ReportWire

Tag: Abortion

  • Louisiana Republicans Want to Make It Harder to Obtain a Medication That Stops Postpartum Hemorrhages

    Louisiana Republicans Want to Make It Harder to Obtain a Medication That Stops Postpartum Hemorrhages

    [ad_1]

    Antiabortion Republicans talk a big game about caring about the sanctity of life, but as they’ve made abundantly clear, the only thing they care about is controlling women’s bodies—and in fact, could not give less of a f–k about pregnant people or the babies they want to force people to have. We know this because of:

    Oh, and now we also know it because lawmakers in Louisiana—home of one of the most extreme abortion bans in the country*—are so zealous about eradicating abortion that they’re proposing legislation that would categorize mifepristone and misoprostol as controlled dangerous substances on par with opioids and other highly addictive prescription drugs.

    Per The Washington Post:

    The amendment would list mifepristone and misoprostol under the state’s Uniform Controlled Dangerous Substances Act…It elicited a strong reaction from more than 240 Louisiana doctors, who called it “not scientifically based.”

    The pending language appears to open yet another front in the country’s bitter battle over if and how women can obtain an abortion. Attempts to curtail medication abortions—which now constitute more than half of all abortions in the United States—are part of legislative agendas not just in deep-red Louisiana but in many Republican-controlled statehouses. And in March, the US Supreme Court heard arguments in a case brought against the Food and Drug Administration by a group of antiabortion doctors seeking to limit access to mifepristone.

    The legislation was sponsored by Republican state senator Thomas Pressly, whose sister testified that her then husband spiked her drink with an abortion drug, which caused her to have “intense cramping.” (Doctors were able to save the pregnancy and Pressly’s former brother-in-law was sentenced to 180 days in jail; the bill would carry a sentence of up to 10 years in prison and a $75,000 fine.)

    Obviously, no one disagrees with the fact that what happened to Pressly’s sister was horrific. But medical professionals do not think it should lead to laws that will curtail the ability of people who want to have abortions being able to do so, or classify a medication as a controlled substance that does much more than induce abortions. “Adding a safe, medically indicated drug for miscarriage management … creates the false perception that these are dangerous drugs that require additional regulation,” a group of Louisiana doctors wrote to Pressly. Crucially, the doctors noted that misoprostol is also used to prevent gastrointestinal ulcers and to safely help induce labor in people who are ready to give birth. As the Post notes, misoprostol is also used after someone has a miscarriage (when they body does not pass the tissue on its own) and “to help stop postpartum hemorrhage, one of the leading causes of maternal mortality in the state.”

    “Given its historically poor maternal health outcomes, Louisiana should prioritize safe and evidence-based care for pregnant women,” the doctors wrote to Pressly. As Neelima Sukhavasi, an OB/GYN in Baton Rouge and a fellow with Physicians for Reproductive Health, told the Post: “To OB/GYNs, this is very worrisome. There’s no one that would endorse what happened to [Pressly’s] sister. But this is a safe medication that has many important lifesaving uses. It’s not addictive.” Nimra Chowdhry, senior state legislative counsel at the Center for Reproductive Rights, put it more bluntly, saying the legislation if passed “turns back the clock on modern medicine.” As in the kind that stops postpartum women from bleeding to death.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • FL House Speaker Paul Renner misleads on abortion amendment

    FL House Speaker Paul Renner misleads on abortion amendment

    [ad_1]

    In November, Floridians will vote on a ballot amendment that, if approved, will expand abortion access up to the point of fetal viability, overriding the state’s current six-week abortion ban that took effect May 1.

    Amendment 4 says abortions cannot be prohibited before fetal viability, typically considered around 24 weeks of pregnancy, or when a health care provider determines it’s necessary to protect the patient’s health, which is called a health risk exception.

    Florida’s Republican House Speaker, Paul Renner, who has spoken out against the amendment, took exception to the fact that “health care provider” is not defined in the text.

    Health risk exceptions are “in the hands of a health care provider that’s not defined,” Renner told South Florida radio station WLRN in an April 4 interview. “Is that a receptionist at the abortion clinic? Is that a tattoo artist? It doesn’t say. It’s certainly not a physician, as other amendments in other states have provided. So, you’re not even talking to a doctor to make that determination on what could be something that’s risky to the mother at a late stage in pregnancy.”

    Similar claims about the amendment allowing “any person that provides a health care service, like tattoo artists” to determine when women qualify for health risk exceptions also circulated in a Miami Spanish-language radio show and have been repeated by the amendment’s opponents.

    PolitiFact contacted Renner’s office for comment but received no reply. 

    The terms “health care provider” and “practitioner” are used and defined in Florida statute in several different ways, depending on the regulation the statute covers, legal experts told PolitiFact. No single statute would apply, and the definition of “health care provider” for abortion care would be determined by Florida’s Department of Health. If the amendment passes and is challenged in court, the state court system would weigh in on the definition.

    In response to our questions about whether professionals such as tattoo artists can authorize health risk exceptions or certify viability under Florida law, Weesam Khoury, Florida Department of Health deputy chief of staff, said, “No, tattoo artists are not health care providers.”

    Experts in health and constitutional law and reproductive health physicians also said Renner’s statement isn’t accurate. Florida’s amendment would not allow people who aren’t licensed to provide health care to determine whether a patient qualifies for a health risk exception. They said such claims ignore the rules and laws governing the practice of medicine. 

    Nicole Huberfeld, a Boston University health law professor, said there’s “zero truth” to the statement.

    “This is not enigmatic terminology,” she said. “Not only are tattoo artists, 911 operators or receptionists not considered health care providers, if they held themselves out as providing health care, that would be unlicensed practice of medicine.” That’s against the law in Florida.

    What does the amendment say? 

    The summary for Amendment 4, titled, “Amendment to Limit Government Interference with Abortion,” reads: 

    “No law shall prohibit, penalize, delay, or restrict abortion before viability or when necessary to protect the patient’s health, as determined by the patient’s healthcare provider. This amendment does not change the Legislature’s constitutional authority to require notification to a parent or guardian before a minor has an abortion.”

    PolitiFact contacted Floridians Protecting Freedom, the committee sponsoring the amendment, to find out more about how the language was decided.

    Michelle Morton, an American Civil Liberties Union attorney and senior adviser with Floridians Protecting Freedom, said “health care provider” is a generic term that’s used in statutes for multiple state regulations, and the professions included under that term depend on the context.

    In this case, “health care provider,” Morton said, would be interpreted in the context of who is qualified to determine whether patients meet criteria for health risk exceptions for an abortion. She said different statutory definitions of what constitutes a health care provider are not necessarily applicable if they aren’t related to abortion care. 

    For example, in some places in Florida statute, the term “health care provider” includes podiatrists, who specialize in the treatment of feet. But a podiatrist would not be called on to determine an abortion health risk exception. 

    Morton said the amendment would not change that health care providers are bound by standards of care and medical ethics, as well as oversight from the state.

    Florida health care regulation

    Florida doctors are regulated by the state’s Board of Medicine, and must follow the “standards of practice,” or they can be disciplined, up to and including losing their license.

    We also asked the Florida Medical Association, the state’s professional association of medical providers, whether it considers professionals such as tattoo artists or receptionists to be “health care providers.” We did not receive a response by publication.

    However, in a 2022 report that discusses public policies adopted by the organization’s delegates and board of directors, the association outlines its abortion policy, including under what circumstances, and by whom, it should be performed.

    “Abortion is a medical procedure and should be performed only by a duly licensed physician in conformance with standards of good medical practice and the laws of the state,” the report said. “No physician or other professional personnel shall be required to perform an act violative of good medical judgment or personally held moral principles.”

    The association has defined the term “health care provider” in other documents to include a “healthcare professional, healthcare facility, or entity licensed or certified to provide health services in this state as recognized by the board,” and has clarified that “scope of practice” should be “specifically defined” to keep “health professionals’ responsibilities in line with their training and respective titles.”

    How Florida statute defines health care provider

    PolitiFact found several definitions for “health care provider” or “practitioner” in Florida law. These statutes cover a range of regulations and include rules governing professions and occupations, patient’s rights and medical malpractice.

    • Florida Statute 765, which covers advance directives to inform providers about a patient’s preferences at the end of life, defines a health care provider as “any person licensed, certified, or otherwise authorized by law to administer health care in the ordinary course of business or practice of a profession.” 

    • Florida Statute 766, which covers medical malpractice, says a “health care provider” can be a medical doctor, an osteopathic doctor and a podiatrist. 

