for some legal immigrants who will lose access under the Republican law.

    Because some state Affordable Care Act insurance plans cover abortion,anti-abortion advocates say the enhanced federal subsidies Democrats support indirectly fund abortion. But the ACA requires that insurers segregate insurance premiums from enrollees so that money for abortion is separated from federal funds.

    “The ACA is very clear in the statute and there is nothing in it that provides ‘free’ abortions using federal dollars,” Alina Salganicoff, a senior vice president and director of the Women’s Health Policy Program at KFF, a health care think tank, told PolitiFact. “Non-federal funds are to be collected by the plans and segregated to be used exclusively to pay for abortions. Federal funds are not used to subsidize tax credits or abortion coverage in any way.”

    PolitiFact contacted Scott’s office but did not hear back.

    Democrats’ proposal doesn’t include funding for free abortions

    Since 1976, the Hyde Amendment has barred using federal funds for abortions — except in cases or rape, incest or to save the life of the pregnant woman —including via Medicaid, Medicare and other federal insurance providers. Congress enacts the amendment annually and it’s attached as a rider to annual appropriations bills to ensure government money doesn’t go toward abortions. The restrictions apply to the subsidies that Democrats seek to extend.

    Anti-abortion groups and some Republican lawmakers have pushed to prohibit subsidies’ use in insurance plans that include abortion coverage, and seek to attach the Hyde Amendment to any ACA subsidy extension. Democrats cite the ACA process to separate taxpayer funds and accuse Republicans of using the debate to expand nationwide restrictions on abortion coverage.

    Section 1303 of the health law stipulates that insurers must deposit insurance premiums for abortion services into a separate account and charge each enrollee $1 per month to pay for covered abortion services.

    Anti-abortion advocates say the money is fungible, meaning that once insurance providers have collected it, they can spend it on anything, including abortion.

    Health policy experts say this argument is flawed. The ACA had the same process in place since its 2010 enactment. Then-President Barack Obama issued an executive order that year affirming that the funding restrictions spelled out in the Hyde Amendment apply to Section 1303.

    Sign up for PolitiFact texts

    In 2014, the first year of the federal health care marketplace, a Government Accountability Office report found mixed compliance for the process to separate the funding, and Health and Human Services issued additional guidance instructing insurers how to comply. Following the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2022 decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision that legalized abortion access, HHS reiterated that ACA coverage of abortion services is subject to state law.

    “This is not something new that Democrats are proposing,” said Katie Keith, a Georgetown University health policy researcher and Affordable Care Act expert. “This framework has been in place since the ACA was enacted, and for more than a decade since the marketplace opened.”

    The 2010 law allows states to bar health care plans from covering abortions, which 25 states have done. Twelve states have laws that require marketplace plans to include abortion coverage, while the remainder neither require nor prohibit abortion coverage in ACA plans.

    Research has also found that the ACA’s required monthly minimum of $1 per member for abortion services “exceeds the cost of abortions that plans are paying for with those funds,” KFF wrote in September. For example, one report found that Maryland ACA plans had $25 million in unspent funds from policyholder payments for abortion coverage.

    “Democrats are not touching abortion coverage at all right now,” Keith said. “They are talking about extending the status quo and preventing a premium spike for millions of Americans. When COVID-era ACA extensions were put in place it had nothing to do with abortion then — and it still has nothing to do with abortion now.”

    Our ruling

    Scott said Democrats shut down the government because they are seeking to use taxpayer money on “health care for illegal aliens and funding for free abortions.”

    This distorts the Democratic shutdown proposal on two fronts. 

    Immigrants who are in the U.S. illegally are largely ineligible for federally funded health care; the Democrats’ proposal would restore access to certain health care programs for some legal immigrants who stand to lose access.

    Democrats also are not seeking funding for free abortions. Federal law prohibits federal funds to be used for abortions except in cases or rape, incest or to save the life of the pregnant woman. The ACA  requires non-federal funds to be collected by insurance plans and segregated into separate accounts to be used exclusively for abortion services.

    We rate Scott’s statement False.

    PolitiFact staff writer Maria Ramirez Uribe contributed to this report.

    RELATED: Republicans falsely tie shutdown to Democrats wanting health care for immigrants illegally in the US

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Abortion Providers Say Missouri’s Attorney General Is Trying to Get Patient Records

    [ad_1]

    Missouri’s Republican attorney general is trying to get the medical records of Planned Parenthood patients who’ve had abortions, officials who oversee clinics in Kansas City and St. Louis said in legal filings.

    The fight over the subpoenas is playing out in a lawsuit filed last year by Planned Parenthood Great Plains, the abortion provider’s affiliate for Kansas City, and Planned Parenthood Great Rivers, the affiliate for St. Louis. Planned Parenthood officials argue that the state’s restrictions violate an amendment to the Missouri Constitution narrowly approved by voters in November to protect abortion rights.

    The Missouri attorney general’s office issued subpoenas starting in late August to two employees of the Kansas City Planned Parenthood affiliate, a physician contracting with it, and two former board members of the St. Louis-area Planned Parenthood affiliate, according to Planned Parenthood court filings last month. One filing seeking to quash the subpoenas said the attorney general demanded patient records, reports on adverse events and communications about patient care, along with clinical protocols, equipment maintenance records, contract documents and records related to compliance with state requirements.

    “Despite the Missouri Attorney General’s blatant attempts to overturn the will of the people, all patients expect and have the right for their medical records to be private,” the two affiliates said in a joint statement Tuesday. “Politicians have no place in the exam room with patients and their medical providers.”

    Attorney General Catherine Hanaway’s office did not immediately respond to an email Tuesday requesting comment. But in a filing in June, the state questioned Planned Parenthood officials’ repeated statements that “abortion rarely involves medical complications” and that state requirements do not improve patients’ health.

    “The purpose of litigation is to ‘ascertain the truth,’” the filing said.

    Abortion policy has been in flux nationally since the 2022 U.S. Supreme Court decision that overturned Roe v. Wade and allowed states to enforce bans. Twelve states now ban abortion at any stage of pregnancy, with limited exception, and women now are more likely to cross state lines for abortions or to obtain them via pills shipped in by prescribers elsewhere.

    A multiyear legal battle has seen Missouri swing back and forth between banning and allowing most abortions. Before last year’s ballot question, the state had a near-total ban.

    In July, Jackson County Circuit Court Judge Jerri Zhang, in Kansas City, blocked enforcement of many of the restrictions while the lawsuit proceeds, including licensing requirements and a 72-hour waiting period for abortions.

