US Politics

OpinionAbortionThe Guardian view on the Texas abortion ban: this is not the endEditorialThe supreme court’s refusal to block the law marks a grave blow to the freedom and safety of women Thu 2 Sep 2021 13.45 EDTLast modified on Thu 2 Sep 2021 14.31 EDTThe cruel, vindictive and dangerous law that has taken effect in Texas is much more than the most extreme anti-abortion legislation in the United States. To many, it understandably feels like the beginning of the end – denying women the rights enjoyed under the landmark Roe v Wade ruling, which established that abortion is legal before the foetus is viable outside the womb, at around 24 weeks. It will further embolden the religious right. Though polling suggests the majority of Americans believe that terminations should be legal in most or all cases, this is already the worst ever legislative year for restrictions.But it is better understood as the end of the beginning. The right to abortion has, in practice, been systematically dismantled through methods ranging from intimidation to cynical regulation. This moment is the culmination of the first stage in a decades-long war on the rights of women, made possible by Donald Trump’s appointment of judges known to support restricting reproductive rights. A divided supreme court refused to block the legislation while the legal battle over it plays out.This is a near-total abortion ban, with an exemption only for medical emergencies. The six-week limit in practice applies not from fertilisation, but from six weeks after a woman’s last period, used by doctors to date pregnancies – when most women will not even know they are pregnant. Up to 90% of the state’s procedures happened after that time. International evidence, and America’s own past, testifies that it will not stop abortions. It will push them underground, endangering women’s health and lives. It is an attack on the rights of all women, but above all will punish those who are poor and black, who already struggled to access services and will not be able to travel outside the state easily. It will hurt women who want to control their own bodies, including survivors of incest, rape and abuse. Many states have enacted similar laws, which have been blocked. But this one is especially egregious. It has used the architecture of the state to promote the rule of the mob. It prohibits officials from enforcing it, instead deputising ordinary citizens to sue anyone for suspected violations. While designed this way to make legal challenges harder, it is part of the broader turn of Trump Republicans towards vigilantism and away from democratic institutions. By promising a $10,000 bounty to anyone who sues successfully, it encourages the greedy as well as vindictive ex-partners and zealots to act. Not only abortion providers, but anyone who “aids and abets” an abortion is liable; it appears that even someone who drives a woman to a clinic could be targeted. There is no redress against malicious suits, even in cases where the plaintiff has a past history of similar claims. The result is that doctors and providers who comply with the law can still be put out of business by vexatious claims.Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s blistering dissent attacked the supreme court’s inaction in the face of “a breathtaking act of defiance – of the constitution, of this court’s precedents and of rights of women seeking abortions throughout Texas”. But she is in the minority as the court prepares to rule on a separate case – Mississippi’s ban on most abortions after 15 weeks – which anti-abortion activists see as a chance to overturn Roe v Wade. If that happens, bans will automatically come into force under trigger statutes enacted by multiple states. Others would be able to enforce pre-Roe v Wade bans that remain on their books.This law, like the wider anti-abortion drive, hurts women’s freedom, their health and even their lives. It has been achieved through the relentless efforts of activists who are not merely egging on but also funding others around the world. Meeting and defeating these challenges will require an equally committed, comprehensive and ambitious campaign. The opponents of women’s freedom will not stop. Defenders cannot either. This law will galvanise them.TopicsAbortionOpinionWomenUS supreme courtHealthRepublicansUS politicsLaw (US)editorialsReuse this content More

OpinionUS politicsTexas now has abortion ‘bounty hunters’: read Sonia Sotomayor’s scathing legal dissentS More

OpinionUS politicsIt’s time to brace ourselves for a world without Roe v Wade. Here’s what we must doK More

