Tag: abortion

No Wisconsin wake-up call: Republicans go full steam ahead on abortion restrictions

[ad_1]

DeSantis, Donald Trump’s chief rival in the Republican presidential primary, has said he will sign the bill. Once he does — and if North Carolina Republicans act, too — abortion would be largely illegal throughout the South. It will all but guarantee that the topic will become a defining point in the 2024 campaign.
“It’s obviously a bad issue for Republicans,” said Sarah Longwell, a moderate Republican strategist who has conducted extensive focus groups with Republican voters.
Republicans know by now that the politics of abortion in the post-Roe v. Wade era are unfavorable to them. They have since seen the stunning defeat of an anti-abortion measure in heavily-Republican Kansas last year, and continuing through a less-than-red-wave midterm.
On the issue of abortion, “we are at a disadvantage, 100 percent,” said Mark Graul, a Republican strategist in Wisconsin who oversaw George W. Bush’s 2004 campaign in the state.
But even as Donald Trump himself has said the party went too far with abortion restrictions, there has been little appetite in the broader GOP for pulling back. Public opinion overall favors abortion rights, with even many Republicans and Republican-leaning independents saying the procedure should be legal in most cases. But among the activist base — including many Republicans who spent decades laboring to overturn Roe — the issue remains a litmus test that features prominently in GOP primaries. The 15-week bans that seemed extraordinarily aggressive just one year ago now are considered half-measures.
“The majority of [state] representatives are in safe seats, so they’re more worried about primaries where social issues play to the base,” said former North Carolina Gov. Pat McCrory, who ran unsuccessfully for a U.S. Senate seat last year. “They’re not really worried about those people running statewide.”
“It’s a very selfish game,” he added.
If Wisconsin is any indication, it may also prove to be enormously destructive to the GOP. In that swing state on Tuesday, liberals flipped the ideological balance of the Supreme Court with Janet Protasiewicz’s lopsided victory over conservative former state Supreme Court Justice Dan Kelly.

Abortion wasn’t the whole story. Money and candidate quality may have mattered more, Graul said. But it was a big part of it — in a state that has a controversial, 19th-century abortion ban on the books, and where Protasiewicz campaigned heavily on abortion rights.
Some Republicans looking ahead to 2024 are already sounding the alarm.
Earlier this week, Jon Schweppe, policy director at the American Principles Project, a conservative think tank, warned on Twitter that “Republicans need to figure out the abortion issue ASAP. We are getting killed by indie voters who think we support full bans with no exceptions.”
He urged them to “suck it up” and unite behind Sen. Lindsey Graham’s proposed 15-week abortion ban, hoping to blunt Democrats’ criticisms of more restrictive measures.
“I want to ban abortion,” Schweppe said in an interview on Thursday. “That’s a long-term goal. I think almost every pro-lifer will tell you that’s the case. We believe it’s murder. But you know, you’re not going to get there overnight, and you’re not going to get there by doing something that’s against the will of the American people.”
He added: “If the pro-life movement doesn’t get their shit together, ultimately, Republicans are going to say, ‘Well, we have to get elected, and the pro-life movement is a liability.”
Longwell’s focus groups would appear to bear that out. Abortion, she said, is often the first example voters raise when explaining why they view a candidate as “extreme.” And as Donald Trump’s loss in 2020 and the midterms laid bare, that designation is deadly in a general election.
“The gap between what base voters demand on abortion, on election denialism, on fidelity to Trump — the gap between that and what swing voters are up for has gotten very wide,” Longwell said. “You always had to do a general election pivot, but it’s turning from a pivot into a massive leap.”
For Democrats, it’s becoming an ongoing political gift — a cudgel they will use to hit Republicans in the run-up to 2024.
Citing what he called Wisconsin’s experience with “the nightmare that Republicans want to inflict on the entire country,” Ben Wikler, the state Democratic Party chair, said, “the political impact of it represents a tectonic shift.”