    Planned Parenthood clinics are doing procedural abortions in St. Louis, Kansas City and Columbia, home to the University of Missouri’s main campus. Planned Parenthood Great Plains also has two clinics performing abortions on the Kansas side of the Kansas City metropolitan area.

    The Republican-led Legislature wants to return to a ban, with exceptions for pregnancies resulting from rape and incest. It approved a proposed constitutional amendment in May to do that, but the explanation for voters that lawmakers wanted on the ballot in 2026 became tied up in another lawsuit, filed in Cole County Circuit Court the state capital of Jefferson City by a doctor who championed last year’s ballot question.

    Cole County Judge Daniel Green ruled last month that summary originally written by lawmakers was unfair and failed to tell voters they would be repealing last year’s measure. He ordered Missouri’s secretary of state to rewrite it.

    The revision Green approved Tuesday notes that the new measure would “Repeal Article I, section 36, approved in 2024,” but it doesn’t explain what that entails.

    Associated Press journalist David A. Lieb also contributed from Jefferson City, Missouri.

    Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

    Photos You Should See – Sept. 2025

    [ad_2]

    Associated Press

    Source link

  • Republican fury after FDA approves abortion pill: ‘Complete betrayal’

    [ad_1]

    Several Republican figures have spoken out against the Donald Trump administration’s approval of an abortion pill, with former Vice President Mike Pence calling it a “complete betrayal of the pro-life movement.”

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) gave the green light to a new generic version of mifepristone on Tuesday, Drugmaker Evita Solutions announced on its website.

    Pence is one of multiple conservatives who have criticized the move—he called on Trump to reverse the decision.

    Newsweek has contacted the FDA and Evita Solutions, via email, for comment.

    Why It Matters

    The decision has ignited intense backlash from Republican lawmakers and anti-abortion groups, highlighting the enduring divisiveness of abortion policy in the United States.

    It comes amid ongoing legal and political battles over reproductive rights and federal drug approval authority.

    Mifepristone, first approved in 2000, is used in combination with misoprostol for medication abortions, a method accounting for the majority of abortions nationwide.

    The FDA’s action not only stokes political tensions but also underscores the complexities of drug regulation where ideological and medical considerations intersect.

    What People Are Saying

    Pence, who has repeatedly criticized Trump in the aftermath of the January 6 riots, said in a post on X: “The Trump Administration’s approval of a generic chemical abortion drug is a complete betrayal of the pro-life movement that elected President Trump.

    “Earlier this year, I opposed RFK’s nomination because he was unfit for the role and particularly over the concern that he would expand access to abortion, as he has done today.

    “President Trump must immediately reverse this decision. RFK must resign and give President Trump the opportunity to appoint a new Secretary of HHS who will protect the sanctity of life. The fight for life continues.”

    Missouri Republican U.S. Senator Josh Hawley said on X: “This is shocking. FDA has just approved ANOTHER chemical abortion drug, when the evidence shows chemical abortion drugs are dangerous and even deadly for the mother. And of course 100% lethal to the child.

    “FDA had promised to do a top-to-bottom safety review of the chemical abortion drug, but instead they’ve just greenlighted new versions of it for distribution. I have lost confidence in the leadership at FDA.”

    Oklahoma Republican Congressman Josh Brecheen said: “The FDA just approved the generic counterpart for mifepristone, the abortion pill. Abortion is one of the defining evils of our time, and we must acknowledge that it is murder in every form. 1 in 10 women who take the abortion pill face serious complications, at a rate 22x higher than initially reported by the FDA. How can this be considered safe for unborn children or women?”

    Prominent anti-abortion activist Lila Rose said: “UNACCEPTABLE: The FDA just approved another generic of the abortion pill mifepristone. This drug starves babies and harms mothers! The FDA just said it would do a new serious safety study—so why approve a another generic now?  Robert Kennedy Jr. must reverse this decision!”

    Reproductive Freedom for All account posted on X: “The FDA approved a new generic version of mifepristone, a pill that has been safely and effectively used in abortion and miscarriage care for over two decades. Thank you to the civil servants who made this happen.”

    What To Know

    In a letter to Republican attorneys general last month, Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and FDA Commissioner Dr. Marty Makary pledged to conduct a full review of mifepristone, which was approved 25 years ago and has repeatedly been deemed safe and effective by FDA scientists.

    Generic approvals are usually considered routine. After the patent on the original drug expires, multiple drugmakers often enter the market with cheaper versions. To receive approval, companies must demonstrate that their product is chemically identical to the original. In most cases, such reviews are completed within 10 months.

    But Evita’s application took far longer. According to FDA filings, the company submitted its request four years ago. The FDA did not explain the delay.

    What Happens Next

    Approval of Evita’s pill is not expected to significantly alter access to mifepristone. The medication is typically prescribed with misoprostol, a second drug that causes the uterus to contract and empty. Together, the two drugs account for roughly two-thirds of U.S. abortions. Mifepristone blocks the hormone progesterone and softens the cervix to prepare the body for expulsion.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • FDA approves another generic abortion pill, prompting outrage from conservatives

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON — WASHINGTON (AP) — Federal officials have approved another generic version of the abortion pill mifepristone, a regulatory formality that quickly triggered pushback from anti-abortion groups and politicians aligned with the Trump administration.

    Drugmaker Evita Solutions announced on its website that the Food and Drug Administration signed off on its low-cost form of the pill, which is approved to end pregnancies through 10 weeks.

    Students for Life Action, which opposes abortion, in a statement Thursday called the approval “a stain on the Trump presidency and another sign that the deep state at the FDA must go.”

    Republican Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri also criticized the move in a post on X, stating, “I have lost confidence in the leadership at FDA.”

    A spokesperson for the agency said the FDA “has very limited discretion in deciding whether to approve a generic drug,” and added that FDA officials do not “endorse any product.”

    The criticism comes as Republican President Donald Trump’s top health officials, including Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., face growing pressure from abortion opponents to reevaluate mifepristone, which was approved 25 years ago and has repeatedly been deemed safe and effective by FDA scientists.

    In a letter to Republican attorneys general last month, Kennedy and FDA Commissioner Dr. Marty Makary pledged to conduct a full review of the drug’s safety.

    Under Makary and Kennedy, the FDA has repeatedly delayed decisions on vaccines, ultimately narrowing the terms of approval for this year’s COVID-19 shots. That type of political intervention was previously highly unusual at the FDA, where career scientists typically make such decisions.

    The FDA approved the original version of mifepristone in 2000 and gradually eased access over time. That included approving the first generic pill, from drugmaker GenBioPro, in 2019.