    • In Florida’s Patient Bill of Rights, which is intended to ensure that patients are treated respectfully and can exercise informed consent, “health care provider” is defined as a “physician” licensed under Florida statute chapters 458, 459 and 461, which covers medical doctors, osteopathic doctors and podiatrists. 

    • In another section of Florida law, “health care practitioner,” which is slightly different from the amendment’s wording, includes professions such as acupuncturists, dental hygienists, nutritionists and massage therapists. (Tattoo artists and receptionists are not included.)

    Legal experts said none of these provisions are directly related to abortion health risk exceptions.

    “All states license health care providers to practice medicine, sometimes calling them providers, sometimes practitioners, but this is a longstanding set of state regulations that is not mysterious or controversial,” Huberfeld, from Boston University, said.

    Bob Jarvis, a Nova Southeastern University law professor, took issue with the amendment not defining the term.

    “I think the drafters of Amendment 4 did a poor job, and either should have left the term ‘health care provider’ out altogether or should have explicitly defined it,” Jarvis wrote in an email to PolitiFact. “In the end, however, it probably won’t matter because the courts probably will (if the amendment passes) read into it a requirement that the health care provider be a licensed medical professional.”

    Others said they thought the answer was obvious.

    “I think it is fair to say a common sense, textual reading of the amendment anticipates that the health care provider referred to would be the one qualified to determine that the abortion was necessary to protect a pregnant woman’s health,” said Louis Virelli, a Stetson University College of Law professor, wrote in an email. “I therefore find it hard to imagine how a tattoo artist would be able to make that determination.”

    Health risk exceptions require specialized knowledge

    More than 90% of abortions take place in the first trimester, or up until around 13 weeks of pregnancy, according to U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data. Abortions after fetal viability, which marks the point at which a fetus is able to survive outside the womb, are rare and typically happen because of severe fetal anomalies or health risks to the pregnant woman. 

    Health care providers typically place viability between 22 and 25 weeks of pregnancy. Neonatal survival rates vary and depend on the size and health of the fetus, the pregnant woman’s health and the health care facility.

    “Physicians, if anything, have been very reluctant to perform abortions in health emergencies that are clearly justified under state statutes for fear of liability,” Mary Ziegler, an abortion historian and law professor at University of California, Davis, previously told PolitiFact. “The terms are ambiguous, but who’s going to be interpreting that? The Florida Supreme Court and the conservative legislature.”

    Most state abortion law health risk exceptions permit abortion when there’s a serious risk or substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function. However, the language is often vague, without specific clinical definitions of what qualifies, according to a December 2023 report by KFF. This leaves medical practitioners vulnerable, with the determination often being debated or decided by hospital lawyers or courts.

    Reproductive health experts told us that, even if it were legal for nonmedical professionals to determine health risks under the amendment, obstetricians and gynecologists would only provide care if they personally saw the patient, as failing to do so would be against their medical training.

    Leah Roberts, a reproductive endocrinologist and fertility specialist with Boca Fertility in Boca Raton, Florida, said qualifying a patient for a health exception is not a simple task and requires years of study and experience. “It’s certainly a lot of nuance,” Roberts said, “and we’ve been trained for a very, very long time to be able to parse some of that in order to provide the best care for our patients.”

    Our ruling

    Renner said that, for health risk exceptions in Florida’s abortion amendment, “You’re not even talking to a doctor to make that determination.”

    Health law experts said Renner’s statement is inaccurate and the terms “health care provider” and “practitioner” are used throughout Florida statutes, with the definition depending on the regulation and context. 

    Those Renner cited such as tattoo artists and receptionists are not considered to be health care providers, experts said. Anyone practicing medicine without a license would be violating state law.

    Florida health care providers are regulated by the state and must follow medical ethics and the standards of practice or risk losing their licenses.

    We rate the statement False.

    RELATED: No, a Florida ballot measure wouldn’t ‘mandate abortion up to birth,’ as Gov. Ron DeSantis said 

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Ruling Against New York Abortion Vote Is a Blow to Democrats

    Ruling Against New York Abortion Vote Is a Blow to Democrats

    [ad_1]

    Pro-choice protesters in New York.
    Photo: AFP via Getty Images

    Even in states where there’s no imminent threat to the abortion rights that existed under Roe v. Wade, ballot measures are becoming a popular way to protect or even expand the right to choose via constitutional amendments — and also for Democrats to turn out pro-choice voters at the polls. Such ballot tests have uniformly been won by pro-choice activists in recent years, and Democrats hoped to add New York to the list of states expanding abortion rights this November.

    But now, they may not get the chance. This week, a conservative upstate New York judge ruled that a proposed state constitutional amendment banning discrimination based on “pregnancy outcomes” and “gender expression,” which includes language to protect abortion rights, cannot appear on the ballot in November due to a procedural error.

    State Supreme Court Justice Daniel Doyle ruled that an advisory opinion on the constitutionality of the proposed Equal Rights Amendment from state Attorney General Letitia James was not received before an initial legislative vote (as required by the state constitution, the measure cleared the Legislature twice, in 2022 and in 2023, before being referred to voters). Democrats have argued that the opinion was received during legislative consideration of the amendmen, and that the requirement has been overlooked many times in the past. Now James will have the responsibility of making that case before New York’s appeals courts, where Democratic-appointed judges may be more sympathetic.

    In the meantime, Doyle’s ruling has created significant consternation among pro-choice New Yorkers. One fact should mitigate anxiety, though: The current law in New York protects the right to pre-viability abortions, as well as post-viability abortions under significant exceptions. In other words, in New York, it’s as though Roe has never been reversed, though some abortion-rights advocates felt the ERA’s language (prohibiting, among other things, discrimination based on “pregnancy” or “pregnancy outcomes”) might expand reproductive rights beyond those guaranteed by Roe.

    Most of the controversy over the ERA (and its ballot counterpart, Proposition 1) actually has involved non-abortion issues; Republicans have argued that by banning discrimination on grounds of “sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression” and also of national origin, the ERA will lead to transgender participation in women’s sports and expanded rights for undocumented immigrants. There’s not much question New York Republicans believe transphobia is a better bet politically than hostility to abortion rights.

    New York Democrats, on the other hand, while supporting protections for LGBTQ citizens, have heavily advertised Proposition 1 as necessary to offer permanent protection for abortion rights, and as a rebuke to national Republicans scheming to impose abortion bans via Congress or perhaps executive order if Donald Trump is returned to office. So they’ve been counting on the ballot measure to drive up Democratic turnout and even to flip some swing voters in their direction. This in turn has drawn the attention of Democrats nationally, who consider New York central to their plans to flip control of the U.S. House of Representatives (the Cook Political Report rates four GOP House seats from New York as highly vulnerable).

    The legal and political maneuvering in New York over the proposed ERA will get less attention than ballot fights in other states where the clock has been turned back all the way to the pre-Roe legal regime of near-universal forced birth. But for New Yorkers who simply want constitutional equality, and for Democrats eager to give or deny the next president control over the U.S. House, it’s a big deal that will go down in the courts very soon.


    See All



    [ad_2]

    Ed Kilgore

    Source link

  • Many Florida women can’t get abortions past 6 weeks. Where else can they go?

    Many Florida women can’t get abortions past 6 weeks. Where else can they go?

    [ad_1]

    RALEIGH, N.C. — When Florida enacted its six-week abortion ban last week, clinics in several other Southern and mid-Atlantic states sprang into action, knowing women would look to them for services no longer available where they live.

    Health care providers in North Carolina, three states to the north, are rushing to expand availability and decrease wait times.

    “We are already seeing appointments,” said Katherine Farris, chief medical officer of Planned Parenthood South Atlantic. “We have appointments on the books with patients who were unable to get in, in the last days of April in Florida.”

    Their reaction is part of a growing trend in the United States: Since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, spurring more than 20 states to adopt laws banning or severely limiting abortions, states with looser restrictions have taken steps to welcome women who want or need to end their pregnancies.

    Since the court overturned Roe in June 2022, some Democratic-controlled states have made it easier for out-of-state women to obtain abortions. Several have adopted laws protecting in-state health care workers from being investigated for providing abortion to women from states with bans. Such measures have included allowing providers to prescribe abortion pills, the most common abortion method, via telehealth.

    Officials in California, New Mexico, Oregon and other states have used taxpayer money to increase abortion access.

    Florida recorded more than 84,000 abortions in 2023, a slight increase from 2022. As of April 1, the state reported approximately 14,700 abortions this year, potentially leaving a substantial number of women to consider going out of state.

