How a Kamala Harris Candidacy Could Supercharge Democrats’ Message on Abortion
The 19th, July 21, 2024
President Joe Biden’s decision to not seek a second term – and his endorsement of Vice President Kamala Harris to replace him – gives Democrats the opportunity to elevate an eager and consistent messenger on abortion rights heading into the first presidential election since the fall of Roe v. Wade. Harris had already become the administration’s leading voice on the importance of abortion rights, one of the Democratic Party’s top issues, at the federal and state level. She has spent the last year using rallies and interviews to make a clear-eyed case to voters on how a second Donald Trump presidency and Republican majorities in Congress could restrict abortion access. Harris’ nomination would present a stark departure from Biden, who anchored his reelection campaign on abortion but who at times struggled to articulate his party’s view that it is an essential right for women. Biden, a devout Roman Catholic, evolved his position on the issue over five decades in office, going from opposing most abortions to running for reelection on restoring federal protections for abortion under the framework of Roe v. Wade. Democrats’ ability to energize and persuade voters on the issue will be a decisive factor in an election that is only 107 days away. Abortion rights’ popularity with voters has made the issue an albatross for Republicans, costing them victories up and down the ballot over the past two years. The party appears to be trying to neutralize the issue by drawing voters’ attention away from it, as illustrated by the Republican National Convention last week, where just two low-profile speakers mentioned abortion. A growing share of Americans say a candidate’s stance on abortion will be critical in how they vote. Polling from KFF, a nonpartisan health research organization, found that 12 percent of voters said abortion was the most important issue shaping their vote; an additional 52 percent said it was “very important” though not their top issue. Harris’ status as a top contender for the nomination would make her one of the most vocally pro-abortion-rights candidates ever nominated by a major political party, just as the nation enters its first presidential election since the 2022 overturn of Roe v. Wade, which allowed states to ban the procedure.
Iowa’s Ban on Abortions After 6 Weeks Will Go Into Effect Next Week
NBC News, July 23, 2024
An Iowa law banning most abortions in the state will take effect Monday, roughly one year after Gov. Kim Reynolds signed it. The law prohibits physicians from administering an abortion after a fetal heartbeat is detected – around six weeks into pregnancy, before most women even know they’re pregnant. It briefly took effect in July 2023, but a lower court temporarily blocked the ban just days later in response to a legal challenge brought by abortion providers and the American Civil Liberties Union. The Iowa Supreme Court reversed that ruling last month, declaring the policy constitutional and clearing the way for it to go into effect. A district court judge for Polk County said the law can be fully enforced starting July 29 at 8 a.m. CT, to allow time for medical providers to receive notice of the change. The ACLU of Iowa tried earlier this month to petition the Iowa Supreme Court to rehear the case, but the court denied that request Monday. Iowa’s new abortion law includes exceptions for rape, incest, fetal abnormalities that are “incompatible with life” and medical emergencies that endanger the life of a pregnant woman. Previously, Iowa allowed abortions up to 20 weeks, meaning the vast majority of those seeking to terminate a pregnancy were able to do so. The new law puts Iowa among three other states that similarly ban abortion after around six weeks: Florida, Georgia and South Carolina. Fourteen states have full abortion bans, and 22 (including Iowa) have some kind of abortion restriction. Just two abortion clinics in Iowa offer in-person care: the Emma Goldman Clinic and a Planned Parenthood facility in Ames. Planned Parenthood of the Heartland – which represents its Iowa clinics – and the Emma Goldman Clinic were both plaintiffs in the lawsuit challenging the law. Both organizations have said they’ll continue to provide abortions within the limits of state law, but most Iowa residents seeking abortions will have to go to other states.