[ad_2]
#Wisconsin #wakeup #call #Republicans #full #steam #ahead #abortion #restrictions
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

April 7, 2023
Liberals take over Wisconsin Supreme Court — with major implications for abortion

[ad_1]

The race was the most expensive state judicial race in American history. As of late last week, over $45 million has been spent on the contest, according to WisPolitics.com.
That is roughly three times the previous record.
The election will have wide-sweeping effects on the state, including, in the nearest-term, access to abortion in Wisconsin. The state has a 1840s law on the books that bans abortion in nearly all instances in the state. State Attorney General Josh Kaul, a Democrat, has brought a lawsuit challenging that law in state court that is widely expected to eventually land in front of the state Supreme Court.
But in the interim, abortion providers have stopped performing the procedure in the state.
That was an animating factor for Protasiewicz’s campaign, whose advertising regularly spoke about abortion rights. On the trail, she has repeatedly said “my personal value is that a woman has a right to choose,” while stressing that she is merely speaking about her values and not prejudging any particular court case.
The race court could have a significant impact on election laws in the state, which has regularly ruled on contentious election issues since the 2020 election.
Perhaps most notably, the state Supreme Court turned away then-President Donald Trump’s attempts to throw out the 2020 election results in the state.
Its 4-to-3 vote came only after Justice Brian Hagedorn, a conservative who sometimes served as a swing vote, joined the liberal bloc to reject the case.

Protasiewicz’s win also makes Democrats much more likely to bring challenges to the state’s congressional and legislative lines.
Republicans have near-supermajorities in both legislative chambers and a 6-2 split of the congressional delegation in a state that routinely votes close to 50-50 on a statewide level.
Similarly to her comments about values on abortion, Protasiewicz has said that it is clear the maps in the state are unfair.“
Wisconsin has probably the most gerrymandered maps in the entire country,” she said in an interview with POLITICO in February. “I anticipate that it’s possible that some type of litigation in regard to fair maps could come before the Supreme Court.”
[ad_2]
#Liberals #Wisconsin #Supreme #Court #major #implications #abortion
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

April 5, 2023
Liberals take over Wisconsin Supreme Court — with major implications for abortion

[ad_1]

Kelly acknowledged his loss on Tuesday evening, but savaged the now-justice elect in his concession speech. “I wish in circumstances like this, I would be able to concede to a worthy opponent, but I do not have a worthy opponent,” he said, calling Protasiewicz’ campaign “beneath contempt” that launched “rancid slanders.” He said she would damage the integrity of the court.
Protasiewicz struck a more optimistic tone. “It means that our democracy will always prevail,” she said at her victory night party. “Too many have tried to overturn the will of the people. Today’s result shows that Wisconsinites believe in democracy and the democratic process.”
The race was the most expensive state judicial race in American history. As of late last week, over $45 million has been spent on the contest, according to WisPolitics.com.
That is roughly three times the previous record.
The election will have wide-sweeping effects on the state, including, in the nearest-term, access to abortion in Wisconsin. The state has a 1840s law on the books that bans abortion in nearly all instances in the state. State Attorney General Josh Kaul, a Democrat, has brought a lawsuit challenging that law in state court that is widely expected to eventually land in front of the state Supreme Court.
But in the interim, abortion providers have stopped performing the procedure in the state.
That was an animating factor for Protasiewicz’s campaign, whose advertising regularly spoke about abortion rights. On the trail, she has repeatedly said “my personal value is that a woman has a right to choose,” while stressing that she is merely speaking about her values and not prejudging any particular court case.
The race court could have a significant impact on election laws in the state, which has regularly ruled on contentious election issues since the 2020 election.

Perhaps most notably, the state Supreme Court turned away then-President Donald Trump’s attempts to throw out the 2020 election results in the state.
Its 4-to-3 vote came only after Justice Brian Hagedorn, a conservative who sometimes served as a swing vote, joined the liberal bloc to reject the case.
Protasiewicz’s win also makes Democrats much more likely to bring challenges to the state’s congressional and legislative lines.
Republicans have near-supermajorities in both legislative chambers and a 6-2 split of the congressional delegation in a state that routinely votes close to 50-50 on a statewide level.
Similarly to her comments about values on abortion, Protasiewicz has said that it is clear the maps in the state are unfair.“
Wisconsin has probably the most gerrymandered maps in the entire country,” she said in an interview with POLITICO in February. “I anticipate that it’s possible that some type of litigation in regard to fair maps could come before the Supreme Court.”
[ad_2]
#Liberals #Wisconsin #Supreme #Court #major #implications #abortion
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

April 5, 2023
Florida Senate approves 6-week abortion ban as two Republicans vote ‘no’