    “Patients will travel when they’re desperate to get an abortion,” said Mara Buchbinder, a social medicine professor at University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. “We know that.”

    At one point, Florida was a go-to state for women from other Southeastern states with restrictions, including neighboring Georgia and South Carolina, which both ban abortions around six weeks of gestation, before many women even know they are pregnant.

    Last year, about 7,700 abortions in Florida were for out-of-state patients, according to state data.

    But the state has steadily narrowed access. In anticipation of Roe being reversed, the Legislature passed a 15-week ban in April 2022 that took effect despite a court challenge. In 2023, it passed a six-week abortion ban that would take effect only if the earlier ban held up in court. The state Supreme Court upheld the ban last month, and the new law quickly went into effect.

    A referendum in November asking voters to codify abortion rights in Florida’s constitution could reverse the ban. But at least until then, Florida abortion advocacy groups will still need to organize many out-of-state trips.

    For women who are more than six weeks pregnant, South Florida is now the farthest from a legal provider of any highly populated area in the U.S. Subsequently, the average cost per abortion is expected to jump from $600 or $700 to as much as $1,800 or more, said Daniela Martins, a board member and caseworker team leader at the Women’s Emergency Network, a nonprofit organization that helps people in the region pay for abortion and other reproductive health care.

    Martins said her group anticipates helping women get to Virginia and places even farther north, such as Maryland and Washington, D.C. She said it is committed to not turning away clients in need, though raising enough money to honor that commitment could be challenging.

    “We’ve seen a lot of outpouring of support,” she said. “It’s nowhere near what we project we’ll need.”

    Another group, The Brigid Alliance, which provides travel and support across the country for women seeking abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy, is preparing for more needs in the coming months.

    Serra Sippel, the group’s interim executive director, said the alliance is adding six new logistical coordinators, including four who speak Spanish, and is partnering with a clinic in Puerto Rico, an option particularly for Spanish-speaking people.

    One of the largest patient influxes is anticipated in North Carolina, where, even before Florida’s ban, 32% of abortions provided at the state’s Planned Parenthood clinics were for out-of-state patients, Farris said.

    But while it might be the most convenient place for Florida women given its geographical proximity, North Carolina is not without its own set of hurdles. The state’s 2023 law allows for abortions through 12 weeks of pregnancy, but requires two in-person visits to a provider 72 hours apart.

    Those extra steps can turn a single-day procedure into a weeklong affair, said Justine Orlovsky-Schnitzler, engagement director for Carolina Abortion Fund, a nonprofit in North Carolina and South Carolina that operates a helpline to assist callers with abortion care.

    Providers in North Carolina also fear the arrival of new patients will lengthen the wait time for an abortion, currently five to 20 days. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic, which serves North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia and West Virginia, is trying to avoid that by rolling out seven additional days of abortion services and adjusting providers’ schedules at North Carolina clinics to expand availability, Farris said.

    “We are all willing to do the work,” she said. “Operationally, it is incredibly challenging, and I think it’s important to remember that this is a chaotic system.”

    Farris, who provides abortions in North Carolina, has to turn away patients who don’t qualify under the state’s law because they are more than 12 weeks along. She initially refers them to Virginia, which allows abortions until 24 weeks. If there are no appointments available, women can travel to Maryland, Washington or places farther north.

    Carolina Abortion Fund has six staff members and a volunteer network, but working there could often feel like having two full-time jobs even before Florida’s ban, Orlovsky-Schnitzler said.

    Volunteers have sometimes stayed up until midnight to help someone coordinate an emergency abortion, and there have been months in which the organization has received as many as 1,000 calls, she said. After Roe was overturned, calls rose by 400%.

    “That’s not an exaggeration,” she said.

    The center received 650 calls in April alone, according to data it provided.

    The organization often runs out of money, but Orlovsky-Schnitzler said that doesn’t stop workers from answering every call to get people the help they’re seeking.

    Staff at A Preferred Women’s Health Center in North Carolina, with clinics in Charlotte and Raleigh, are fielding about 4,000 calls weekly, most from women in Southern states, Executive Director Calla Hales said.

    Since Roe was overturned, about 70% of the clinics’ approximately 13,000 abortions each year have been with out-of-state patients, she said.

    The center also operates two clinics in Georgia under the state’s six-week ban. The clinics’ operations there may give a preview of what’s to come in Florida, Hales said.

    “As soon as they pee on a pregnancy stick, they’re running in,” she said.

    ___

    Associated Press writer Amanda Seitz in Washington, D.C., contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Biden misleads on Trump’s abortion remarks to Time magazine

    Biden misleads on Trump’s abortion remarks to Time magazine

    [ad_1]

    Democrats wasted no time blasting former President Donald Trump over his comments about abortion in interviews with Time magazine.

    Within 24 hours of Time’s April 30 online rollout of its cover story about Trump’s vision for a second term, top Democratic lawmakers nationwide issued condemnations, including President Joe Biden.

    “Trump did a long interview in Time magazine,” Biden said at a May 1 campaign reception. “It’s coming out. You got to read it. It’s a mandatory reading. And he said in that magazine, he said states should monitor women’s, now, get this, states should monitor women’s pregnancies and prosecute those who violate abortion bans. Monitor women’s pregnancies?”

    Some of Biden’s allies made similar points on X. Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer said Trump “said again that women should be punished for abortions.” New York Gov. Kathy Hochul said Trump “endorses punishing women who get an abortion.”

    But these claims go further than what Trump said. Trump didn’t endorse either policy, and instead acknowledged to the Time reporter, Eric Cortellessa, that states may decide to introduce criminal abortion penalties or monitor women for legal compliance. He wouldn’t share his opinion on whether they should, calling his comfort “irrelevant.” 

    Vice President Kamala Harris was more careful in her Jacksonville, Florida, campaign stop, saying Trump told the magazine that states have the right to monitor and punish women over abortion. That more accurately summed up Trump’s remarks, though he was not that direct.

    Biden campaign spokesperson James Singer told PolitiFact that Trump was “clear” in his interview. 

    “He believes states should be allowed to ban abortion, monitor women’s pregnancies and prosecute women if they violate those bans,” Singer wrote in an email. “That is what the President was speaking about. Neither the President nor our campaign are going to allow Donald Trump off the hook on this.”

    PolitiFact reached out to Trump’s campaign to get more clarity on his position and received no response. 

    What the Time magazine story and transcript show

    Time published transcripts from two interviews Cortellessa had with Trump in April.

    Cortellessa tried asking Trump several abortion-related questions, including whether he would veto federal abortion restrictions and how he would vote on Florida’s proposed constitutional amendment that would enshrine abortion access. Trump turned the focus onto the states without giving his personal take.

    Then, Cortellessa asked, “Do you think states should monitor women’s pregnancies so they can know if they’ve gotten an abortion after the ban?” 

    Trump replied, “I think they might do that. Again, you’ll have to speak to the individual states.” 

    As Trump began talking about Roe v. Wade, the legal precedent that allowed federal abortion access until the U.S. Supreme Court overturned it in 2022, Cortellessa jumped in. The journalist mentioned states “prosecuting women” who received illegal abortions and he asked Trump whether he was comfortable with that.

    Trump said his comfort was irrelevant. Here’s the transcript:

    Cortellessa: “States will decide if they’re comfortable or not —” 

    Trump: “Yeah the states —”

    Cortellessa: “Prosecuting women for getting abortions after the ban. But are you comfortable with it?” 

    Trump: “The states are going to say. It’s irrelevant whether I’m comfortable or not. It’s totally irrelevant, because the states are going to make those decisions. And by the way, Texas is going to be different than Ohio. And Ohio is going to be different than Michigan. I see what’s happening.”

    Cortellessa featured Trump’s abortion comments high in the Time story, characterizing them by saying Trump “would let red states monitor women’s pregnancies and prosecute those who violate abortion bans.” 

    Democrats have been focusing on the possibility of state-level abortion penalties. So far, such efforts to punish women have foundered.  

    Lawmakers in states such as Texas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Kansas and South Carolina have offered bills that could allow the prosecution of women who have abortions. None has advanced far; some Republican leaders have come out against them as too extreme. PolitiFact couldn’t find any bills introduced so far that would require monitoring of pregnancies to prevent abortions.

    This is not the first time Biden has said that Trump supports punishing women for getting abortions. We have rated previous claims Mostly False. In a 2016 MSNBC town hall, host Chris Matthews asked about penalties for abortion, and Trump said there has to be “some form of punishment” for women. But Trump retracted the comment that same day, amid criticism, and issued a statement that said he meant that physicians should be held legally responsible, not women.