    In 2021, the FDA under Democratic President Joe Biden permitted online prescribing and mail-order delivery of the drug, greatly expanding access. Abortion opponents have been fighting the change ever since.

    Approval of generic drugs is typically a rote process at the FDA, with multiple copycat versions usually approved after the patent on the original drug expires. In most cases, generic drugmakers only need to show that their drug matches the ingredients and formula used in the original medication.

    “This is exactly how our system is supposed to work, and it has worked this way for decades,” said Mini Timmaraju of Reproductive Freedom for All. “Career scientists and civil servants at the FDA did their jobs.”

    The FDA typically approves such applications within 10 months. But filing documents posted to the FDA’s website show that Evita Solutions filed its application to market mifepristone four years ago.

    On its website, Evita states that it “believes that all people should have access to safe, affordable, high-quality, effective, and compassionate abortion care.”

    The company said in an email that the drug is expected to launch in January of next year.

    Approval of a second generic is unlikely to affect access to the pill, which is typically taken with another drug, misoprostol. The combination accounts for roughly two-thirds of all U.S. abortions. Mifepristone dilates the cervix and blocks the hormone progesterone, while misoprostol causes the uterus to cramp and contract.

    Access to mifepristone is restricted across large sections of the country because of state laws that ban abortion — including medication abortion — or impose separate restrictions on the drug’s use. Those laws are subject to a number of ongoing lawsuits that are winding their way through the legal system.

    Restrictions on the pill are not supported by most major medical societies, including the American Medical Association.

    ___

    Associated Press writer Christine Fernando in Chicago contributed reporting.

    ___

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

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Pope Leo XIV says those

    [ad_1]

    For the first time since being elected in May, Pope Leo XIV waded into U.S. politics Tuesday, criticizing those who say they’re against abortion but support the death penalty, saying that’s “not really pro-life.” 

    Leo, a Chicago native, was asked late Tuesday about plans by Chicago Cardinal Blase Cupich to give a lifetime achievement award to Illinois Sen. Dick Durbin for his work helping immigrants. The plans drew objection from some conservative U.S. bishops, given the powerful Democratic senator’s support for abortion rights.

    Leo called first of all for respect for both sides, but he also pointed out the seeming contradiction in such debates.

    “Someone who says ‘I’m against abortion but says I am in favor of the death penalty’ is not really pro-life,” Leo told reporters. “Someone who says that ‘I’m against abortion, but I’m in agreement with the inhuman treatment of immigrants in the United States,’ I don’t know if that’s pro-life.”

    Leo, whose words echoed a common Catholic argument often made in discussions about abortion, spoke hours before Cupich announced that Durbin had declined the award.

    “I am not terribly familiar with the particular case. I think it’s important to look at the overall work that a senator has done during, if I’m not mistaken, in 40 years of service in the United States Senate,” the pope told reporters on Tuesday in response to a question from EWTN News.

    In his comments about the Illinois dispute, Leo made no mention of President Trump, whose administration has carried out a surge of immigration enforcement in the Chicago area.

    Still, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt weighed in and disputed concerns raised by Pope Leo about the treatment of immigrants, saying that she “would reject there is inhumane treatment of illegal immigrants in the United States under this administration.”

    The administration, Leavitt said, “is trying to enforce our nation’s laws in the most humane way possible.”

    Church teaching forbids abortion, but it also opposes capital punishment as “inadmissible” under all circumstances. U.S. bishops and the Vatican have strongly called for humane treatment of migrants, citing the Biblical command to “welcome the stranger.”

    Responding to a question in English from the U.S. Catholic broadcaster EWTN News, he said there were many ethical issues that constitute the teaching of the Catholic Church.

    “I don’t know if anyone has all the truth on them but I would ask first and foremost that there be greater respect for one another and that we search together both as human beings, in that case as American citizens or citizens of the state of Illinois, as well as Catholics to say we need to you know really look closely at all of these ethical issues and to find the way forward in this church. Church teaching on each one of those issues is very clear,” he said.

    Cupich was a close adviser to Pope Francis, who strongly upheld church teaching opposing abortion but also criticized the politicizing of the abortion debate by U.S. bishops. Some bishops had called for denying Communion to Catholic politicians who supported abortion rights, including former President Joe Biden.

    Biden met on several occasions with Francis and told reporters in 2021 that Francis had told him to continue receiving Communion. During a visit to Rome that year, he received the sacrament during Mass at a church in Francis’ diocese.

    Durbin was barred from receiving Communion in his home diocese of Springfield in 2004. Springfield Bishop Thomas Paprocki has continued the prohibition and was one of the U.S. bishops who strongly objected to Cupich’s decision to honor the senator. Cupich claims Durbin as a member of the Chicago Archdiocese, where Durbin also has a home.

    In his statement announcing that Durbin would decline the award, Cupich lamented that the polarization in the U.S. has created a situation where U.S. Catholics “find themselves politically homeless” since neither the Republican nor the Democratic party fully encapsulates the breadth of Catholic teaching.

    He defended honoring Durbin for his pro-immigration stance, and said the planned Nov. 3 award ceremony could have been an occasion to engage him and other political leaders with the hope of pressing the church’s view on other issues, including abortion.

    “It could be an invitation to Catholics who tirelessly promote the dignity of the unborn, the elderly, and the sick to extend the circle of protection to immigrants facing in this present moment an existential threat to their lives and the lives of their families,” Cupich wrote.

    Paprocki, for his part, thanked Durbin for declining the award. “I ask that all Catholics continue to pray for our church, our country, and for the human dignity of all people to be respected in all stages of life, including the unborn and immigrants,” Paprocki said in a Facebook post.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Louisiana’s last Planned Parenthood clinic closes

    [ad_1]



    Louisiana’s last Planned Parenthood clinic closes – CBS News










































    Watch CBS News



    The last Planned Parenthood clinic remaining in Louisiana closed its doors on Tuesday. CBS News national reporter Kati Weis has the details.