[ad_1]
Before the vote Monday, Grall invoked comments made by former President Bill Clinton, a Democrat who had said abortions should be safe, legal and rare.
“We’re so far from safe, legal and rare, we have normalized and sterilized the taking of life as health care,” Grall said. “We’ve heard women will continue to have abortions, but that’s like saying people will continue murdering people.”
The House is expected to take up the issue next week. Republicans hold a supermajority in the Legislature, and the bill is expected to have no difficulties reaching DeSantis, who also supports it.
The debate on the bill was halted for 10 minutes by protesters in the public-viewing gallery who screamed comments such as “People will die” and “Abortion is health care.” State Sen. Ileana Garcia (R-Miami) began pointing at protesters and said, “You shut up,” before Senate President Kathleen Passidomo ordered security to clear the public-viewing gallery.
After the session resumed, state Sen. Alexis Calatayud (R-Miami) said she was voting against the 6-week ban on behalf of her constituents, but she still supported several other parts of the bill.
“I’m not supporting this bill today, but I believe it will pass and it will become the law in this state,” said Calatayud, who also voted against the bill in two committee hearings. “And I believe it will go a long way to help change the hearts and minds influenced by a decade of anti-life culture.”
The second opposing Republican vote was from state Sen. Cory Simon (R-Tallahassee), who offered no comment during the debate. Simon also did not vote on the bill during its final Senate committee meeting last week. Simon’s district includes Leon County, which is a stronghold for Democrats.
Democrats argued that the bill supported Christian principles over health care for women, and that the government should not interfere in decisions that a patient makes with a doctor. State Sen. Tracie Davis (D-Jacksonville) said the measure was written to make women feel ashamed of making health-care decisions.

“I won’t let anyone make me feel ashamed and not have to acknowledge it,” Davis said. “No woman should be ashamed to have an abortion.”
[ad_2]
#Florida #Senate #approves #6week #abortion #ban #Republicans #vote
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

April 4, 2023
Dem AGs clash with Biden admin over abortion pill restrictions

[ad_1]

Should the judge rule in their favor, the case could eliminate restrictions in those states — broadening access to the drug for tens of millions of people. But the oral arguments also come as a federal judge in Texas is set to rule on whether to ban the pills entirely, and the potential for clashing federal court decisions could push the issue to the U.S. Supreme Court, which overturned Roe v. Wade in June.
The Biden administration has repeatedly criticized GOP officials and corporate entities in recent months for moving to curb access to abortion pills — noting that they have been deemed safe and effective by the FDA for nearly 25 years and have become the most popular way of terminating a pregnancy in the U.S.
Yet it is also in court fighting to maintain restrictions on the pills known as REMS — or Risk Evaluation & Mitigation Strategies — that the FDA places on a narrow class of drugs. Namely, Biden administration is defending requirements that patients sign a “Patient Agreement Form” acknowledging the risks of the medication and that health care providers who prescribe the drug first obtain certification and prove they can accurately date pregnancies, diagnose ectopic pregnancies, and provide or arrange for a follow-up care if needed.
The FDA declined to comment on the case, citing the ongoing litigation.
Oregon Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum is co-leading the lawsuit with Ferguson, and they are joined by the Democratic attorneys general representing Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Michigan, Nevada, New Mexico, Rhode Island and Vermont.
The pill restrictions, the group claims, are burdensome for both patients and doctors and the documentation requirements put them at risk for harassment or violence.
The Justice Department, meanwhile, is arguing that the attorneys general challenging the FDA rules waited too long to do so, didn’t follow the proper procedure and have failed to prove the remaining pill restrictions are harming patients in their states.
“They cannot credibly claim to be irreparably harmed by FDA’s decision to retain two 22-year-old requirements,” Biden administration attorneys wrote in a brief filed earlier in March. “Their delay shows that any harm is not so significant as to justify a preliminary injunction that would upset the status quo.”