    Our ruling

    Biden said Trump said that states “should” monitor women’s pregnancies and prosecute women who violate abortion bans. 

    Trump didn’t tell Time that he believed states should do this. He said they might. 

    His comments allowed for the possibility that states could monitor and punish women for getting illegal abortions. He wouldn’t explain how he felt, telling the reporter to ask the states about monitoring and punishment because “it’s irrelevant whether I’m comfortable or not.” 

    Biden’s statement contains an element of truth that Trump’s position would allow states to monitor and punish women over illegal abortions, but it ignores the critical detail that Trump did not say states “should” do this. We rate Biden’s statement Mostly False.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump on tracking pregnancies, punishing women over abortion

    Trump on tracking pregnancies, punishing women over abortion

    [ad_1]

    On the same day Florida’s six-week abortion ban took effect, Vice President Kamala Harris visited Jacksonville to blast the law and blame one person: Florida resident and former President Donald Trump.

    Harris said the Florida ban prohibits abortions before most women know they are pregnant. Then she singled out Trump, citing recent remarks in a Time magazine about his stance on policies including reproductive health.

    “Just this week in an interview, (Trump) said states have the right to monitor pregnant women to enforce these bans and states have the right to punish pregnant women for seeking out abortion care,” Harris told campaign supporters.

    Her phrasing could make it sound as though Trump spoke in support of the states taking those actions. Rather, he acknowledged that states have the right to do this but would not share his opinion on whether they should.

    On April 30, Time published the transcripts of two interviews with Trump with the online rollout of its cover story about his vision for a second term in office. Reporter Eric Cortellessa interviewed Trump twice in April, once at Mar-a-Lago, Trump’s West Palm Beach estate, and once by phone.

    Cortellessa pressed Trump for details about his somewhat murky abortion position, including whether he would veto federal abortion restrictions or a bill that grants full legal rights to embryos. Trump’s answers consistently deferred to the states. (Trump also wouldn’t say how he planned to vote on Florida’s ballot amendment that would allow abortions to the point of fetal viability.)

    Then, Cortellessa asked, “Do you think states should monitor women’s pregnancies so they can know if they’ve gotten an abortion after the ban?”

    Trump replied, “I think they might do that. Again, you’ll have to speak to the individual states.” 

    As Trump began talking about Roe v. Wade, the legal precedent that allowed federal abortion access until the U.S. Supreme Court overturned it in 2022, Cortellessa jumped in, mentioning states prosecuting women who received illegal abortions and asking Trump if he was comfortable with that.

    Trump said his comfort was irrelevant. Here’s the transcript:

    Cortellessa: “States will decide if they’re comfortable or not — ” 

    Trump: “Yeah the states — “

    Cortellessa: “Prosecuting women for getting abortions after the ban. But are you comfortable with it?” 

    Trump: “The states are going to say. It’s irrelevant whether I’m comfortable or not. It’s totally irrelevant, because the states are going to make those decisions. And by the way, Texas is going to be different than Ohio. And Ohio is going to be different than Michigan. I see what’s happening.”

    Cortellessa gave Trump’s abortion comments prominence within the Time story, characterizing them by saying Trump “would let red states monitor women’s pregnancies and prosecute those who violate abortion bans.” He later wrote that Trump said policies such as monitoring women’s pregnancies and prosecuting them for illegal abortions should be left to the individual states.

    Brian Fallon, a communications director for the Biden-Harris campaign, told PolitiFact that Trump’s answers may have avoided a direct call for states to monitor pregnant women, but “clearly means he thinks individual states are within their rights to do so.”

    Likewise, Fallon said, on punishing women, Trump’s deferment to states “means he believes it is in their power to make the decision to punish women if they wish.”

    In recent legislative sessions, lawmakers in states such as Texas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Kansas and South Carolina have offered bills that could potentially allow the prosecution of women who undergo abortions. None has advanced far; Republican leaders have often come out against them as too extreme. PolitiFact was unable to find any bills introduced so far that would require monitoring of pregnancies to prevent abortions.

    President Joe Biden and Harris have long said that Trump supports punishing women for getting abortions, a claim we previously rated Mostly False. In a 2016 MSNBC town hall, host Chris Matthews asked about penalties for abortion, and Trump said there has to be “some form of punishment” for women. But Trump retracted the comment that same day, amid criticism, and issued a statement that said he meant that physicians should be held legally responsible, not women.

    Our ruling

    Harris said that “just this week in an interview, (Trump) said states have the right to monitor pregnant women to enforce these bans, and states have the right to punish pregnant women for seeking out abortion care.”

    Trump’s comments allowed for that possibility, though he wasn’t that explicit about whether he thought they should. Trump told a Time reporter that the reporter would need to ask the states “because the states are going to say.” 

    Harris’ statement is accurate but needs clarification. We rate it Mostly True.

    RELATED: Donald Trump said all legal scholars, ‘on both sides,’ wanted Roe v. Wade overturned. That’s wrong.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Biden campaign continues focus on abortion with new ad buy, Kamala Harris campaign stop in Philadelphia

    Biden campaign continues focus on abortion with new ad buy, Kamala Harris campaign stop in Philadelphia

    [ad_1]

    President Biden’s campaign is launching a new seven-figure ad buy Thursday centered around abortion, a centerpiece issue for his campaign, as it attempts to link restrictive state abortion bans to former President Donald Trump. 

    It will run on the two-year anniversary of the leak of a Supreme Court draft opinion on the Dobbs case, which overturned Roe v. Wade and transferred decisions about abortion access to the states. 

    The campaign ad, titled “Prosecute,” first shared with CBS News, features an OBGYN physician in Texas talking about how the state’s near-total abortion ban, enacted after the Dobbs decision, forced her to flee the state to get care.

    “If Donald Trump is elected, that is the end of a woman’s right to choose. There will be no place to turn. We could lose our rights in every state, even the ones where abortion is currently legal,” says Austin Dennard in the ad. 

    The ad begins with a portion of Mr. Trump’s interview with Time Magazine in which he said that it should be up to states to decide whether to prosecute women who receive abortions. 

    “The states are going to say,” Trump told Time magazine in the interview, published Tuesday, when asked if he’s “comfortable” with states prosecuting women who get abortions. “It’s irrelevant whether I’m comfortable or not. It’s totally irrelevant, because the states are going to make those decisions.” 

    In the interview, Trump also indicated he’d allow states to monitor women’s pregnancies to know if they underwent an abortion procedure. 

    The Biden campaign ad begins airing one day after a six-week abortion ban took effect in Florida, as well as a repeal by Arizona’s legislature of an 1864 law that would have enacted a near-total abortion ban in that state. The ad will run in seven battleground states on various cable networks and will also air during the Kentucky Derby on Saturday. 

    The focus of the ad underscores the ongoing effort by the Biden campaign to hinge restrictive bans on Trump’s legacy in appointing judges who helped overturn Roe v. Wade. Biden’s campaign has aired six other television spots related to abortion, according to political advertisement tracking firm AdImpact. 

    “He’s saying he approves of states surveilling, prosecuting, and punishing women for receiving reproductive care,” said Biden campaign manager Julie Chavez Rodriguez about Trump, adding that the campaign will “continue to relentlessly remind voters every single day about the very real and horrifying stakes for women this November if Trump has his way.”  

    As the Biden campaign intends to mobilize voters through ads, Vice President Kamala Harris is expected to continue her “Fight for Reproductive Freedoms” tour. CBS News has learned exclusively that Harris will make a May 6 campaign stop in Philadelphia focused on abortion access. 

    Harris has visited Pennsylvania twice this year, but this trip would mark the first time the vice president addresses abortion in the Keystone state. Her Philadelphia stop comes after her visit to Florida Wednesday to discuss the state’s six-week abortion ban.

    “Joe Biden and I have a different view,” Harris pitched to Floridians. “We believe no politician should ever come between a woman and a doctor.” 

    Throughout her tour stops, Harris has blamed abortion bans on Trump, referring to him as the “architect of this health care crisis.” Harris warns her crowds that a second Trump term would be worse, claiming he would sign a national abortion ban if elected in November. 

    Trump showed support for a national abortion ban bill during his term in the White House, and as a candidate, he suggested in an interview last month that he could potentially support a 15-week national abortion ban. But in recent weeks he’s punted on whether he’d sign a national ban, and has said abortion access should be left up to the states. 

    On Wednesday he said in an interview with Fox 6 in Wisconsin that he is “not signing a national abortion ban. That’s Democrat misinformation.”