TexasMost extreme abortion law in US takes effect in TexasUS supreme court fails to act to block near-total ban that allows private citizens to sue abortion providers Mary TumaWed 1 Sep 2021 07.25 EDTLast modified on Wed 1 Sep 2021 15.19 EDTThe most radical abortion law in the US has gone into effect, despite legal efforts to block it.A near-total abortion ban in Texas empowers any private citizen to sue an abortion provider who violates the law, opening the floodgates to harassing and frivolous lawsuits from anti-abortion vigilantes that could eventually shutter most clinics in the state.It’s time to brace ourselves for a world without Roe v Wade. Here’s what we must do | Kathryn Kolbert and Julie F KayRead more“Abortion access will be thrown into absolute chaos,” says Amanda Williams, executive director of the abortion support group the Lilith Fund, a plaintiff in the suit that challenged the law. “Unfortunately, many people who need access the most will slip through the cracks, as we have seen over the years with the relentless attacks here in our state.“It is unbelievable that Texas politicians have gotten away with this devastating and cruel law that will harm so many.”Senate Bill 8, ushered through the Republican-dominated Texas legislature and signed into law by the Republican governor, Greg Abbott, in May, bars abortion once embryonic cardiac activity is detected, which is around six weeks, and offers no exceptions for rape or incest. Texas is the first state to ban abortion this early in pregnancy since Roe v Wade, and last-minute efforts to halt it through an appeal to the US supreme court by Tuesday did not succeed.While a dozen other states have passed similar so-called “heartbeat” bills, they have all been blocked by the courts. The Texas version is novel in that it is intentionally designed to shield government officials from enforcement, and thus make legal challenges more difficult to secure. It instead incentivizes any private citizen in the US to bring civil suit against an abortion provider or anyone who “aids or abets” the procedure.The law “immediately and catastrophically reduces abortion access in Texas”, say state abortion providers, and will probably force many abortion clinics to ultimately close. It will prevent the majority of Texas women (85%) from accessing abortion care, as most aren’t aware they are pregnant as early as six weeks.Planned Parenthood, which operates 11 clinics in the state, and Whole Woman’s Health clinics told the Guardian they would comply with the extreme law despite the fact that it is contrary to their best medical practices. In the days leading up to the law’s enactment, Texas clinics say they have been forced to turn away patients who need abortion care at the law’s cutoff point this week and into the near future.Some abortion physicians in Texas have opted to discontinue offering services, choosing to forgo the potential risk of frivolous and costly lawsuits. For instance, most of the physicians across the four Whole Woman’s Health clinics in Texas will not continue care to prevent jeopardizing their livelihoods, said the clinic founder, Amy Hagstrom Miller.‘Radicalized’ anti-abortion movement poses increased threat, US warnedRead more“We are all going to comply with the law even though it is unethical, inhumane, and unjust,” Dr Ghazaleh Moayedi, a Texas abortion provider and OB-GYN, said. “It threatens my livelihood and I fully expect to be sued. But my biggest fear is making sure the most vulnerable in my community, the Black and Latinx patients I see, who are already most at risk from logistical and financial barriers, get the care they need.”The law will force most patients to travel out of state for care, increasing the driving distance to an abortion clinic twentyfold – from an average of 12 miles to 248 miles one-way, nearly 500 miles round-trip, the Guttmacher Institute found. And that is only if patients have the resources to do so, including time off work, ability to pay for the procedure, and in some cases childcare.Providers and abortion fund support groups – who help finance travel, lodging, and direct service for low-income women through donations – have spent months scrambling to coordinate with out-of-state clinics, including in New Mexico and Colorado, to ensure patients receive timely care when SB8 goes into effect. Last year, the state was offered a glimpse of what would happen if abortion care ceased: when the state barred most abortion procedures amid the Covid-19 pandemic in March 2020, the number of patients who traveled out of state for care jumped nearly 400%.Many abortion-seeking women are expected to be delayed until later in pregnancy and others will be forced to carry pregnancy to term or try to end their pregnancies without medical oversight, abortion providers caution. As with most abortion restrictions, low-income women and women of color will bear the greatest burden under SB8.Physicians are not the only ones that could be targeted under SB8: a breathtakingly wide range of people and groups, including clinic nurses, abortion fund workers, domestic violence and rape crisis counselors, or even a family member who offers a car ride to the clinic could now face suit from strangers. Those who sue can collect a minimum of $10,000 if they win, but if providers are legally successful they cannot recoup any legal payment. The law, say providers, will spur abortion “bounty hunters”.The law’s radical legal provision is the first of its kind in the country.The state’s major anti-abortion lobby group, Texas Right to Life, have already helped empower anti-abortion activists to enforce the law by creating a website that invites “whistleblowers” to report violations of SB8. (In response, pro-choice advocates have flooded the digital entry forms with satirical information.)Abortion providers, funds, and clergy members, represented by the Center for Reproductive Rights, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, and the American Civil Liberties Union, filed suit against SB8 in July, writing that the law would “create absolute chaos in Texas and irreparably harm Texans in need of abortion services.”A preliminary injunction hearing was originally set for Monday 30 August in federal court. However, the largely conservative fifth circuit court of appeals cancelled the hearing on Sunday afternoon and denied the plaintiffs’ request to allow the district court to block the law. Providers then appealed to the US supreme court for emergency relief.But the court failed to act before the law took effect on Wednesday, allowing it to proceed. While the nation’s high court, which now holds a strong anti-choice contingent, plans to consider a Mississippi 15-week ban that could test Roe v Wade during the next term, its lack of action in the Texas case signals the possible early unraveling of Roe.Texas is already one of the most difficult states in the US in which to access abortion due to a slew of state laws pushed by the Republican-dominated legislature over the past decade, including a 24-hour waiting period, a 20-week abortion ban, restrictions on telemedicine, and a prohibition on private and public insurance. It is home to the highest number of abortion deserts – cities in which an abortion-seeking patient must travel at least 100 miles for care – in the country.Following the passage of a 2013 multi-part law known as House Bill 2, roughly half of the state’s abortion clinics shuttered – dropping from 40 to less than 20. While the law was eventually struck down by the US supreme court in 2016, many clinics were unable to reopen. Large swaths of the state – including the Panhandle and west Texas – are without an abortion clinic, forcing women to travel great distances for care.TopicsTexasAbortionGenderUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

OpinionSeptember 11 2001Two decades after 9/11, the real threat to the US is our own far rightH More