Even as the Democratic officials and the FDA face off in Washington State on Tuesday, they’re on the same side in the Texas case, arguing that the anti-abortion groups suing the agency have no standing, haven’t proved the pills are causing harm and are infringing on the FDA’s authority to regulate the drugs. The same group of Attorneys General, plus several others, submitted amicus briefs in the Texas case backing the FDA rules around abortion medication.
When the FDA originally approved mifepristone for market in 2000, after many years of debate, the agency said the pills could only be dispensed in person by a certified physician. The Biden administration has acted multiple times to loosen those restrictions. In 2021, soon after Biden took office, the FDA allowed the drugs to be prescribed via telemedicine and delivered by mail — at first only for the duration of the Covid-19 pandemic and then permanently. Then, this January, the FDA announced that retail pharmacies could dispense the pills to patients with a prescription and the Justice Department reaffirmed that mailing the pills is not considered a federal crime under the Comstock Act.
Still, Ferguson and his fellow attorneys general argue the remaining restrictions on the pills are not justified given their well-documented safety record and lower rate of complications compared to many other over-the-counter medications. They also say the restrictions prevent providers in their states from serving both their own residents and the high volume of patients coming in from states with abortion restrictions.
“The FDA has approved over 20,000 drugs without limitations. So why is mifepristone listed along with fentanyl as one of only 60 drugs that have limitations?” he said. “It doesn’t make sense from a science perspective. And that’s why we think we’re going to prevail.”
[ad_2]
#Dem #AGs #clash #Biden #admin #abortion #pill #restrictions
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

March 28, 2023
Abortion puts New York Republicans on defense

[ad_1]
Already, House Majority PAC, the Democratic Party’s main House-specific political action committee, is budgeting $45 million to compete in New York next cycle. And the group’s president, Mike Smith, firmly declared that “the path to a Democratic House Majority runs through New York.”
How able Democrats are in turning the ‘24 election cycle into a referendum on abortion policy will go a long way toward determining the party’s success at the ballot box. Advocates believe that Republicans may just play into their hands.
They believe they can spotlight a continued appetite for anti-abortion legislation in a GOP-led House, as well as a looming court case that could restrict abortion even in states where it is protected by state laws.
The House has already voted on one bill that would make it a felony to not provide medical assistance to an infant that survives an attempted abortion (which is already illegal), and it has promised a speedy vote on a second that would put stricter bans on federal funding for the procedure.
The newly elected Republicans from New York — Reps. Anthony D’Esposito, Mike Lawler, Marc Molinaro, George Santos, Nick LaLota, and Brandon Williams — all voted in favor of the first bill, which passed the House.
These members are all targets of the Democratic congressional campaigns spending group, House Majority PAC. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, chaired by Rep. Suzan DelBene (D-Wash.), has not yet released its target list.
D’Esposito, Molinaro, LaLota, and Williams did not respond to multiple requests for comment. Lawler’s office denied an interview request and he denied a request made in person. The National Republican Congressional Committee also declined to comment on this issue.
Abortion rights advocates are also anticipating that a federal judge will rescind the FDA’s approval of a popular abortion drug, in Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. FDA, significantly restricting access to abortion. The decision is still pending, but such a move would bring the issue to the fore for many voters, even in states with strong protections for abortion. Some national drugstore chains like Walgreens have voluntarily pulled the drug from their shelves in anticipation of a decision in the case.

That is just one component of the abortion access tug-of-war. Stitzlein, of NARAL, said while the FDA case is the current battle, he believes the anti-abortion movement will continue challenging access on other fronts.
“I remain convinced that there’s going to be a move to a national abortion ban by Republicans in the House and in the Senate. And nothing I’ve seen dissuades me of that,” said Rep. Joe Morelle (D-N.Y.), who represents an upstate battleground district, in an interview with POLITICO. “The protections that are offered in states like New York and California, if there’s a national abortion ban, won’t be a way to protect women anymore.”
Morelle, who’s race was considered a toss up last cycle, said he not only talked about his support for abortion access on the trail but made it a “centerpiece” of his campaign.
“Incumbents here, they’re going to have to make a decision about whether or not they’re going to adhere to the national agenda that has been established by, frankly, pretty extreme members of the Republican Party,” Morelle said. Or if “they’re going to represent the interests of people in their communities that are much more moderate.”
Advocates and Democratic lawmakers believe even the threat of a national ban will activate voters in New York in the same way the initial Dobbs decision did for voters in purple and red states, from Michigan to Kansas, in the midterms.
“This is an issue that’s not going away because Republicans are going to keep pushing the envelope and keep pushing the envelope,” House Majority PAC Executive Director Abby Curran Horrell said in an interview with POLITICO.
In 2024, Republicans in congressional races in reliably blue states will also be running alongside whomever ends up being the GOP presidential nominee. Nearly all the candidates have already declared support for abortion restrictions or bans.
Former President Donald Trump has said Republicans should have moderated their anti-abortion stance in the 2022 cycle, but he also takes credit for putting in place the Supreme Court justices who overturned Roe v. Wade. Former Vice President Mike Pence supports an outright national abortion ban. And Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis is expected to sign a six-week abortion ban into law in his state.
“The fact that they will presumably support [the nominee] will be showing that they are objectively anti-choice,” said Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) about the frontline Republicans in New York. “Any anti-choice vote they make will obviously come back to bite them.”
If there’s any success in restricting access, Nadler said, “in New York, I think the Republicans are going to pay very dearly.”
[ad_2]
#Abortion #puts #York #Republicans #defense
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