    [ad_2]
    Source link

  • Former California Senate leader Toni Atkins drops out of 2026 governor’s race

    [ad_1]

    Toni Atkins, a former California Assembly speaker and former president pro tempore of the State Senate, is withdrawing her campaign to become the state’s next governor.She was among the crowded pool of Democrats hoping to take Gov. Gavin Newsom’s place once he terms out in 2026. In California, one can only hold the office of governor for two terms.In a Monday message to her supporters, she said it’s important that California Democrats be united in response to President Donald Trump’s policies.”That’s why it’s with such a heavy heart that I’m stepping aside today as a candidate for governor,” Atkins said. “Despite the strong support we’ve received and all we’ve achieved, there is simply no viable path forward to victory. Though my campaign is ending, I will keep fighting for California’s future.”Atkins is considered an LGBTQ+ trailblazer and was the lead author of a constitutional amendment enshrining the right to abortion in California. Voters approved the measure in 2022. “Toni Atkins’ run in this race is only the latest chapter in a career defined by trustworthy service and lifting up others – a legacy that will continue to shape California for generations to come,” shared the California Legislative LGBTQ Caucus in a statement, in part. “As the first openly LGBTQ+ individual and woman to lead both houses of our State Legislature, and as a proud member of our Caucus, Toni has shattered barriers once thought unbreakable and led with compassion, courage, and conviction. We were proud to support her campaign for governor because it was more than a candidacy – it was a powerful testament to how far our community has come and a beacon for what is possible.”Her withdrawal makes her the second prominent Democrat to drop out of the race, with current Lt. Gov. Eleni Kounalakis announcing her dropped gubernatorial campaign in August.Former U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris spent this past summer mulling a run for governor before ultimately deciding against it.Even with Atkins out, several Democrats are still in the race. They include:Former U.S. House Rep. Katie PorterState Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony ThurmondFormer U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier BecerraFormer Los Angeles Mayor Antonio VillaraigosaCalifornia Democratic Party Vice Chair Betty YeeFormer California Assembly Majority Leader Ian CalderonU.S. Sen. Alex Padilla told KCRA 3’s Ashley Zavala that he is also not ruling out a run for governor. His term ends in 2029.| RELATED | The full list of who’s running for California governorThe two prominent Republicans are Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco and former Fox News commentator Steve Hilton.According to a Berkeley IGS Poll last month, Porter held a small lead as first choice, but nearly twice as many voters were undecided.See more coverage of top California stories here | Download our app | Subscribe to our morning newsletter | Find us on YouTube here and subscribe to our channel

    Toni Atkins, a former California Assembly speaker and former president pro tempore of the State Senate, is withdrawing her campaign to become the state’s next governor.

    She was among the crowded pool of Democrats hoping to take Gov. Gavin Newsom’s place once he terms out in 2026. In California, one can only hold the office of governor for two terms.

    In a Monday message to her supporters, she said it’s important that California Democrats be united in response to President Donald Trump’s policies.

    “That’s why it’s with such a heavy heart that I’m stepping aside today as a candidate for governor,” Atkins said. “Despite the strong support we’ve received and all we’ve achieved, there is simply no viable path forward to victory. Though my campaign is ending, I will keep fighting for California’s future.”

    Atkins is considered an LGBTQ+ trailblazer and was the lead author of a constitutional amendment enshrining the right to abortion in California. Voters approved the measure in 2022.

    “Toni Atkins’ run in this race is only the latest chapter in a career defined by trustworthy service and lifting up others – a legacy that will continue to shape California for generations to come,” shared the California Legislative LGBTQ Caucus in a statement, in part. “As the first openly LGBTQ+ individual and woman to lead both houses of our State Legislature, and as a proud member of our Caucus, Toni has shattered barriers once thought unbreakable and led with compassion, courage, and conviction. We were proud to support her campaign for governor because it was more than a candidacy – it was a powerful testament to how far our community has come and a beacon for what is possible.”

    Her withdrawal makes her the second prominent Democrat to drop out of the race, with current Lt. Gov. Eleni Kounalakis announcing her dropped gubernatorial campaign in August.

    Former U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris spent this past summer mulling a run for governor before ultimately deciding against it.

    Even with Atkins out, several Democrats are still in the race. They include:

    • Former U.S. House Rep. Katie Porter
    • State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond
    • Former U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra
    • Former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa
    • California Democratic Party Vice Chair Betty Yee
    • Former California Assembly Majority Leader Ian Calderon

    U.S. Sen. Alex Padilla told KCRA 3’s Ashley Zavala that he is also not ruling out a run for governor. His term ends in 2029.

    | RELATED | The full list of who’s running for California governor

    The two prominent Republicans are Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco and former Fox News commentator Steve Hilton.

    According to a Berkeley IGS Poll last month, Porter held a small lead as first choice, but nearly twice as many voters were undecided.

    See more coverage of top California stories here | Download our app | Subscribe to our morning newsletter | Find us on YouTube here and subscribe to our channel

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Abortions Appear to Be Decreasing, a Post-Roe First

    [ad_1]

    For many Americans, getting an abortion has become far more difficult since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022. But even in the face of states imposing new restrictions and clinics shutting down, the number of abortions continued to climb each year—until, it seems, this one.

    About 518,940 abortions were provided by clinicians in states without near-total abortion bans in the first six months of 2025—a 5% decrease compared to the same period the year before, according to new research released by the Guttmacher Institute, which studies and supports sexual and reproductive health and rights. The number of people traveling across state lines for an abortion in that time also fell—by about 8%—compared to the same period in 2024.

    The new findings mark a reversal of the trend seen in previous research the Guttmacher Institute has released: past data revealed that the number of abortions provided by clinicians in most of the U.S. jumped up by 11% in 2023, the year after the court’s decision, compared to 2020. In 2024, that number increased just slightly—by less than 1%—compared to the year before. Out-of-state travel that year, though, saw a small decrease compared to 2023.

    While the number of people traveling across state lines for abortions has continued to fall this year, that figure is still “significantly higher” than it was before Roe was overturned, researchers noted.

    Isabel DoCampo, a senior research associate at Guttmacher who worked on the new analysis, suggests that one explanation for the overall decline in the group’s findings could be that the growing use of so-called shield law provisions means that more people in states with near-total bans may be receiving abortion pills in the mail via telehealth, rather than having to travel across state lines.

    DoCampo tells TIME that researchers only analyzed the abortions provided by clinicians in states without near-total bans, so Guttmacher’s estimates don’t include abortion pills sent to states with near-total bans under shield laws, or self-managed abortions. That means, she says, that “we shouldn’t consider these estimates to reflect trends in abortion nationwide.”

    Rather, DoCampo says that the data “highlight that shield laws, I think, are a critical option that people are making use of.” 

    “This is an innovation of the last couple years that I think has been incredibly important, and it’s important that policymakers and advocates continue to protect and expand these provisions because it’s clear that they’ve been incredibly important to the abortion access landscape in the U.S.,” she continues.

    Read More: What Are Abortion Shield Laws?