US Capitol attackCapitol riot inquiry to investigate whether Trump’s White House was involved in attackThe committee has issued sweeping requests for Trump executive branch records related to the insurrection Hugo Lowellin Washington DCWed 1 Sep 2021 02.00 EDTLast modified on Wed 1 Sep 2021 02.01 EDTCongressman Bennie Thompson, chair of the House select committee investigating the Capitol attack, is preparing an expanded inquiry into Donald Trump that will scrutinize whether the White House helped plan or had advance knowledge of the insurrection.The move amounts to an escalation for the committee as they embark on an inquiry into the events around the 6 January assault that could ensnare the former US president and some top allies in the White House and on Capitol Hill, portending an aggressive inquiry with far-reaching ramifications.Trump officials can testify to Congress about his role in Capitol attack, DoJ saysRead moreHouse select committee investigators in July started examining the events that left five dead and nearly 140 injured as a mob of Trump supporters stormed the Capitol in an unsuccessful attempt to stop the certification of Joe Biden’s election win.But for the first time in a congressional inquiry, the committee will also scrutinize whether the White House was involved in efforts to precipitate the Capitol attack – and what Trump knew of such efforts ahead of time, according to a source familiar with the matter.The committee’s intentions to examine potential White House involvement were telegraphed in part when Thompson last week issued sweeping requests for Trump executive branch records related to the insurrection, the source said.In letters to the National Archives and seven other agencies including the justice department and FBI, Thompson said House select committee investigators were seeking documents and communications from the previous administration related to 6 January.But in a notable additional request, Thompson also demanded communications of White House personnel and members of Congress that referred to attacks on the Capitol – on both the day of the insurrection as well as key dates before.“Our constitution provides for a peaceful transfer of power, and this investigation seeks to evaluate threats to that process, identify lessons learned,” Thompson said in the letters.The expansion of the dragnet to include 5 January is significant, the source said, since it raises the specter of the committee prying open a window into what Trump and his top allies were thinking and doing the day before the Capitol attack.White House aides and members of Congress were among those who huddled that evening to pressure more Republicans to object to the electoral college results and push then-Vice-president Mike Pence to reject Biden’s certification, according to one Trump administration official.The meetings alarmed some White House aides, the official said, because they feared it could leave White House aides vulnerable to charges that the administration was involved in plans to violently intimidate federal officials from carrying out the transition of power, a potential crime.House select committee investigators are poised to examine whether Trump – who Republican senator Ben Sasse was told was “delighted” at images showing rioters storming the Capitol – contributed to such deliberations, the source said.A spokesperson for the committee declined to comment on the direction of the investigation. But taken together, the committee’s moves mark a politically treacherous turning point for the former president and his supporters on Capitol Hill.House and Senate Republicans in June blocked the creation of a 9/11-style commission into the Capital attack for fear it could conclude the GOP’s role in promulgating Trump’s lies about a stolen election incited the rioters and prove damaging in the 2022 midterms.The House minority leader, Kevin McCarthy, and the top Republican on the House judiciary committee, Jim Jordan, were already certain to face scrutiny over their separate phone calls to Trump on 6 January.But far from avoiding a close accounting of the insurrection, the dooming of the commission opened an avenue for House speaker Nancy Pelosi to empanel a select committee and start an inquiry overseen by some of Trump’s fiercest critics in Congress.CNN reported on Monday that the committee plans to order that a group of telecom companies preserve the phone records of House Republicans suspected of playing a role in the “Stop the Steal” rallies and marches before the insurrection.The list was said to be evolving but included Jordan and Republican lawmakers Lauren Boebert, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Andy Biggs, Paul Gosar, Mo Brooks, Madison Cawthorn, Matt Gaetz, Louie Gohmert, Jody Hice and Scott Perry.Enraged at the sharpening contours of the committee’s inquiry, which raises the prospect of an embarrassing airing of Trump’s private attempts to reinstall himself in the Oval Office, the former president threatened last week to block its efforts.“Executive privilege will be defended, not just on behalf of my administration and the patriots who worked beside me, but on behalf of the office of the president of the United States and the future of our nation,” Trump said in a statement.It was not clear whether invoking executive privilege would be successful. The justice department previously declined to assert the protection over 6 January testimony after the White House office of legal counsel determined it did not exist to benefit private interests.The National Archives also acknowledged to CNN earlier this month that they were in possession of records and communications from the Trump administration and indicated that they would comply with records requests from Congress.Even as Trump threatened to mount court challenges against the investigation, House select committee investigators are expected to exercise a broad mandate that mirrors the framework used by Republicans for the select committee into the 2012 terror attacks in Benghazi, Libya.The new line of inquiry – whether Trump and White House officials played a role in planning the Capitol attack – is expected to continue for months as the committee sifts through what is anticipated to be thousands of pages of documents, the source said.Other investigative actions are also underway. The committee announced last week that it was seeking records from social media companies for material “related to the spread of misinformation, efforts to overturn the 2020 election or prevent the certification”.TopicsUS Capitol attackDonald TrumpUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

Joe BidenBiden sets himself apart by placing Afghanistan blame at predecessors’ feetThe president appeared indignant and unwilling to concede defeat in a 26-minute speech that marked the close of a 20-year chapter David Smith in Washington@ More