March 27, 2023
How Florida uses a little-known law to punish abortion clinics

[ad_1]
Florida has become a hub for abortions since the fall of Roe v. Wade last year, despite a new law limiting abortions after 15 weeks. Thousands of people have come to Florida from across the southeast to get abortions as other states in the region impose even stricter limits on access, and abortion rights groups say the “24 hour” rule will further burden people traveling to Florida who will be forced to stay in the state longer.
“We have a lot of independent clinics in this state that are working hard to provide women with access, so it’s a shame,” Laura Goodhue, executive director of the Florida Alliance of Planned Parenthood Affiliates, said in an interview. “And women are getting hurt in the process, especially the ones coming from out of state.”
So far, the agency has issued almost $500,000 in fines to 14 of Florida’s 52 abortion clinics. While Planned Parenthood has an advocacy arm that helped prepare its 38 Florida clinics for the “24 hour” law, smaller independent clinics couldn’t afford the same luxury, Goodhue said.
The “24 hour” rule is another example of Florida restricting abortion access, though it’s not has high profile as the 2022 law banning abortion at 15 weeks that the Republican-controlled Legislature approved last year. The law doesn’t include exceptions for rape or incest.
This year, with Gov. Ron DeSantis’ support, Florida Republicans are seeking to ban abortions at six weeks of pregnancy. Republicans hold supermajorities in the state House and Senate, so Democrats have no power to even slow the GOP from approving the measure. The new proposal, and “24 hour law,” are strong indicators that some GOP-led states will continue to crack down on abortions in the wake of last year’s Supreme Court decision overturning Roe.
Florida Democratic House leader Rep. Fentrice Driskell had especially harsh words for Republicans.
“It’s very easy to be tough on abortion when you’re sitting hundreds of miles away in your ivory tower in Tallahassee versus these doctors and nurses who are dealing with women who are about to make one of the most consequential decisions of their lives,” Driskell said.
State inspectors levied the maximum $1,000 fine on clinics whose individual patient files didn’t include any notes or paperwork showing compliance with the 24-hour law. The state issued the largest fine, $193,000, against an Orlando abortion clinic that inspectors alleged violated the law for 193 patients.

The clinic, Center of Orlando for Women, however, challenged the fine and a lawyer representing it, Julie Gallagher, argued that imposing the maximum fine for each violation was arbitrary and unfair, according to records filed with the state Division of Administrative Hearings.
Gallagher and lawyers representing six other clinics that are challenging the fines claimed state inspectors also failed to account for clinics’ ongoing efforts to comply with the law.
“At trial, the agency had no justification, or explanation, for the maximum fine other than ‘we always start at the maximum’ or ‘we always do it this way,’” Gallagher wrote in an email to POLITICO. “This is not a valid use of agency discretion.”
Lawyers for AHCA, however, wrote in agency documents that the Center of Orlando for Women failed to conduct due diligence to prepare for the “24 hour” law, including hiring a legal adviser or calling other clinics for advice.
The lawyers also wrote that the agency is under no legal obligation to promptly alert clinics about changes in law.
The state began enforcing the 24 hour law after a Leon County Circuit Court Judge Angela Dempsey tossed out the legal challenge to the law in April, which was first filed by the Bread and Roses Women’s Health Center in Gainesville. Lawyers from the ACLU argued on behalf of the clinic that the law violated a privacy right in the state Constitution that had been successfully cited in the past to uphold abortion protections.
Dempsey, however, wrote in an order that standards for several medical procedures also require that patients wait 24 hours. She was appointed to the bench by former GOP Gov. Jeb Bush.
“Twenty-four hours is the minimum time needed to sleep on such an important decision,” Dempsey wrote. “And it is shorter than or the same waiting periods for other decisions that implicate significant constitutional interests — privacy.”
The state started issuing fines 17 days after Dempsey issued her final ruling on April 25, AHCA spokesperson Bailey Smith said.
“The 17 days between the circuit court judge’s orders provided ample notice of her decision for clinics to comply,” Smith wrote in an email. “The Agency’s Division of Health Quality Assurance has surveyors throughout that state that are efficient and diligent in their work to protect the health and safety of Floridians.”
Of the 14 clinics fined, at least three settled with the state for reduced fines. Today’s Women Medical Center in Miami, for example, was initially levied a $2,000 fine but the state settled for $500 after the medical director of the clinic provided additional information showing that the violations were not as serious as reported by an inspector. For instance, the medical equipment at the clinic used to observe the fetus records the date and time of each examination, but the equipment was not programmed to include the date and time information in patient files.
A doctor with the clinic declined to speak on the record, fearing backlash from anti-abortion groups.
[ad_2]
#Florida #littleknown #law #punish #abortion #clinics
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