    Another explanation for the trend could be the increasing burden of traveling across state lines to access care, which DoCampo says points to “the need for policymakers to address some of these financial strains.”

    DoCampo also points out that there’s variation in the data between states.

    The declines in the number of abortions provided were largest in states that implemented a ban on abortion after six weeks of pregnancy in 2024, and in states that bordered those with near-total bans. In Florida, for instance, there were 27% fewer abortions provided by clinicians in the first six months of 2025 compared to the same period the year before. Florida implemented a six-week ban in 2024; before that, the state had a 15-week ban.

    Illinois, which DoCampo says is a major destination for people traveling from other states to access abortion care, has seen a significant decline in the number of out-of-state travelers so far this year. And that drop accounted for nearly three-quarters of the overall decrease in the number of abortions provided in the state. “Declining travel is the primary source of the decline in caseloads in Illinois,” she says.

    Meanwhile in New York, the number of abortions provided by clinicians in the state declined by roughly 5%, but the number of people traveling to the state to access care increased by about 51%. DoCampo says that was likely because there were more people traveling from Florida to New York, given Florida’s new restrictions on abortion.

    Overall, however, DoCampo says the research indicates a reversing trend from previous years, when the number of abortions being provided was rising.

    Diana Greene Foster—a professor at the University of California, San Francisco who was not affiliated with Guttmacher’s research—agrees that the apparent overall decline in abortions provided so far this year could be due to people accessing care under shield laws, which the data don’t capture. But she says she is worried that some people may not be able to access pills via shield laws or travel out of state to get care.

    “A decrease, to me, just raises the concern that there could be people who want abortions who don’t get them,” Foster says. Foster conducted her own yearslong research project that found that people who were denied abortions experienced worse economic and health outcomes than those who did receive care.

    “My big concern is whether people who need to travel are able to travel,” she says. “We don’t know from this data that they’re not, but it is a concerning possibility.”

    [ad_2]

    Chantelle Lee

    Source link

  • Louisiana issues a warrant to arrest California doctor accused of mailing abortion pills

    [ad_1]

    BATON ROUGE, La. — Louisiana is pursuing a criminal case against another out-of-state doctor accused of mailing abortion pills to a patient in the state, court documents filed this month revealed.

    A warrant for the arrest of a California doctor is a rare charge of violating one of the state abortion bans that has taken effect since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022 and allowed enforcement.

    It represents an additional front in a growing legal battle between liberal and conservative states over prescribing abortion medications via telehealth and mailing them to patients.

    Pills are the most common way abortions are accessed in the U.S., and are a major reason that, despite the bans, abortion numbers rose last year, according to a report.

    Louisiana said in a court case filed Sept. 19 that it had issued a warrant for a California-based doctor who it says provided pills to a Louisiana woman in 2023.

    Both the woman, Rosalie Markezich, and the state attorney’s general, are seeking to be part of a lawsuit that seeks to order drug regulators to bar telehealth prescriptions to mifepristone, one of the two drugs usually used in combination for medication abortions.

    In court filings, Markezich says her boyfriend at the time used her email address to order drugs from Dr. Remy Coeytaux, a California physician, and sent her $150, which she forwarded to Coeytaux. She said she had no other contact with the doctor.

    She said she did not want to take the pills but felt forced to and said in the filing that “the trauma of my chemical abortion still haunts me” and that it would not have happened if telehealth prescriptions to the drug were off limits.

    The accusation builds on a position taken by anti-abortion groups: That allowing abortion pills to be prescribed by phone or video call and filled by mail opens the door to women being coerced to take them.

    “Rosalie is bravely representing many woman who are victimized by the illegal, immoral, and unethical conduct of these drug dealers,” Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill said in a statement.

    Murrill’s office did not immediately answer questions about what charges Coeytaux faces, or when the warrant was issued. But under the state’s ban on abortions at all stages of pregnancy, physicians convicted of providing abortion face up to 15 years in prison and $200,000 in fines.

    Coeytaux is also the target of a lawsuit filed in July in federal court by a Texas man who says the doctor illegally provided his girlfriend with abortion pills.

    Coeytaux did not immediately respond to emails or a phone message.

    The combination of a Louisiana criminal case and a Texas civil case over abortion pills is also playing out surrounding a New York doctor, Margaret Carpenter. New York authorities are refusing to extradite Dr. Carpenter to Louisiana or to enforce for Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton the $100,000 civil judgment against her.

    In the Louisiana case, officials said a pregnant minor’s mother requested the abortion medication online and directed her daughter to take them. The mother was arrested, pleaded not guilty and was released on bond.

    New York officials cite a law there that seeks to protect medical providers who prescribe abortion medications to patients in states with abortion bans — or where such prescriptions by telehealth violate the law.

    New York and California are among the eight states that have shield laws with such provisions, according to a tally by the Guttmacher Institute, a research organization that supports abortion rights.

    The legal filings that revealed the Louisiana charge against Coeytaux are part of an effort for Louisiana, along with Florida and Texas, to join a lawsuit filed last year by the Republican attorneys general for Idaho, Kansas and Missouri to roll back federal approvals for mifepristone.

    This year, both Louisiana and Texas have adopted laws to target out-of-state providers of abortion pills.

    The Louisiana law lets patients who receive abortions sue providers and others. The Texas law goes further and allows anyone to sue those who prescribe such pills in the state.

    Both Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Marty Makary have said they are conducting a full review of mifepristone’s safety and effectiveness.

    Medication abortion has been available in the U.S. since 2000, when the Food and Drug Administration approved the use of mifepristone.

    ___

    Mulvihill reported from Cherry Hill, New Jersey.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Education Department launches investigation into Fairfax Co. schools over abortion claims – WTOP News

    [ad_1]

    The U.S. Department of Education is launching an investigation into Fairfax County Public Schools over allegations that a school social worker scheduled an abortion appointment for a student and didn’t tell the student’s parents.

    The U.S. Department of Education is launching an investigation in Virginia’s largest school division over allegations a school social worker scheduled an abortion appointment for a student and didn’t tell the student’s parents.

    In a news release, the agency said it has initiated enforcement action against Fairfax County Public Schools and is seeking additional information by mid-October. If the school system doesn’t provide it, they could risk losing federal funding, the agency said.

    The step comes weeks after reports that a Centreville High School social worker allegedly scheduled an abortion for a student during the 2021-22 school year, paid the clinic fee and didn’t tell the student’s parents. The release said the social worker reportedly pressured a second student into having an abortion.

    The action, the Education Department said, could violate the Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment. That amendment requires schools to tell parents about invasive physical examinations and gives parents the chance to opt their child out of them.

