Roe v Wade

Subterms

    More stories

    • 213 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      On the Fourth of July, a few reasons to feel encouraged about US democracy | Margaret Sullivan

      by

      It’s been a grim week or so in the United States, especially for those with progressive values.In Baltimore, a deadly mass shooting underscored, again, how desperately gun reform is needed, and, tragically, how unlikely it is to happen.And in Washington, a spate of supreme court rulings undid decades of forward movement – the court’s rightwing majority rejected affirmative action in college admissions, favored religion over anti-discrimination laws and knocked down Joe Biden’s plan to forgive student loan debt.Add to that the one-year anniversary of the court’s devastating overturning of Roe v Wade, and you could practically hear the sound of hard-won progress being sucked down history’s drain.Pretty depressing, all told.But despite that, there are reasons to feel encouraged about the future of the nation on this, its 247th birthday.First, the successful effort in Congress to protect democracy and electoral integrity known as the Electoral Count Act reform. Widely seen as the most important such reform in a generation, it developed in direct response to Donald Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election which came to a violent head in the January 6 insurrection at the US Capitol. Among its many admirable provisions, it prohibits state legislatures from changing how electors can be selected after an election.Then in one of two positive pieces of supreme court news in recent weeks, the court rejected a dangerous effort to allow states to ignore their own state constitutions. Undeterred, that could have radically transformed how federal elections are conducted by giving state legislatures a great deal of power to set rules for federal elections. The court also unexpectedly struck down Alabama’s racial gerrymandering plan under the Voting Rights Act.I find it oddly encouraging that, according to a recent USA Today/Suffolk University poll, seven in 10 Americans think our democracy is “imperiled.” Of course, people define that peril according to their own politics and world views, but is is undoubtedly one reason why election denialists were roundly defeated during last year’s midterm elections.As NBC News’s Adam Edelman put it: “Nearly every single candidate in battleground state races who denied or questioned the results of the 2020 election was defeated for positions that oversee, defend and certify elections – a resounding loss for a movement that would have had the power to overturn future contests.”Most Americans apparently don’t want extremists running elections and they understand how high the stakes are.“Our democracy is fortifying itself on many levels,” Greg Sargent of the Washington Post wrote recently. That happened because citizens and government officials took post-2020 threats seriously.It’s a good thing that they did, since – according to one respected organization, the Virginia-based Center for Systemic Peace – the United States in late 2020 no longer could clearly be categorized as a democracy. It had become, for the first time, an “anocracy”, which shares qualities of both autocracy and democracy. America’s rating has more recently improved, putting us back, though not safely, in the democracy zone.In media, the continuing loss of local newspapers – in itself, a serious threat to democracy – has been offset somewhat as innovation-minded journalists and entrepreneurs have stepped into that void. Witness the growth of digital-first news organizations such as VoteBeat and States Newsroom, and collaborative efforts like Spotlight PA or the partnership between the Texas Tribune and ProPublica.A recent big pricetag for Fox News – $787.5m to settle a defamation case brought by Dominion Voting Systems – is another encouraging development. It provided some accountability for the way the cable network knowingly spread election-related lies after the 2020 election; when that settlement was followed by Fox’s firing the reprehensible Tucker Carlson, it began to look as if legal challenges could do what advertiser boycotts could not.The various criminal prosecutions and investigations to hold the January 6 insurrectionists accountable are heartening as well. Those potentially include Trump himself – in Washington, in Georgia, and according to the latest news, maybe in Arizona, too. To some degree, the democratic guardrails are holding and the rule of law prevailing.And while this is hard to quantify, I know of many citizens and advocates who are working hard to protect voting, to support the rights of the disenfranchised. to lessen the blows dealt by the recent court rulings, and to sustain local journalism.It’s a heavy lift, so we should all lend a hand.“Get engaged locally,” urged Yale University’s Asha Rangappa told me recently when I interviewed the former FBI agent for my podcast, American Crisis: Can Journalism Save Democracy? That could mean runing for office, signing up to be a poll worker, volunteering at school, participating in the arts.Rangappa wants more Americans to “cultivate the habits of democracy”. Those habits are developed when people leave their social-media echo chambers, get out into their communities, and simply talk to each other.On this Fourth of July, let’s make sure our ever-fragile democracy endures to celebrate many more birthdays.
      Margaret Sullivan is a Guardian US columnist writing on media, politics and culture More

    • 113 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      Indiana supreme court clears way for Republican abortion ban

