Montana Supreme Court Declares 2021 Abortion Restrictions Unconstitutional
Associated Press, June 10, 2025
Montana’s Supreme Court upheld a lower court ruling that struck down as unconstitutional several laws restricting abortion access, including a ban beyond 20 weeks of gestation. The measures approved by Republican lawmakers in 2021 had been blocked since a judge issued a preliminary injunction against them that year. While the case was pending, voters passed an initiative that enshrined the right to abortions in the Montana Constitution. Justices said in Monday’s ruling that the state constitution included a “right to be left alone” and have access to abortions. They said that right was not affected by a 2022 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that overturned Roe v. Wade and ended a half-century of nationwide abortion rights. Justices cited a 1999 Montana Supreme Court ruling that said the state constitution’s right to privacy includes a woman’s right to obtain an abortion before the fetus is viable from the provider of her choice. The state argued that the 1999 ruling was wrongly decided and has tried unsuccessfully on several occasions to get the Montana Supreme Court to overturn it. The Legislature in 2023 passed another slate of bills seeking to limit abortion access. Last year’s initiative to make abortion a constitutional right in the state passed with backing from 58% of voters.
Democrats Introduce Bill That Aims To Protect Reproductive Health Data
The Guardian, June 11, 2025
Three Democratic members of Congress have introduced a bill to limit companies’ ability to hoover up data about people’s reproductive health — a measure, they say, that is necessary to protect women from persecution in the post-Roe v. Wade era. Representative Sara Jacobs of California, Senator Mazie Hirono of Hawaii and Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon on Wednesday filed the “my body, my data” bill in both the US House and Senate. The bill aims to block companies from collecting, using, retaining or disclosing information about someone’s reproductive health unless that data is essential to providing a requested service. This provision would apply to information about pregnancy, menstruation, abortion, contraception and other matters relating to reproductive health. Law enforcement officials have already attempted to use people’s data trails to identify abortion seekers. The post-Roe landscape is also creating more opportunities for online surveillance. In recent years, orders for abortion pills online have spiked, as tens of thousands more Americans have used online services to obtain pills to self-manage their own abortions. A number of women have also faced criminal charges over miscarriages, leading abortion rights advocates to worry that women who Google phrases like “how to get an abortion” and then miscarry could find themselves in law enforcement’s crosshairs.
Midwest Women May Be Impacted by Trump’s Revocation of Emergency Abortion Guidance
Iowa Public Radio, June 10, 2025
The Trump Administration last week rescinded Biden-era guidance requiring hospitals to provide emergency abortions to women when they are necessary to stabilize their medical condition. The guidance was especially impactful for some states in the Midwest and South with total or near-total abortion bans. In the Midwest, all states with abortion bans in place have exceptions for the life of the mother. Some states, like Indiana, have near-total abortion bans with a few other exceptions, including things like lethal fetal anomalies and serious health risks for the pregnant woman. Kentucky has a similar ban, but mentions the health exception is to prevent “permanent impairment of a life-sustaining organ.” But some states, like Oklahoma, have no exceptions for the health of the mother. Jody Madeira, a professor of law at Indiana University, said that even for states with built-in exceptions to their restrictive abortion laws, the federal guidance provided an extra layer of assurance. Madeira said it was the previous administration’s way of assuring physicians they didn’t have to worry about abortion bans when making complicated medical decisions to save the life or health of a pregnant person. Now, she worries care may be negatively impacted. “It’s essentially, them [The Trump Administration] saying we’re going to leave it up to interpretation for different hospitals about whether or not emergency medical conditions meet their state abortion bans or not,” she said.
New State Laws Aim To Clarify Abortion Bans. Doctors Say It’s Not so Simple.
The 19th, June 11, 2025
Almost three years after the fall of Roe v. Wade made way for near-total abortion bans, state lawmakers are weighing whether to offer more specific guidance about when doctors can perform abortions in a medical crisis. Texas, Kentucky and Tennessee all passed laws this year ostensibly clarifying the scope of their abortion bans, a reaction to climbing sepsis rates and harrowing stories of patients who have suffered or died preventable deaths. Since June 2022, lawmakers in at least nine states have introduced such bills. But doctors, attorneys and policy experts say that the laws being enacted will not solve the problems health providers have been forced to navigate since the end of Roe: The risk of being punished has deterred physicians, hospitals and health systems from providing consistent care, even when it is needed. Clarification bills can have mixed support in legislatures. Local physicians might back tweaks to exemption language if they see it as potentially lifesaving for their patients. Some anti-abortion advocates might also favor changes if the legislation can address certain medical emergencies that they believe fall outside of a state’s ban, such as ectopic pregnancies or preterm premature rupture of membranes. But not all anti-abortion advocates or Republican lawmakers within these statehouses support even a small clarification. The end result are clarification laws that remain unclear to physicians and their employing hospitals and health systems, who can still face high penalties for violating an abortion ban.
Women and Men Diverge More Than Ever on Support for Abortion Rights, Poll Shows
The Guardian, June 9, 2025
Three years after the fall of Roe v. Wade and months after an election that heavily focused on the fight over abortion rights, men and women have never diverged more on their support for access to the procedure, according to new polling from Gallup released Monday. Sixty-one percent of women now identify as “pro-choice”, but only 41% of men say the same, Gallup found. The same percentage of women identified as “pro-choice” in 2022, just after the decision to overturn Roe was leaked, but at the time, 48% of men also did so. Prior to Roe’s collapse, men and women were never more than 10 points apart from one another on the issue, according to decades of Gallup polling. Men and women are also in record disagreement over whether abortion is moral, as 57% of women and 40% men say that it is. Just 41% of men say that abortion should be legal in all or most circumstances, while 56% of women say the same. These gender gaps are likely less due to post-Roe changes in men’s attitudes towards abortion than in changes in women’s attitudes, said Lydia Saad, Gallup’s director of US social research. Specifically: women have become a lot more supportive of abortion since Roe fell. In 2021, 52% of women and 45% of men identified as “pro-choice”. Sudden political upsets do have the power to dramatically change people’s beliefs, Saad said. Typically, however, those changes don’t last and people revert to their norm views within a few years. Men’s declining support for abortion may thus be a sign that they are reverting to their norm — but Saad was surprised women are still so energized by the issue.
ICYMI: In Case You Missed It
Medicaid gives people access to essential health care and supports when they need it most, but enormous Republican-proposed cuts would jeopardize the health of over 70 million people, including children, pregnant people, older adults, people with disabilities and people with low incomes.
Read the blog post by Rolonda Donelson.
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.