    Fairfax County Public Schools emailed a statement to WTOP in response to the Education Department’s announcement of its investigation.

    FCPS has received the latest Department of Education (DOE) letter requesting information, and welcomes the opportunity to answer the DOE’s questions, based on our ongoing review of these 2021 allegations. We want to reiterate that such conduct would be completely unacceptable in Fairfax County Public Schools. Although there is also an ongoing state police investigation, we are committed to cooperating, to the fullest extent possible, with the DOE’s inquiry. FCPS remains focused on our commitment to academic excellence and opportunity for each and every student in a safe and welcoming environment.

    The announcement comes as the school system is also engaged in a legal battle with the federal agency over bathroom policies.

    “It shocks the conscience to learn that school personnel in Fairfax have allegedly exploited their positions of trust to push abortion services on students without parental knowledge or consent,” said Candice Jackson, the Education Department’s acting general counsel.

    “Children do not belong to the government — decisions touching deeply held values should be made within loving families. It is both morally unconscionable and patently illegal for school officials to keep parents in the dark about such intimate, life-altering procedures pertaining to their children,” Jackson said.

    The department is requesting a specific set of information by Oct. 17. The request includes the county’s notice to parents telling them about their rights under the Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment, and a statement indicating whether federal funds were used in connection with sensitive medical services, including abortion-related procedures.

    Separately, the federal agency had threatened to withhold funding to five Northern Virginia school systems, including Fairfax County, if they didn’t change their bathroom policies. The department said policies that allow students to use intimate facilities based on gender identity violate Title IX.

    Several of those school districts have taken legal action to prevent funds from being frozen.

    Get breaking news and daily headlines delivered to your email inbox by signing up here.

    © 2025 WTOP. All Rights Reserved. This website is not intended for users located within the European Economic Area.

    [ad_2]

    Scott Gelman

    Source link

  • Kennedy says FDA is reviewing safety of abortion pill mifepristone

    [ad_1]

    The Food and Drug Administration is reviewing the safety of the abortion pill mifepristone, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said in a recent letter to Republican state attorneys general. 

    Conservatives and anti-abortion groups have criticized the drug, particularly after the Biden administration in 2023 made it possible for women to receive mifepristone via telehealth and by mail. The majority of women who terminate pregnancies do so through medication abortions. 

    Republican attorneys general had written to Kennedy on the matter in July, and in response, Kennedy said the FDA is taking a look at the drug’s Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy. Kennedy in June asked FDA Commissioner Martin Makary to “review the latest data” on the drug, an FDA spokesperson confirmed at the time. The spokesperson did not respond to further questions about when the review would start or what specifically it was reviewing about the drug. 

    In their Sept. 19 letter to the states, Kennedy and Makary wrote, “HHS — through the FDA — is conducting its own review of the evidence, including real-world outcomes and evidence, relating to the safety and efficacy of the drug.” 

    “Recent studies — such as the study by the Ethics and Public Policy Center (EPPC), which you highlighted in your letter — indicate potential dangers that may attend offering mifepristone without sufficient medical support or supervision,” the letter continued. “FDA’s own data collected between 2000 to 2012 indicated 2,740 adverse events, including 416 events involving blood loss requiring transfusions. Since then, safeguards for women regarding the administration of mifepristone have been significantly reduced.”

    According to EPPC, its study found nearly 11% of women “experience sepsis, infection, hemorrhaging, or another serious adverse event within 45 days following a mifepristone abortion,” but CBS News medical contributor Dr. Celine Gounder told “CBS Evening News,” “Other data sources show the rate of serious complications to be much lower, at less than 1 in 200.”

    The EPPC study cited by Kennedy and lawmakers like Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri, is one that says it focuses on “applying the Judeo-Christian moral tradition” to public policy. 

    Asked whether the review could lead to a ban on mifepristone, Gounder suggested it would be difficult for the FDA to withdraw approval, an extraordinary step that would quickly draw legal challenges, but said depending on what the safety review finds, it could make access more difficult, limiting the drug’s availability through telehealth or by mail, or restricting the ability to prescribe it to doctors, rather than physician assistants or nurses who are also currently able to prescribe it.

    Kennedy and Makary did not say when their review would be completed, but told the states, “We will keep you informed as the FDA’s review of mifepristone progresses.”

    Advocates of access to the abortion pill insist it’s safe.

    “More than 100 studies confirm mifepristone’s exceptional safety record,” the American Civil Liberties Union said in a statement in response to the mifepristone safety review. “Today, medication abortion accounts for nearly two-thirds of abortions in the U.S, and the nation’s leading medical associations now stress mifepristone’s importance not only for abortion but for miscarriage care as well.”

    Mifepristone is approved to terminate a pregnancy through 10 weeks of gestation. It was first approved by the FDA in 2000, and has, according to the ACLU, been used by more than 7.5 million women since then. 

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Republican U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany enters Wisconsin’s open gubernatorial race

    [ad_1]

    A loyalist of Donald Trump who represents a broad swath of Wisconsin’s rural north woods in Congress entered the governor’s race in the battleground state Tuesday, shaking up the Republican primary. 

    U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany becomes the front-runner over the two other announced Republican candidates who have less name recognition and support from key conservative donors.

    The governor’s race is open for the first time in 16 years after Democratic Gov. Tony Evers decided against seeking a third term. There is no clear frontrunner among the numerous Democrats who are running, and Evers hasn’t endorsed anyone.

    President Donald Trump has not endorsed anyone, which will be key in the August GOP primary. Tiffany said earlier this month, after reports that Trump declined to immediately endorse him, “I’m not worried about endorsements. I think we focus too much time chasing endorsements.”

    Another GOP candidate, businessman Bill Berrien, has faced fierce criticism on conservative talk radio after he backed former United Nations Ambassador Nikki Haley in the 2024 primary and said in August 2020 that he hadn’t decided whether to support Trump.

    The third Republican in the race, Washington County Executive Josh Schoemann, has also tried to court Trump voters. He represents a suburban Milwaukee county that Trump won with 67% of the vote in 2024.

    “I have the experience both in the private sector and the public sector to be able to work from Day One,” Tiffany said in an interview on “The Dan O’Donnell Show” announcing his candidacy.

    “I give us the best chance to win in 2026,” he said, promising to make the governor’s race one of the most competitive in the country by raising up to $40 million himself to attract additional outside spending.

    Reacting to Tiffany’s announcement, Schoemann said he looked forward to a primary “focused on ideas and winning back the governor’s office.”