March 26, 2023
Abortion on the ballot? Not if these Republican lawmakers can help it

[ad_1]

Legislatures in Arkansas, Florida, Idaho, Missouri, North Dakota, Ohio and Oklahoma are debating bills this session that would hike the filing fees, raise the number of signatures required to get on the ballot, restrict who can collect signatures, mandate broader geographic distribution of signatures, and raise the vote threshold to pass an amendment from a majority to a supermajority. While the bills vary in wording, they would have the same impact: limiting voters’ power to override abortion restrictions that Republicans imposed, which took effect after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade last year.
After watching the pro-abortion rights side win all six ballot initiative fights related to abortion in 2022 — including in conservative states such as Kansas and Kentucky — conservatives fear, and are mobilizing to avoid, a repeat.
“It was a wake-up call that taught us we have a ton of work to do,” said Kelsey Pritchard, the state public affairs director for Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, which plans to spend tens of millions of dollars on ballot initiative fights on abortion over the next two years. “We’re going to be really engaged on these ballot measures that are often very radical and go far beyond what Roe ever did.”
In Mississippi, where a court order froze all ballot efforts in 2021, GOP lawmakers are advancing legislation that would restore the mechanism but prohibit voters from putting abortion-related measures on the ballot.
“I think it just continues the policy of Mississippi and our state leaders that we’re going to be a pro-life state,” said Mississippi state Rep. Nick Bain, who presented the bill on the House floor.
But in most states, the GOP proposals to tighten restrictions on ballot initiatives are not explicitly targeting abortion. The push to change the rules began years before the Dobbs decision overturned Roe v. Wade in June of 2022 — spurred by progressive efforts to legalize marijuana, expand Medicaid and raise the minimum wage in several red states — though it reached new heights over the past year as voters and elected officials clashed over abortion policies.
Still, some anti-abortion activists worry that the trend could backfire, preventing groups from using the tactic to pass their own constitutional amendments via popular vote.
“In Florida, it’s a double-edged sword,” said Andrew Shirvell, the leader of the group Florida Voice for the Unborn that is working to put an anti-abortion measure on the 2024 ballot. “So we’re conflicted about it, because there is a large contingent of pro-life grassroots advocates who feel our governor and legislature have failed us on this issue for far too long and want to take things into our own hands.”