    According to the Guttmacher Institute, since Roe v. Wade was overturned, 21 states have enacted either near-total abortion bans, or bans in the first 18 weeks of pregnancy.   

    A CBS News battleground state poll of Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin showed that at least 60% of voters in each state were following the news about restrictive abortion bans in Arizona and Florida.

    However, not all voters blame Trump for the overturning of Roe v. Wade. In Wisconsin, where current state law prohibits abortion after 20 weeks of pregnancy, 40% blamed Trump for the overturning of Roe v. Wade, the poll found, while 44% didn’t give him credit or blame. 

    Voters in these three competitive states also ranked other issues, such as the economy, democracy and crime, as higher factors than abortion. 

    During a rally in Freeland, Michigan, Wednesday, Trump touted the overturning of Roe v. Wade and said, “a lot of controversy has now been taken out.”

    “You’ve seen what’s taken place over the last period of a couple of months,”  Trump said. “People are getting together and they’re deciding within their own states.”

    “You have to fight for what’s in your heart and what’s the right thing to do, but remember, you also have to get elected,” he added, in a message to other Republicans about their messaging on abortion. 

    Aaron Navarro

    Aaron Navarro is a CBS News digital reporter covering Florida Governor Ron DeSantis’ presidential campaign and the 2024 election. He was previously an associate producer for the CBS News political unit in the 2021 and 2022 election cycles.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • 5/1: The Daily Report with John Dickerson

    5/1: The Daily Report with John Dickerson

    [ad_1]

    5/1: The Daily Report with John Dickerson – CBS News


    Watch CBS News



    John Dickerson reports on the status of pro-Palestinian protests on college campuses, a strict abortion ban becoming law in Florida, and the impact of another round of student debt relief from the Biden administration.

    Be the first to know

    Get browser notifications for breaking news, live events, and exclusive reporting.


    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • 5/1: CBS Evening News

    5/1: CBS Evening News

    [ad_1]

    5/1: CBS Evening News – CBS News


    Watch CBS News



    Several college protests turn violent; police called in to clear encampments; Bee colony delays Arizona Diamondbacks game

    Be the first to know

    Get browser notifications for breaking news, live events, and exclusive reporting.


    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • 5/1: America Decides

    5/1: America Decides

    [ad_1]

    5/1: America Decides – CBS News


    Watch CBS News



    Florida’s six-week abortion ban takes effect; former first lady Michelle Obama surprises students for college signing day.

    Be the first to know

    Get browser notifications for breaking news, live events, and exclusive reporting.


    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Does Florida’s abortion amendment remove parental consent?

    Does Florida’s abortion amendment remove parental consent?

    [ad_1]

    Gov. Ron DeSantis, R-Fla., warned parents about a state abortion amendment that would expand legal access to abortion and overrule a six-week abortion ban that went into effect May 1.

    In Naples, hours before President Joe Biden spoke in Tampa April 23 about abortion, DeSantis told a crowd that Biden was coming to Florida to support a constitutional amendment “that will eliminate parental consent for minors and that’s written in a way that’s intentionally designed to deceive voters.”

    The governor repeated this warning on April 30, calling it “an amendment that they wanted to go into Florida’s Constitution that will eliminate parental consent for minors.”

    “Why would you take away parental consent?” he asked.

    The picture of how the amendment could affect parental consent is complex. The ballot measure needs 60% approval to take  effect. And if it is approved, the amendment itself says it “does not change the Legislature’s constitutional authority to require notification to a parent or guardian before a minor has an abortion.”

    But DeSantis’ warning is based on a prediction about what could happen to the parental consent law through legal challenges. 

    That’s because the amendment stipulates that “no law shall prohibit, penalize, delay, or restrict abortion before viability or when necessary to protect the patient’s health.” Legal experts say this wording could lead advocates to challenge a 2020 state law that requires written parental consent before a minor undergoes an abortion.

    But the consent law’s elimination isn’t a foregone conclusion — it would likely be decided by the courts. 

    Adding one more wrinkle: Legal experts told us that, until April 1, parental consent requirements had been unconstitutional in Florida for decades. 

    Here’s why DeSantis’ statement needs more explanation. 

    What the amendment says about parental consent, notification

    The summary for Amendment 4 reads in full:

    “No law shall prohibit, penalize, delay, or restrict abortion before viability or when necessary to protect the patient’s health, as determined by the patient’s healthcare provider. This amendment does not change the Legislature’s constitutional authority to require notification to a parent or guardian before a minor has an abortion.”

    DeSantis and others argue that the language would eliminate the law requiring minors to get parental consent before an abortion. Minors can also seek a judge’s permission to obtain an abortion without parental involvement.

    But legal experts told PolitiFact the amendment doesn’t spell the immediate end of parental consent for abortions in Florida.

    “It’s possible that a person or group might sue to overturn the (parental consent) law, however, the case would be heard in state court and, ultimately, the Florida Supreme Court would decide the issue,” said Aubrey Jewett, a political science professor at the University of Central Florida. 

    Given the court’s conservative bent, Jewett said, it’s possible that it would uphold Florida’s existing law, even if the constitutional amendment passes. Justices could determine that parents have traditionally had a legal right to have a say in their children’s health care decisions, he said, and therefore still have a say here.

    The amendment also stipulates that it “does not overrule the Legislature’s constitutional authority to require notification to a parent or guardian before a minor has an abortion.” This refers to Article X, Section 22 of the Florida Constitution, which requires parental notification before a minor seeks an abortion.

    Bryan Griffin, a DeSantis spokesperson, told PolitiFact in an email that parental notification is not the same thing as consent. He referenced DeSantis’ April 17 news conference, during which DeSantis said the “notification is after-the-fact. The consent is obviously a condition precedent.” The initiative’s language, however, as well as current Florida law, specifies that parents would be notified before an abortion takes place, not after.

    “Minors do not have the same constitutional rights as adults do, and the Florida Constitution recognizes this in the abortion context in its provision that expressly allows the Legislature to require parental notification,” said Quinn Yeargain, a Widener University assistant law professor and expert on state constitutional law. 

    “While Section 22 only relates to notification, not consent, it still clearly indicates a desire in the Constitution to limit abortion rights for minors,” Yeargain said.

    The state’s 2020 consent law became enforceable only on April 1, when the Florida Supreme Court ruled that the constitutional protection of privacy didn’t apply to abortions.

    A 1989 Florida Supreme Court case had invalidated an earlier parental consent law for minors seeking abortions on the grounds that it violated Florida’s constitutional right to privacy. So, although DeSantis has a point that the initiative could eventually eliminate the consent requirement, Floridians until April had lived without it for more than 30 years.

    “We don’t know if parental consent will later be interpreted to be a delay or a prohibition on abortion under the amendment, but we do know that the parental consent requirement has been deemed unconstitutional since 1989” until now, said Louis Virelli, a Stetson University law professor.

    RELATED: No, a Florida ballot measure wouldn’t ‘mandate abortion up to birth,’ as Gov. Ron DeSantis said 

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • GOP-led Arizona Senate to vote on repealing 1864 abortion ban

    GOP-led Arizona Senate to vote on repealing 1864 abortion ban

    [ad_1]

    Arizona’s Republican-controlled Senate on Wednesday is set to vote on repealing a Civil War-era abortion ban, one week after a similar motion passed the GOP-controlled state House. 

    After two failed attempts, three Republicans in the state House on joined all the Democrats in successfully voting to repeal the law, sending it to the Senate. 

    The 14 Democrats in the state Senate are hoping to pick up at least two Republicans to send the measure to Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs, who has said she will sign it. If the repeal is signed, a 2022 law that capped abortions at 15 weeks would eventually go into effect. 

    Last month, the Arizona Supreme Court ruled that the 1864 law banning nearly all abortions could go into effect, superseding a 15-week abortion ban put in place in 2022 by state Republicans. The March 2022 law was signed three months before the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the federal right to an abortion with its decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision.

    The state Supreme Court found that the 2022 Arizona ban “is predicated entirely on the existence of a federal constitutional right to an abortion” because the 2022 ban didn’t “independently authorize abortion.” As a result, the court said, there was no provision in either state or federal law that addressed the operation of the 1864 ban, so that ban “is now enforceable,” the court ruled.

    Even if the Senate passes the repeal on Wednesday, it would not go into effect until 90 days after the legislature adjourns. The 1864 law is set to go into effect on June 27. 

    Abortion Arizona
    File: The Arizona Senate building at the state Capitol, April 11, 2024, Phoenix.