    Even if he lands a Trump endorsement, Tiffany faces hurdles. In the past 36 years, gubernatorial candidates who were the same party as the president in a midterm election have lost every time, except for Evers in 2022.

    Tiffany has cruised to victory in the vast 7th Congressional District, which covers nearly 19,000 square miles encompassing all or part of 20 counties. Tiffany won a special election in 2020 after the resignation of Sean Duffy, who is now Trump’s transportation secretary. Tiffany won that race by 14 points and has won reelection by more than 20 points three times.

    But candidates from deep-red rural northern Wisconsin have struggled to win statewide elections, largely because of the huge number of Democratic voters in the state’s two largest cities, Milwaukee and Madison.

    Prior to being elected to Congress, Tiffany served just over seven years in the state Legislature. During his tenure, he was a close ally of then-Gov. Scott Walker and voted to pass a law that effectively ended collective bargaining for most public workers.

    Tiffany also voted in favor of legalizing concealed carry and angered environmentalists by trying to repeal a state mining moratorium to clear the way for an open-pit mine in northern Wisconsin.

    In Congress, Tiffany has upset animal welfare activists with his push to take the gray wolf off the endangered species list, which would open the door to wolf hunting seasons.

    In 2020, Tiffany voted against accepting the Electoral College votes from Arizona and Pennsylvania as part of an effort to overturn Democrat Joe Biden’s win. He was one of just 14 Republican House members in 2021 who voted against making Juneteenth a national holiday.

    Wisconsin Democratic Party Chairman Devin Remiker branded Tiffany as “Tariff Lover Tom Tiffany,” highlighting his support for Trump’s tariffs, his push at the federal level to ban abortions around six weeks of pregnancy.

    “We’re going to show Wisconsinites what a fraud he is and defeat him next November,” Remiker said.

    When asked about his abortion stance Tuesday, Tiffany said he stood by the current Wisconsin law that bans abortions after about five months of pregnancy. He also reiterated his support for Trump’s tariffs.

    Tiffany promised as governor to freeze property taxes, lower income taxes, improve schools, bolster job creation, overhaul the state Department of Natural Resources and protect farmland from foreign ownership.

    Tiffany, 67, was born on a dairy farm and ran a tourist boat business for 20 years. He has played up his rural Wisconsin roots in past campaigns, which included ads featuring his elderly mother and one in which he slings cow manure.

    The most prominent Democratic candidates for governor are Lt. Gov. Sara Rodriguez; Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley; state Sen. Kelda Roys; and state Rep. Francesca Hong. Others considering getting in include Attorney General Josh Kaul, former Lt. Gov. Mandela Barnes and former state economic development director Missy Hughes.

    [ad_2]

    CBS Minnesota

    Source link

  • Missouri judge strikes down ballot summary for anti-abortion measure backed by Republican lawmakers

    [ad_1]

    JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. — A Missouri judge has struck down a ballot summary for an anti-abortion amendment backed by Republican state lawmakers while concluding that it presented an unfair and insufficient description to voters.

    Cole County Circuit Judge Daniel Green ruled Friday that the ballot summary must be rewritten, but he rejected a request by abortion-rights advocates to block the proposed constitutional amendment from going to voters.

    The judge said the summary prepared by Republican lawmakers failed to inform voters that the new measure would repeal an abortion-rights amendment adopted by voters last year. He directed the secretary of state’s office to write a new summary.

    The ruling marks the latest in a series of twists and turns in Missouri’s abortion policies over the past three years.

    When the U.S. Supreme Court ended a nationwide right to abortion by overturning Roe v. Wade in 2022, that triggered a Missouri law to take effect banning abortions “except in cases of medical emergency.” But abortion-rights activists then gathered initiative petition signatures to put their own measure on the ballot.

    Last November, Missouri voters narrowly approved a constitutional amendment guaranteeing a right to abortion until fetal viability, generally considered sometime past 21 weeks of pregnancy. That measure, known as Amendment 3, also allows later abortions to protect the life or health of pregnant women and creates a “fundamental right to reproductive freedom” that includes birth control, prenatal and postpartum care and “respectful birthing conditions.”

    In May, the Republican-led Legislature shut down Democratic opposition and approved a new referendum that would repeal Amendment 3 and instead allow abortions only for a medical emergency or fetal anomaly, or in cases of rape or incest up to 12 weeks of pregnancy. That proposed amendment also would prohibit gender transition surgeries, hormone treatments and puberty blockers for minors, which already are barred under state law.

    Abortion-rights advocates had argued in a lawsuit that the entire measure should be stricken, alleging that the combination of abortion and transgender policies violated a constitutional requirement that amendments contain only one subject. But Green agreed with Republican lawmakers that both topics fit under the measure’s title of “reproductive health care.”

    The court order provided both sides an opportunity to claim victory.

    Missouri Attorney General Catherine Hanaway’s office said in a statement that the court upheld “the central constitutional issues.”

    Tori Schafer, director of policy and campaigns at the ACLU of Missouri, said abortion-rights advocates are “pleased that the judge saw through the legislature’s deceitful language” in the ballot summary.

    Both the attorney general’s office and Republican state Rep. Brian Seitz, who championed the latest measure, said they are confident in Republican Secretary of State Denny Hoskins’ ability to revise the ballot summary.

    If it’s a simple wording change, “I think we would be fine with that, because we do want the Missouri voters to know what they are voting on,” Seitz said Friday.

    The proposed amendment will appear on the November 2026 ballot, unless Republican Gov. Mike Kehoe schedules the vote for sooner. The new measure is slated to be listed as Amendment 3 — the same number as the original abortion amendment.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Planned Parenthood’s Medicaid funding can be blocked for now, appeals court rules

    [ad_1]

    Boston — A U.S. appeals court panel on Thursday allowed President Donald Trump’s administration to block Medicaid funds to Planned Parenthood while legal challenges continue.

    A federal judge in July ruled Planned Parenthood clinics nationwide must continue to be reimbursed with Medicaid funding as the nation’s largest abortion provider fights the administration’s efforts to defund the organization in his signature tax legislation.

    Medicaid is a government health care program that serves millions of low-income and disabled Americans. Nearly half of Planned Parenthood’s patients rely on Medicaid.

    A provision in Mr. Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” instructed the federal government to end Medicaid payments for one year to abortion providers that received more than $800,000 from Medicaid in 2023, even those like Planned Parenthood that also offer medical services like contraception, pregnancy tests and STD testing.

    Federal Medicaid dollars already can’t be used to cover abortions except in cases of rape, incest or risk to a mother’s life. But Planned Parenthood argues the provision in the tax bill would make it harder for patients to access the non-abortion services it provides.  