Interest on the left in using ballot initiatives to protect or expand abortion access exploded in the wake of the 2022 midterm elections. Efforts are already underway in Missouri, Ohio and South Dakota to insert language restoring abortion rights into the states’ constitutions, while advocates in several other states are mulling their options.
The campaign is furthest along in Ohio, where abortion rights advocates began collecting signatures this week. A coalition of anti-abortion groups called Protect Women Ohio formed in response and announced a $5 million ad buy this week to air a 30-second spot suggesting the proposed amendment would take away parents’ rights to decide whether their children should obtain abortions and other kinds of health care.
At the same time, some Ohio lawmakers are pushing for a proposal that would raise the voter approval threshold for constitutional amendments from a simple majority to 60 percent.
In Missouri, where progressive groups have submitted several versions of an abortion-rights ballot initiative to state authorities for review, lawmakers are similarly weighing proposals to impose a supermajority vote requirement and mandate that the measure pass in more than half of Missouri House districts to take effect.
“It’s about making sure everyone has a voice, and that includes middle Missouri as well,” said Missouri Right to Life Executive Director Susan Klein. “We have known for some time that the threat to legalize abortion was going around different states and would ultimately come to Missouri. We’ve been hard at work preparing for this challenge and we’re ready.”
In Idaho, lawmakers are trying to require backers of initiative petitions to gather signatures from 6 percent of registered voters to qualify for the ballot.
“I call these bills ‘death by a thousand cuts,’” said Kelly Hall, the executive director of the progressive ballot initiative group The Fairness Project. “When you hear about each one in isolation, they seem like not that big a deal. But taken together, they have an exclusionary effect on people’s participation in democracy.”
Conservative lawmakers and advocates pushing the rule changes say they reflect their beliefs about how laws should be crafted and are not solely about abortion — but they are upfront about wanting to make it harder to pass the kind of broad protections voters in California, Michigan and Vermont enacted last year.
“I did not start this out due to abortion, but … Planned Parenthood is actively trying to enshrine a lack of protections for the unborn into constitutions,” said North Dakota state Sen. Janne Myrdal, who heads the state legislature’s Pro-Life Caucus. “You can sit in California or New York or Washington and throw a dart, attach a couple million dollars to it, and you change our constitution.”
The resolution Myrdal is sponsoring, which passed the Senate last month and is awaiting a vote in the House, would require proposed constitutional amendments to pass twice — during the primary and general elections — and bump up the signature-gathering requirement from 4 percent to 5 percent of residents. If approved, the proposed changes would appear on the state’s 2024 ballot.
Major national anti-abortion groups say they’re not formally endorsing these efforts, but support the GOP lawmakers behind them.
“It starts to diminish the importance of a constitution if it can be changed by the whim of the current culture,” Carol Tobias, the president of the National Right to Life Committee, said.
Even in states that have not yet taken steps to put an abortion-rights measure on the ballot, conservative fears of such a move are driving some surprising legislative action.
In Oklahoma, the anti-abortion leader Lauinger is arguing to lawmakers that polling shows overwhelming support for rape and incest exceptions — as one lawmaker has proposed in a bill that cleared its first committee last month — and overwhelming opposition to leaving the state’s ban as-is.
If the state didn’t have a ballot measure process, he said, he wouldn’t support exceptions. But since that threat exists, he argued, “We must not allow the perfect to be the enemy of the good.”
“The abortion industry has the weapon to defeat what we regard as the ideal policy,” Lauinger told the lawmakers. “The initiative petition is their trump card.”
Lauinger did not respond to multiple requests for comment. Yet National Right to Life, the parent group of his organization, told POLITICO it backs his argument that it’s better to make exceptions for rape and incest than risk a sweeping ballot initiative enshrining the right to abortion in the state constitution.
“This isn’t a betrayal,” insisted Tobias. “If you really look at what we’re facing, we could either save 95 percent of all babies or we could lose everything and all babies could be subject to death. It’s kind of hard to not see the reality.”
Advocates on both sides of the abortion fight stress, however, that a ballot initiative fight in Oklahoma is still possible — even likely — whether the state approves exceptions for rape and incest or not.
“They’re probably going to try to do one anyway, regardless of what we do,” said Oklahoma state Rep. Jim Olsen, a Republican who launched an effort with other conservative lawmakers in the state to defeat the exceptions bill. “The fight hasn’t even come and we’re already backing away.”
[ad_2]
#Abortion #ballot #Republican #lawmakers
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

March 19, 2023
Wyoming governor signs measure prohibiting abortion pills

[ad_1]

Wyoming’s ban on abortion pills would take effect in July, pending any legal action that could potentially delay that. The implementation date of the sweeping legislation banning all abortions that Gordon allowed to go into law is not specified in the bill.
With an earlier ban tied up in court, abortion currently remains legal in the state up to viability, or when the fetus could survive outside the womb.
In a statement, Gordon expressed concern that the latter law, dubbed the Life is a Human Right Act would result in a lawsuit that will “delay any resolution to the constitutionality of the abortion ban in Wyoming.”
He noted that earlier in the day, plaintiffs in an ongoing lawsuit filed a challenge to the new law in the event he did not issue a veto.
“I believe this question needs to be decided as soon as possible so that the issue of abortion in Wyoming can be finally resolved, and that is best done with a vote of the people,” Gordon, a Republican, said in a statement.
In a statement, Wyoming ACLU advocacy director Antonio Serrano criticized Gordon’s decision to sign the ban on abortion pills, which are already prohibited in a number of states that have total bans on all types of abortion.
“A person’s health, not politics, should guide important medical decisions — including the decision to have an abortion,” Serrano said.
Of the 15 states that have limited access to the pills, six require an in-person physician visit. Those laws could withstand court challenges; states have long had authority over how physicians, pharmacists and other providers practice medicine.