    Ross D. Franklin / AP


    Former Republican Gov. Doug Ducey, who signed the 2022 law, was among the critics of the court’s decision, as well as U.S. GOP Senate candidate Kari Lake. Former President Donald Trump said after the ruling, “I’m sure that the governor and everybody else are going to bring it back into reason and that’ll be taken care of, I think very quickly.”

    Democrats, who nationally have been running on restoring abortion rights, have focused on Arizona, a swing state that flipped for President Biden in 2020, as a key battleground. In a speech in Tucson last month, Vice President Kamala Harris tied the 1864 abortion ban — and similar restrictive measures in other states — to Trump, calling him “the architect of this health care crisis.”

    Shawna Mizelle contributed to this report. 

    Caroline Linton

    Caroline Linton is a senior editor on the political team for CBSNews.com. She has previously written for The Daily Beast, Newsweek and amNewYork. She is currently based out of Austin, Texas, and writes and edits about local, state and national politics.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Former President Trump Says States Should Decide On Prosecuting Women For Abortions, Has No Comment On Abortion Pill – KXL

    Former President Trump Says States Should Decide On Prosecuting Women For Abortions, Has No Comment On Abortion Pill – KXL

    [ad_1]

    CHICAGO (AP) — Former President Donald Trump says it should be left up to the states whether they want to prosecute women for getting abortions or whether to monitor their pregnancies.

    The presumptive Republican presidential nominee declined to comment on access to the abortion pill mifepristone, which has been embroiled in an intense legal battle.

    The comments, published Tuesday in Time magazine, are consistent with Trump’s recent attempts to seek a more cautious stance on the issue, which has become a vulnerability for Republicans and has driven turnout for Democrats.

    More about:

    [ad_2]

    Grant McHill

    Source link

  • DeSantis’ False claim about Florida abortion measure

    DeSantis’ False claim about Florida abortion measure

    [ad_1]

    As Floridians prepare to vote on a November ballot measure that would enshrine abortion access in the state constitution, Florida’s Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis declared his opposition to the effort.

    Hours before, DeSantis claimed the ballot initiative, which President Joe Biden supports, is far more extreme than supporters are letting on. 

    “I hear that Joe Biden is on his way to Florida this afternoon,” DeSantis said during an April 23 news conference ahead of the president’s Tampa speech. “And now he’s coming down to try to support a constitutional amendment that will mandate abortion until the moment of birth.”

    But DeSantis’ statement about the amendment is undermined by the initiative’s language.

    If approved by at least 60% of voters, the measure would restrict prohibitions on abortion before fetal viability — typically considered to be around 24 weeks of pregnancy — or when necessary to protect the pregnant woman’s health. A full-term pregnancy is around 40 weeks.

    In the U.S., less than 1% of abortions are performed after 21 weeks and typically involve an emergency or fatal fetal anomaly. Florida’s upcoming six-week abortion ban, which takes effect May 1, includes an exception for the pregnant woman’s life. If the constitutional amendment passes, Florida’s Legislature can further shape what kind of health exceptions would qualify. 

    What the amendment says on abortion limits

    The summary for Amendment 4, titled, “Amendment to Limit Government Interference with Abortion,” reads:

    “No law shall prohibit, penalize, delay, or restrict abortion before viability or when necessary to protect the patient’s health, as determined by the patient’s healthcare provider. This amendment does not change the Legislature’s constitutional authority to require notification to a parent or guardian before a minor has an abortion.”

    Responding to PolitiFact’s questions, Bryan Griffin, a spokesperson for the governor’s office, wrote, “Where does it define who gets to define ‘viability’?” 

    Health care providers place fetal viability between 22 and 25 weeks of pregnancy. Neonatal survival rates in that time range vary and depend on the size and health of the fetus, the pregnant woman’s health and the health care facility.

    Although the amendment doesn’t define viability, Florida Statute 390.011 does. It says viability is “the stage of fetal development when the life of a fetus is sustainable outside the womb through standard medical measures.” The amendment would not change this definition.

    “It is not true that the amendment protects the right to an abortion up until the moment of birth. It only does so when a woman’s health is in danger,” said Louis Virelli, a Stetson University College of Law professor.

    He said the amendment reinstates the restrictions of Roe v. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court ruling that provided federally protected abortion access until a fetus is viable, in Florida. The Supreme Court in 2022 overturned Roe when it ruled in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization that states should set laws on abortion access.

    “Viability is a well-known medical term that marks the point at which a fetus is able to survive outside the womb,” Caroline Mala Corbin, a University of Miami law professor, wrote to PolitiFact in an email. “Might the courts interpret ‘protecting the patient’s health’ so broadly as to essentially make abortion available until birth? Of course not.”

    More than 90% of abortions take place in the first trimester, or up until around 13 weeks of pregnancy, according to U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data. Abortions later in pregnancy are rare and often happen because of severe fetal anomalies or health risks to the mother.

    “It’s also misleading because physicians, if anything, have been very reluctant to perform abortions in health emergencies that are clearly justified under state statutes for fear of liability,” said Mary Ziegler, an abortion historian and law professor at University of California, Davis. “The terms are ambiguous, but who’s going to be interpreting that? The Florida Supreme Court and the conservative legislature. To think that they will say this is abortion to birth, that’s not going to happen.”

    Florida’s upcoming six-week abortion ban, which DeSantis signed, allows later abortions when doctors certify that the procedure would avert “serious risk of substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function of the pregnant woman other than a psychological condition.” 

    Although this is more restrictive than the amendment’s broader language about protecting the patient’s health, the Legislature would still be able to shape it further.

    Our ruling 

    DeSantis said Florida’s abortion amendment “will mandate abortion until the moment of birth.”

    The amendment does not do this. The measure allows abortion before fetal viability, typically around 24 weeks of pregnancy, or when necessary after that period to protect the health of the pregnant woman. In the U.S., less than 1% of abortions in the U.S. are performed after 21 weeks and typically involve a health emergency or fatal fetal anomaly.

    Existing Florida law defines viability as “the stage of fetal development when the life of a fetus is sustainable outside the womb through standard medical measures.”  

    We rate DeSantis’ statement False.

    RELATED: All abortion bans include exceptions for a mother’s life. But are they working?

    RELATED: All of our fact-checks about abortions

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Rick Scott Celebrates Abortion Ban By Cutting Umbilical Cord Of Woman Forced To Carry Baby To Term

    Rick Scott Celebrates Abortion Ban By Cutting Umbilical Cord Of Woman Forced To Carry Baby To Term

    [ad_1]

    Read more…

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump says it’s up to states if they want to prosecute women for abortions

    Trump says it’s up to states if they want to prosecute women for abortions

    [ad_1]

    Former President Donald Trump, the 2024 GOP presumptive presidential nominee, said in an interview with TIME magazine he would defer to individual states if they want to enforce abortion laws by monitoring women’s pregnancies and prosecuting them if they get abortions.

    What You Need To Know

    • Former President Donald Trump told Time magazine he would defer to individual states if they want to enforce abortion laws by monitoring women’s pregnancies and prosecuting them if they get abortions

    • When asked if states “should monitor women’s pregnancies so they can know if they’ve gotten an abortion after the ban,” Trump said. “I think they might do that”

    • He wouldn’t say if he believed the federal government should ban the shipping of abortion drugs across state lines

    • On a House GOP proposal to grant full legal rights to embryos, Trump said “I’m leaving everything up to the states. The states are going to be different. Some will say yes. Some will say no”

    “It’s irrelevant whether I’m comfortable or not. It’s totally irrelevant, because the states are going to make those decisions,” Trump said when asked if he would be comfortable with states criminally charging women for getting abortions. “And by the way, Texas is going to be different than Ohio. And Ohio is going to be different than Michigan.”

    Trump has proudly taken credit for appointing three of the six judges who authored the Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision, which undid the 50-year precedent of Roe v. Wade and allowed states to implement abortion bans, but has tempered his enthusiasm for the most severe state laws and proposals, arguing they can be political liabilities as he seeks to return to the White House. 

    But in the TIME interview published Tuesday and conducted over the course of two conversations this month, Trump said his personal level of comfort did not matter and he would leave those decisions up to the states if he were elected president again.

    On a proposal by the Republican Study Committee — which includes around 80% of House Republican lawmakers, including Speaker Mike Jorhnson, R-La. — to grant full legal rights to embryos, Trump said “I’m leaving everything up to the states. The states are going to be different. Some will say yes. Some will say no.” He did not say he would veto federal legislation if it reached his desk, arguing again it would be left up to state governments.