A New Normal for Abortion Funds Without ‘Roe’
Rewire News Group, July 22, 2024
Since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022, people have been reaching out to abortion funds for help in historic numbers. In the first year after the decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the National Network of Abortion Funds, a nationwide network of 100 abortion funds, financially supported more than 100,000 people seeking abortion care. NNAF disbursed over $36 million to people seeking abortions, and an additional $10 million in practical support funding, which includes transportation, lodging, and child care. The decision also resulted in abortion funds receiving unprecedented amounts in donations. An influx of donations to Indigenous Women Rising, an abortion fund dedicated to Native and Indigenous people in the United States and Canada, allowed the organization to double its staff and expand employee benefits. “We’re so grateful for the folks around the globe who donated right after Dobbs,” said Rachael Lorenzo, Indigenous Women Rising’s executive director. “I’m proud of using those funds to invest in my staff because the work that we do requires a lot of emotional labor, and I want to compensate them for the heavy work they do. It’s made such a positive impact on our organization, especially since a majority of our staff do not have college degrees.” However, that level of donations has not been maintained since what Sylvia Ghazarian, executive director of the Women’s Reproductive Rights Assistance Project, a national abortion fund, calls 2022’s “rage giving.” Ghazarian said when it comes to donations since Dobbs, “we’ve reversed back to where it was. We’re in constant fundraising mode because a person can’t wait to have an abortion.” At the same time, expenses have only grown as state abortion bans and restrictions made getting care more complicated and onerous. “All of us across the board have seen an increase in legal and security costs, which have skyrocketed,” Ghazarian said. “That’s just the reality of this crisis.”
The Anti-Abortion Movement Wants To Replace Emergency Abortions With Riskier Procedures
Jezebel, July 23, 2024
In June, the Supreme Court ruled that, for now, Idaho doctors can perform stabilizing emergency abortion care in Moyle v. U.S. However, the justices ultimately sent the case back to the U.S. 9th Circuit of Appeals, where litigation is ongoing. And now, as we await a new ruling, anti-abortion researchers are seemingly using this time to try and push back on the idea that emergency abortions are ever necessary. In a new paper published this month in Medical Research Archives, these researchers – including James Studnicki and OB-GYN Dr. Ingrid Skop of the anti-abortion Charlotte Lozier Institute – claim that, in lieu of emergency abortions, doctors should perform c-sections, even though c-sections are far riskier and more invasive. These are the same researchers who submitted a since-retracted “study” pushing the lie that medication abortion is unsafe, cited in a different SCOTUS case this summer. If Skop’s name sounds familiar, she’s the same anti-abortion doctor (now serving on Texas’ maternal mortality committee) who recently said abortion bans shouldn’t offer rape exceptions, because nine and 10-year-old victims can safely give birth. On top of being a monstrous thing to say, it’s also medically inaccurate. Further, Skop and Studnicki’s “research” and policy recommendations, which falsely claim there’s no such thing as abortions out of “medical necessity,” are even cited in the far-right Heritage Foundation’s now-infamous Project 2025, which outlines a plan to impose a national abortion ban. That should probably tell you everything you need to know about their trustworthiness.
In Courtrooms and Capitols, Battles Heat Up Over ‘Abortion Pill Reversal’
NBC News, July 20, 2024
The site, run by the anti-abortion group Heartbeat International, describes what it calls “abortion pill reversal,” based on the disputed idea that it’s possible to undo the first step of a medication abortion by taking the hormone progesterone within 24-72 hours. Started as an experimental treatment more than a decade ago, abortion reversal is now widely promoted in anti-abortion circles – and deeply contentious outside of them. Major medical organizations and researchers say it’s inadequately studied and potentially dangerous. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists is one of them, calling the process “unproven and unethical.” The debate has simmered for years, but now, two years after the fall of Roe v. Wade and with the use of medication abortion at an all-time high, legislative efforts and courtroom battles over the treatment have sprung up in at least nine states. Attorneys general in New York and California have sued to block proponents of abortion reversal from peddling claims they say are false advertising. “Abortions cannot be reversed. Any treatments that claim to do so are made without scientific evidence and could be unsafe,” New York Attorney General Letitia James said in a statement. But several states have moved in the opposite direction, considering legislation that would require abortion clinics to tell patients, among other guidance, that abortions can be reversed. In Kansas, a law passed last year but now on hold requires such counseling, similar to earlier laws passed in 14 other states. In Colorado, the first state to ban providers from offering the procedure, anti-abortion advocates have thus far blocked the law from taking effect. This fall, the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists plans to roll out a course on abortion reversal to hospitals and doctors. The Heritage Foundation, the conservative organization behind Project 2025, which advocates for restricting medication abortion, awarded the association a $100,000 grant toward the effort.
ICYMI: In Case You Missed It
The #SCOTUS' EMTALA dismissal means more chaos in our healthcare system. Head to our latest blog to learn what's at stake for patients nationwide. #AbortionIsHealthcare https://t.co/WETlNkAyDz
— National Partnership (@NPWF) July 24, 2024
We respect your privacy. Read our policy.
Note: The information contained in this publication reflects media coverage of women’s health issues and does not necessarily reflect the views of the National Partnership for Women & Families.