States also set the rules for telemedicine consultations used to prescribe medications. Generally that means health providers in states with restrictions on abortion pills could face penalties, such as fines or license suspension, for trying to send pills through the mail.
Women have already been traveling across state lines to places where abortion pill access is easier. That trend is expected to increase.
Since the reversal of Roe last June, abortion restrictions have been up to states and the landscape has shifted quickly. Thirteen states are now enforcing bans on abortion at any point in pregnancy, and one more, Georgia, bans it once cardiac activity can be detected, or at about six weeks’ gestation.
Courts have put on hold enforcement of abortion bans or deep restrictions in Arizona, Indiana, Montana, Ohio, South Carolina, Utah and Wyoming. Idaho courts have forced the state to allow abortions during medical emergencies.
[ad_2]
#Wyoming #governor #signs #measure #prohibiting #abortion #pills
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

March 18, 2023
Conservative Texas judge weighs challenge to abortion pills

[ad_1]

Mifepristone, when combined with a second pill, has become the most common method of abortion in the U.S. and has been increasingly prescribed since Roe was overturned.
Acknowledging the significance of the case, Kacsmaryk, who was appointed by then-President Donald Trump, asked Baptist if he could cite a prior example of a court removing an FDA-approved drug after many years on the market.
Baptist acknowledged that there are no prior examples, but he blamed the drug’s longevity on the FDA’s “stonewalling” of his group’s prior requests to remove the drug. The group petitioned the FDA in 2002 and in 2019 seeking to curb access to the pill.
Lawyers for the FDA are expected to argue that pulling mifepristone would upend reproductive care for U.S. women and undermine the government’s scientific oversight of prescription drugs.
Kacsmaryk gave each side two hours to make their arguments — with time for rebuttal — in the high-stakes case. Mifepristone’s manufacturer, Danco Laboratories, will join the FDA in arguing to keep the pill available.
A ruling could come any time after arguments conclude. A decision against the drug would be swiftly appealed by U.S. Department of Justice attorneys representing the FDA, who would also likely seek an emergency stay to stop it from taking effect while the case proceeds.
One of the alliance’s chief arguments against the FDA is that it misused its authorities when it originally approved the pill.
The FDA reviewed the drug under its so-called accelerated approval program, which was created in the early 1990s to speed access to the first HIV drugs. Since then, it’s been used to expedite drugs for cancer and other “serious or life-threatening diseases.”

The alliance, which was also involved in the lawsuit that led the Supreme Court to overturn Roe, argues that pregnancy is not a disease and therefore mifepristone should not have been considered for accelerated approval.
“The contrast between these illnesses and the FDA jamming pregnancy into … the FDA regulations could not be more stark,” Baptist told Kacsmaryk.
But the FDA says the group’s argument is flawed on multiple counts. First, FDA regulations make clear that pregnancy is considered a “medical condition” that can be serious and life-threatening in some cases.
Second, while the FDA reviewed the drug under its accelerated approval regime, it didn’t expedite the drug’s review. In fact, approval only came after four years of deliberation. Instead, the FDA used regulatory powers under the accelerated program to add extra safety restrictions to mifepristone, including requiring physicians to be certified before prescribing it.
The hearing is the first in the case and is being closely watched by groups on both sides of the abortion issue in light of the reversal of Roe. Removing mifepristone from the market would curtail access to abortion even in states where it’s legal.
If Kacsmaryk rules against the FDA, it’s unclear how quickly access to mifepristone could be curtailed or how the process would work. The FDA has its own procedures for revoking drug approvals that involve public hearings and scientific deliberations, which can take months or years.
If mifepristone is sidelined, clinics and doctors that prescribe the combination say they would switch to using only misoprostol, the other drug used in the two-drug combination. That single-drug approach has a slightly lower rate of effectiveness in ending pregnancies but is widely used in countries where mifepristone is illegal or unavailable.
In addition to challenging mifepristone’s approval process, the lawsuit takes aim at several later FDA decisions that loosened restrictions on the pill, including eliminating a requirement that women pick it up in person.
Lawyers for the FDA have pointed out that serious side effects with mifepristone are rare, and the agency has repeatedly affirmed the drug’s safety by reviewing subsequent studies and data. Pulling the drug more than 20 years after approval would be “extraordinary and unprecedented,” the government stated in its legal response.
[ad_2]
#Conservative #Texas #judge #weighs #challenge #abortion #pills
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

March 16, 2023