    When asked if states “should monitor women’s pregnancies so they can know if they’ve gotten an abortion after the ban,” Trump said. “I think they might do that” before launching into an aside where he falsely claimed “every legal scholar, Democrat, Republican and other” wanted the question of abortion’s legality sent back to statehouses and state courts.

    Trump described his adopted home state of Florida’s six-week ban, which is set to take effect on Wednesday, as “too severe,” but wouldn’t say how he would vote on a state referendum in November that would undo the ban by codifying abortion rights in the state constitution. He also wouldn’t say if he believed the federal government should ban the shipping of abortion drugs across state lines, telling TIME he would have an announcement on his views within two weeks (and then delaying it another week or two as of Saturday). And he refused to entertain a hypothetical national abortion ban, pushed by many Washington Republicans, by arguing his party would “never” have the 60 votes in the Senate required to pass that kind of legislation.

    “It’s all about the states, it’s about state rights. States’ rights. States are going to make their own determination,” Trump insisted. “And you know what? That’s taken tremendous pressure off everybody… it was ill-defined. And to be honest, the Republicans, a lot of Republicans, didn’t know how to talk about the issue. That issue never affected me.”

    Despite his unwillingness to publicly offer his own distinct opinions on a national abortion ban or  the prosecutions of women who have abortions, Democrats were not willing to let him off the hook on Tuesday morning.

    “All of this cruelty and chaos can be traced back to Donald Trump,” Florida Democratic Party chair Nikki Fried said on a pre-scheduled Democratic National Committee press call. “He repeatedly refused to rule out a national abortion, ban endorsed the prosecution of women and doctors and left the door open to legislation that could rip away access to” in-vitro fertilization.”

    Vice President Kamala Harris will be in Jacksonville, Fla., on Wednesday for a rally focused on the fight for abortion rights. The Biden campaign said she will be there to “continue to make the case that Donald Trump did this.”

    Biden, Harris and Democrats across the country are campaigning against abortion restrictions in the hopes of repeating their electoral successes since Roe v. Wade was overturned in June 2022. A stronger-than-expected showing congressional Democrats that fall and in federal and local special elections since, as well as a successful series of statewide referendums protecting abortion rights in states like Ohio and Kansas, has encouraged them that the issue can be a winner for them this year.

    Biden, a devout Catholic who has long held personal objections to abortion, has said he would work to restore Roe v. Wade as the law of the land.

    “Donald Trump’s latest comments leave little doubt: if elected he’ll sign a national abortion ban, allow women who have an abortion to be prosecuted and punished, allow the government to invade women’s privacy to monitor their pregnancies, and put IVF and contraception in jeopardy nationwide,” Biden’s campaign manager Julie Chavez Rodriguez said in a statement. “The horrific and devastating stories in states like Florida, Texas and Arizona with extreme abortion bans unleashed by Trump overturning Roe are just the beginning if he wins.”

    “Simply put: November’s election will determine whether women in the United States have reproductive freedom, or whether Trump’s new government will continue its assault to control women’s health care decisions,” she added.

    Polling suggests most Americans agree with Biden and Democrats on the issues, even as the president runs about even with Trump in national polls and lags behind him in key swing states. 

    Two-thirds of Americans, including 67% of independents, would support a federal law codifying the right to an abortion, according to a February poll from the health policy nonprofit KFF. Nearly 60% of respondents said they oppose a 16-week abortion ban. And 41% of women said they trusted Biden more to “move abortion policy in the right direction,” compared to 25% for Trump and 22% who said neither. 

    Last month, Fox News’ polling outfit found a record high number of voters — 59% —  believe abortion should be legal in all or most cases. Compared to April 2022, the poll found double-digit increases in support for the legal right to an abortion among voters 65 and older, conservatives, Republicans and white evangelical Christians. Majorities opposed six-week and 15-week abortion bans.

    [ad_2]

    Joseph Konig

    Source link

  • Bill would allow Arizona abortion providers to practice in California temporarily

    Bill would allow Arizona abortion providers to practice in California temporarily

    [ad_1]

    SACRAMENTO — 

    Arizona abortion providers could practice in California under a new law designed to provide care to women who cross the state line as they face newly restrictive prohibitions at home.

    The bill introduced on Wednesday aims to expedite temporary authorization for those Arizona doctors to practice in both states and is the latest move by Gov. Gavin Newsom to make California a reproductive health “sanctuary” as abortion seekers in several Republican led states have lost access to care after the overturning of the Roe vs. Wade Supreme Court decision in 2022.

    The proposal would temporarily allow licensed Arizona doctors to perform abortions and provide related care to Arizona patients traveling to California until the end of November. The Arizona doctors would be under the oversight of California’s Medical Board and Osteopathic Medical Board.

    The legislation, which if passed and signed by the governor would go into effect immediately, comes after the Arizona Supreme Court voted this month to impose a near total abortion ban, reinstating a law from 1864 that prohibits abortions except when the woman’s life is at risk.

    “Arizona Republicans continue to put women in danger — embracing a draconian law passed when Arizona was a territory, not even a state,” Newsom said in a statement released Wednesday morning. “California will not sit idly by.”

    The governor is working with the state legislature’s California Women’s Caucus to pass the bill.

    California saw a surge in abortions after the Supreme Court reversed Roe, and now clinics are bracing for more following the latest Arizona ruling.

    The bill is likely to pass with ease with Newsom’s support but is sure to reignite criticisms from Republican lawmakers who say the Democratic governor — widely viewed as a future presidential candidate — should focus more on California’s crises, including a budget deficit and surging homelessness, and less on out-of-state policies.

    The bill joins a litany of abortion measures that Newsom and California’s Democratic supermajority have approved in recent years — not just to enhance care in the Golden State but to provide support to nonresidents facing limited care nationwide.

    Last year, Newsom signed a bill into law to allow doctors living under “hostile” laws in states where abortion is banned to receive training in California.

    Earlier this week, at a news conference in Modesto, Newsom said that abortion access rollbacks have already “placed a burden” on California’s healthcare system, especially in Imperial, Riverside and San Diego counties, where clinics have seen an increase in out-of-staters, including patients from Arizona and Texas.

    On Sunday, Newsom launched another round of TV advertisements that call out red state antiabortion laws, this time to be aired in Alabama and focusing on proposals that aim to punish women for interstate travel to obtain services.

    [ad_2]

    Mackenzie Mays

    Source link

  • Supreme Court to consider when doctors can provide emergency abortions in states with bans

    Supreme Court to consider when doctors can provide emergency abortions in states with bans

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court will consider Wednesday when doctors can provide abortions during medical emergencies in states with bans enacted after the high court’s sweeping decision overturning Roe v. Wade.

    The case comes from Idaho, which is one of 14 states that now ban abortion at all stages of pregnancy with limited exceptions. It marks the first time the Supreme Court has considered a state ban since Roe was reversed.

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

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

    The Supreme Court has allowed the Idaho law to go into effect, even during emergencies, as the case played out.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Arizona Democrats poised to continue effort to repeal 1864 abortion ban

    Arizona Democrats poised to continue effort to repeal 1864 abortion ban

    [ad_1]

    When asked Tuesday how she feels about the Democratic effort in the Arizona State Legislature to repeal an 1864 abortion ban before it goes into effect, Democratic state Rep. Stephanie Stahl Hamilton laughed.

    “I was told that we could get a clean repeal tomorrow, but you know, who knows, right?” Stahl Hamilton said. “Who knows who loses their nerve, you know, the night before the day? Or minutes before, you know? All I know is we got to keep trying. And people in Arizona need us to continue to do everything we can to repeal this ban.”

    Earlier this month, the Arizona Supreme Court ruled that the highly-restrictive 160-year-old law that bans nearly all abortions can be enforced — blocking the procedure in all cases except to save the life of the mother. If allowed to take effect on June 8, it would supersede current law, which allows abortions up to 15 weeks of pregnancy.  

    Arizona state Rep. Stephanie Stahl Hamilton
    Arizona state Rep. Stephanie Stahl Hamilton listens during a legislative session in the Arizona House on April 17, 2024 in Phoenix, Arizona. 

    Getty Images


    Two previous attempts by Democrats to repeal the 1864 law by circumventing Republican House Speaker Ben Toma have failed to garner enough support for a vote on a rules change.

    An April 17 effort to repeal the ban by means of a temporary rule change fell one vote short. With the support of two Senate Republicans, the upper chamber was able to make headway by getting a first reading of a repeal bill, but two more readings are required before it could be brought to a vote. 