    Planned Parenthood Federation of America and its member organizations in Massachusetts and Utah filed a lawsuit in July against Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

    “While the Trump administration wants to rip away reproductive freedom, we’re here to say loud and clear: We will not back down,” Dominique Lee, President and CEO of Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts said in a statement. “This is not over.”

    The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services didn’t immediately respond to an online request for comment.

    Planned Parenthood said Thursday’s ruling means more than 1.1 million patients can’t use their Medicaid insurance at its health centers. That also puts as many as 200 of those health centers at risk of closure, Planned Parenthood said in a statement.

    Planned Parenthood says it’s the nation’s leading provider and advocate of affordable sexual and reproductive health care, as well as the nation’s largest provider of sex education.

    In response to July’s ruling, a White House official said, “The Trump Administration is ending the forced use of Federal taxpayer dollars to fund or promote elective abortion – a commonsense position that the overwhelming majority of Americans agree with.”

    Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, which opposes abortion, criticized the lawsuit and argued Mr. Trump’s domestic policy bill cut off funding to the “abortion industry.”

    contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • The Explosive Lawsuit Challenging a Right-Wing Abortion-Pill Story

    [ad_1]

    Photo: Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images

    Last month, an anti-abortion activist named Jana Pinson gave explosive testimony before a Texas Senate committee in support of HB7, a law that would vastly expand the state’s bounty-hunter abortion law, allowing lawsuits against anyone who facilitates a Texan getting abortion pills, including manufacturers, for up to $100,000. She described a lawsuit filed that very day by Liana Davis against Christopher Cooprider, accusing him of smuggling abortion pills he ordered online into Davis’s hot chocolate, terminating her pregnancy.

    The case soon made international headlines for both its sordid details and its political valences. Like other red states that outlawed abortion as soon as the Supreme Court let them, Texas has been unable to stop tens of thousands of abortion pills — as many as 12,000 a month, according to the Society of Family Planning — from being mailed by providers in blue states, where they enjoy protection under “shield laws.” (Davis also sued Aid Access, a prominent provider of abortion pills to places where they’re illegal.) Attorney General Ken Paxton promptly issued cease-and-desist letters to shield providers, citing the Davis case. Meanwhile, the state senate passed HB7, and it now awaits the governor’s signature.

    But a countersuit filed Thursday by Cooprider claims the sensationalistic drugging never happened. He says Davis had a spontaneous miscarriage, which he blames on her own conduct, and that she vengefully framed him for a forced abortion. Cooprider is seeking an eyebrow-raising amount in damages — over $1 billion.

    “I’m not here to castigate the pro-life position. I consider myself a pro-life individual, but we don’t do political advocacy by criminal allegations that are not true, and that’s disgusting,” Cooprider’s attorney, Mikal Watts, told me Thursday. “They used this situation to pass a law that, if it’s based on this case, was passed based on a lie.”

    Even as initially presented, the case raised questions. Cooprider wasn’t criminally charged, even though Texas prosecutors have brought at least two other cases against men accused of similar crimes — one of them for capital murder, which carries the death penalty. A second man was sentenced to 180 days in jail last year after pleading guilty to giving his wife abortion pills, though her pregnancy continued.

    Davis did go to the cops in Corpus Christi, where she and Cooprider were neighbors, but they declined to bring charges. When reporters asked why, the police issued a long statement, saying the case had been assigned to a “highly experienced family violence detective” who had “conducted an extremely thorough investigation into the allegation, including an examination of the existing evidence and medical records, and interviews with the complainant, accused, witnesses, hospital medical staff, the complainant’s OBGYN, and the Nueces County Medical Examiner.” Along with the district attorney, the department said, they “concluded that the elements of a crime could not be established, and the investigation was subsequently closed as unfounded.” Unusually, the department added that it “highly encourages any media outlet requesting further information regarding this case to file an open records request through the Police Department Open Records Unit,” though when I filed one, it was declined on the basis that the information would be “highly intimate or embarrassing” and “not of legitimate concern to the public.”

    Even in Davis’s filing, there are a few hints of uncertainty about the pregnancy’s viability. She includes text messages that show that weeks before the hot-chocolate incident, both Cooprider and Davis expressed doubts as to whether the fetus was still alive.

    Cooprider’s 99-page lawsuit says that Davis faked a first pregnancy, then tricked Cooprider into having sex with her when she was ovulating, telling him it would help expel the remains of a miscarriage for a nonexistent pregnancy. It alleges that Davis’s own negligence was a “proximate cause of the death of her unborn baby” and accuses her of not “properly” treating a sexually transmitted infection, causing fevers that can trigger miscarriage; of consuming alcohol, Red Bull, and medications contraindicated for pregnancy; and of ignoring cramping while staying in extreme heat with her kids, which is associated with greater miscarriage risk.

    Cooprider’s lawsuit also accuses Davis of erratic behavior, including, a month before the hot-chocolate incident, standing outside his house and “loudly screaming at him, threatening that she would charge Cooprider with sexual assault if he didn’t speak to her.” Cooprider includes a transcript of a call he says he made to the Corpus Christi police department in which he says Davis was threatening him and had taken abortion pills for a pregnancy he now says didn’t exist.

    Davis’s lawyer, Watts, suggested that Jonathan Mitchell, probably the best-known anti-abortion attorney in America and the father of the original Texas bounty-hunter law, knew that Davis’s case had major holes in it and pressed on even after the police concluded the claims were unfounded.

    “There’s Rule 11 that you have to do a reasonable investigation before you can sign your name to a federal court plea,” says Watts, a well-known torts lawyer in San Antonio who was acquitted in 2016 of fraud in a case where he represented himself. “I’m not here to suggest that that rule has been violated yet, although I may be suggesting after we do some digging.”

    Mitchell didn’t respond to a request for comment but told Autonomy News, “These are abject lies and we will disprove every one of them in court. Cooprider is guilty as sin and will be held to account for what he did, both in this civil suit and in the upcoming criminal proceedings.” It’s not clear what criminal proceedings he’s referring to.

    [ad_2]

    Irin Carmon

    Source link

  • Justice Amy Coney Barrett on same-sex marriage and abortion

    [ad_1]

    Justice Amy Coney Barrett tells CBS News’ Norah O’Donnell the Supreme Court should not “be imposing its own values on the American people.” The statement comes as part of her first television interview since joining the high court in 2020, ahead of the release of her new book, “Listening to the Law: Reflections on the Court and Constitution.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link