    Toma has been a vocal critic of Democrats on abortion. In a statement released immediately after the Arizona Supreme Court decision, Toma said that the legislature would “take the time needed to listen to our constituents and carefully consider appropriate actions, rather than rush legislation on a topic of this magnitude without a larger discussion.”

    He also claimed in his statement that “under the Democrats’ view, partial birth abortions would be allowed, and minors could get abortions on demand without parental consent or a court order,” even though there is no indication that a repeal of the 160-year-old law would allow either. 

    Arizona Senate Democrats have cast doubt on the future of any repeal efforts moving forward in the House. Stahl Hamilton acknowledged that getting Republican support to repeal the ban is a tall task. Even though they seem to have the numbers to do so, she is concerned that at the last minute, minds will change.  

    Democratic state Sen. Eva Burch told CBS News that the Republican caucus in Arizona is fractured and cannot agree on how to address the prospect of a Civil War era abortion ban going into effect. 

    “I have no confidence at all that the repeal is going to go through, certainly not in the way that it should — not in the way that’s being called for. We’ve already passed that point,” Burch said.

    “So do I think that they’re going to come together and do the right thing?” Burch went on. “I don’t have any faith that that’s what’s going to happen.”

    Democratic state Sen. Anna Hernandez also said she wasn’t confident in the prospect of any repeal effort, but noted “anything can happen.”

    The legislature is set to meet Wednesday morning and once again attempt to address the issue. 

    Arizona Right to Life, an anti-abortion group, is calling on legislators to oppose those efforts, and plans on organizing at the state capitol as well. 

    Shawna Mizelle

    Shawna Mizelle is a 2024 campaign reporter for CBS News.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Biden in Tampa: Fact-checks of his claims on abortion, Trump

    Biden in Tampa: Fact-checks of his claims on abortion, Trump

    [ad_1]

    Eight days before a six-week abortion ban takes effect in Florida, President Joe Biden spoke in Tampa to lay blame for restrictive measures nationwide on one person: former President Donald Trump.

    In a 12-minute address April 23 at Hillsborough Community College, Biden warned of “extreme” laws that restrict abortion access, and he blamed Trump, his predecessor and presumptive 2024 rival, for making those policies possible.

    Biden criticized Trump for bragging about overturning Roe v. Wade and paving the way for states to enact strict limits on abortion. Using that new power, Biden said, Arizona reinstated an 1864 total abortion ban and Florida instituted its six-week ban.

    Biden and his running mate, Vice President Kamala Harris, in recent days have made abortion key to their campaign message. Biden shouted his remarks at times, but some of his statements left out context. 

    Biden’s address comes as Florida voters are set to decide whether to expand abortion rights in a high-stakes abortion measure on the November ballot.

    Polls show that six-week abortion bans are unpopular both nationally and in Florida. For bans later in pregnancy, around 16 weeks, polling results are inconsistent. A national KFF poll from February 2024 found that 58% opposed federal ban on abortion at 16 weeks while 42% said they would support one. But an Economist/YouGov poll the same month found the opposite: 48% favoring a 16-week ban, 36% opposed and 16% not sure. Polling also shows wide support for first-trimester abortions, but far less for second-trimester abortions. 

    Here are fact-checks of four things Biden said.

    “Don’t think (Trump) is not making a deal right now with MAGA extremists to ban abortion nationwide in every state, because he’s making it.”

    Although we can’t know what goes on in private, Biden’s claim conflicts with Trump’s most recent public comments on abortion.

    On April 8, Trump released a video on his abortion position and later told reporters that he wouldn’t sign a nationwide ban if it came to his desk.

    In his video, Trump boasted about appointing three justices to the U.S. Supreme Court who overturned Roe v. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court decision that federally protected abortion access. Trump also said he thought that abortion regulation should be left to the states, and that he supports exceptions for rape, incest and the pregnant woman’s life.

    On the campaign trail, Trump has criticized some of the stricter abortion bans. He called Florida’s six-week law poised to take effect May 1 “a terrible mistake.” And he agreed that Arizona’s newly resurrected 1864 total abortion ban went too far.

    Before the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022, Trump expressed more support for a federal abortion ban.

    In 1999, Trump described himself as “pro-choice.” He adopted an antiabortion stance around 2011, when he told a conservative committee that he was “pro-life.”

    When Trump was president in 2017, he endorsed a 20-week national abortion ban that failed to pass.

    In February, The New York Times reported that Trump floated a 16-week nationwide abortion ban in private discussions. In March, Trump indicated in a radio interview that he would back a 15-week ban. 

    Trump surrogates have discussed other executive actions Trump could use once in office, such as enforcing the Comstock Act — a 19th century law that bans the mailing of “obscene” material — that could outlaw abortion across the country by prohibiting sending materials such as medication and surgical equipment that could be used in abortions. Project 2025, a policy platform by a coalition of Trump-aligned groups for a second potential Trump presidency, also referred to the law in its online agenda.

    Trump hasn’t said he would enforce the law this way, but he hasn’t disavowed it either. 

    Trump “said, ‘There has to be punishment for women exercising their reproductive freedom.’” 

    This is misleading. In 2023, we rated a similar statement by Biden Mostly False. 

    Trump made a comment about punishing women in 2016 but quickly walked it back.

    During a March 2016 MSNBC town hall, an audience member asked Trump about his stance on women’s rights in reproductive health decisions. Trump said he was “pro-life,” with exceptions, but gave no further details. In a back-and-forth, host Chris Matthews asked Trump about legal penalties:

    Matthews: “Do you believe in punishment for abortion, yes or no, as a principle?”

    Trump: “The answer is that there has to be some form of punishment.”

    Matthews: “For the woman?”

    Trump: “Yeah, there has to be some form.”

    But Trump retracted the comment that same day after pro- and anti-abortion activists roundly criticized him. He issued a statement that said he meant that physicians should be held legally responsible, not women. It said:

    “If Congress were to pass legislation making abortion illegal and the federal courts upheld this legislation, or any state were permitted to ban abortion under state and federal law, the doctor or any other person performing this illegal act upon a woman would be held legally responsible, not the woman. The woman is a victim in this case as is the life in her womb.”

    The next day, Trump told “Fox & Friends” hosts, “If, in fact, abortion was outlawed, the person performing the abortion, the doctor or whoever it may be that is really doing the act is responsible for the act, not the woman, is responsible.”

    “And today, MAGA Republicans refused to repeal that (1864) ban in Arizona. Trump has literally taken us back 160 years.”

    This leaves out that Trump has criticized Arizona’s recent legal action affecting abortion access.

    On April 9, the Arizona Supreme Court ruled in favor of bringing back a Civil War-era law that would ban all abortions except when a pregnant woman’s life is endangered. Under the law, abortion providers could face two to five years in prison. Barring other legal or legislative action, the abortion measure could take effect as early as June.

    The law is part of Arizona’s Howell Code, nearly 500 pages of laws that governed the Arizona territory before the state’s official 1912 establishment.

    Following the court’s ruling, the Republican-led Arizona House blocked efforts to move forward on a repeal of the 1864 law. The state Senate launched a similar repeal effort.

    The Arizona court concluded that “absent the federal constitutional abortion right” the 1864 law is enforceable. Trump took credit for overturning that federal right.

    Following the ruling, Trump said April 10, “It’s all about state’s rights, and that’ll be straightened out. I’m sure that the governor and everybody else are going to bring it back into reason and that’ll be taken care of, I think, very quickly.”

    Trump was more specific on Truth Social two days later, stating that the Arizona court “went too far on their Abortion Ruling, enacting and approving an inappropriate Law from 1864.” He called on Arizona lawmakers to “remedy what has happened” and called for exceptions for rape, incest and the pregnant woman’s life.

    “One in three women throughout the United States of America” live in a state with an abortion ban at six weeks or sooner.

    This is accurate. At six weeks, most women don’t yet know they are pregnant and haven’t had a chance to see a doctor. And the number of women in that statistic is poised to grow when Florida’s six-week abortion ban takes effect May 1. 

    If the 1864 Arizona law takes effect, it would ban all abortions except when a pregnant woman’s life is in danger. Barring other legal or legislative action, the abortion measure could be instated as early as June, Axios reported.

    Excluding Florida and Arizona, about 21.5 million women and girls of reproductive age currently live in states that ban abortions completely, or after six weeks of pregnancy, U.S. Census data shows. That’s about 29% of women ages 15 to 49. 

    When adding in states that ban abortion after 12 or 15 weeks of pregnancy, the number of affected women grows to about 25 million, or about 40%.

    RELATED: All of our fact-checks on abortion, including statements by former President Donald Trump.

    [ad_2]

    Source link