      by

      The Indiana supreme court ruled on Friday that the state’s abortion ban does not violate the state constitution, removing a major hurdle to enforcing the ban Republicans approved last summer.The court’s decision overturns a county judge’s ruling that the ban probably violates the state constitution’s privacy protections, which she said are stronger than those found in the US constitution. That judge’s order has allowed abortions to continue in Indiana since September, despite the ban.An opinion from three of the court’s five justices said that while Indiana’s constitution provides some protection of abortion rights, the “General Assembly otherwise retains broad legislative discretion for determining whether and the extent to which to prohibit abortions”.All five Indiana supreme court justices were appointed by Republican governors.The Republican state attorney general, Todd Rokita, issued a statement praising the decision: “We celebrate this day – one long in coming, but morally justified. Thank you to all the warriors who have fought for this day that upholds LIFE.”Although the court’s decision strikes down the injunction blocking the ban, it was not immediately clear how soon the ban would take effect. The justices returned the case to the county judge for further action, and left open the possibility of a narrower challenge to the ban.Indiana’s abortion ban also faces a separate court challenge over claims it violates the state’s 2015 religious freedom law signed by GOP the then governor, Mike Pence.Indiana became the first state to enact tighter abortion restrictions, acting in August, after the US supreme court’s eliminated federal protections by overturning Roe v Wade in June 2022.Most Republican-controlled states have enacted tighter abortion restrictions since the US supreme court’s ruling last summer. All the restrictions have been challenged in court.In the past year, judges in Arizona, Iowa and South Carolina have ruled that the bans are not permissible under the state constitutions.Besides Indiana, enforcement of restrictions are on hold as courts decide the cases in Montana, North Dakota, Ohio, Utah and Wyoming. In North Dakota, lawmakers hav since adopted a different ban to replace the one that was blocked. In South Carolina, another ban has been put into place and put on hold by a court. And in North Carolina, a federal judge weighed whether to temporarily block parts of new abortion restrictions set to take effect on Saturday.Democratic-led states, such as Indiana’s neighbors of Illinois and Michigan, have mostly taken steps to protect abortion access.The Indiana ban would eliminate the licenses for all seven abortion clinics in the state and ban the vast majority of abortions even in the earliest stages of a pregnancy. It includes exceptions allowing abortions at hospitals in cases of rape or incest before 10 weeks post-fertilization; to protect the life and physical health of the mother; and if a fetus is diagnosed with a lethal anomaly.The American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana, which represented Planned Parenthood and other abortion clinic operators, argued before the supreme court in January that the state constitution’s liberty protections provide a right to privacy and to make decisions on whether to have children.The state attorney general’s office countered that Indiana had laws against abortion when its current constitution was drafted in 1851 and that the county judge’s ruling would wrongly create an abortion right.The Indiana supreme court’s decision said the state constitution “protects a woman’s right to an abortion that is necessary to protect her life or to protect her from a serious health risk”.The majority opinion, however, also found that the constitution “generally permits the General Assembly to prohibit abortions which are unnecessary to protect a woman’s life or health, so long as the legislation complies with the constitutional limits that apply to all legislation, such as those limiting legislation to a proper exercise of the police power and providing privileges and immunities equally”.A separate court challenge to the ban is ongoing as another county judge in December sided with residents who claim it violates the state’s religious freedom law, which Republican legislators pushed through in 2015 and sparked a widespread national backlash as critics argued it allowed discrimination against gay people.The state supreme court in January turned down a request from the attorney general’s office that it immediately take up the religious freedom lawsuit. The state’s intermediate court of appeals is scheduled to hear arguments over that lawsuit on 12 September.The Marion county judge Heather Welch in December agreed with five residents who hold Jewish, Muslim and spiritual faiths and who argued that the ban would violate their religious rights on when they believe abortion is acceptable. For now it only directly affects those plaintiffs – legal experts say anyone else claiming religious protections of their abortion rights would need their own court order. More

    • 213 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘Conservative justices? Yeah, in what way?’ Key senator on a supreme court in thrall to special interests

      by

      The conservative-dominated US supreme court may be undergoing a “course correction” after witnessing a public backlash to its extremist rulings and ethics scandals, Sheldon Whitehouse, chairman of the Senate judiciary subcommittee on the federal courts, has told the Guardian.America’s highest court has made a series of radical decisions, including in the Dobbs case that overturned the constitutional right to abortion one year ago on Saturday, while two rightwing justices, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, have been exposed for failing disclose luxury gifts from billionaires.But with trust in the court collapsing, it has this month defended the Voting Rights Act by ruling in favor of Black voters in Alabama and preserved a law that aims to keep Native American children with tribal families. Both were unexpected victories for Democrats – and a sign that they might finally be awakening to public opinion.“Frankly, I think the recent Alabama decision would have gone the other way had it not been for the blowback on Dobbs,” Senator Whitehouse said in an interview. “The challenge that they’re not ‘conservative’ – they’re captured – and the preposterous behavior of Thomas. That was a pretty heavy course correction. Some of them said, ‘Oh, damn, looks like we’re going have to act like judges for a while. Till this blows over!’”Whitehouse found it strange that the Alabama voters decision rested so heavily on precedent – something that the current justices, three of whom were appointed by President Donald Trump, have often been content to ignore.He says: “Where was all that when you were throwing out Dobbs? They have not let precedent get in their way when they’ve wanted the result for quite a while and to have it pop up so flagrantly in the middle of the Alabama case? You guys, that’s funny.”The senator believes that the court’s new sensitivity to public opinion could extend to the upcoming case Moore v Harper, another gerrymandering case in which Republican legislators in North Carolina are asking the court to grant them unfettered power to set rules for voting and elections – a dangerous notion in the era of Trump’s “big lie” of a stolen election.“I’ve always thought that was probably a throwaway case for them. If you look at the people who are pitching the case to them, so many of them are under investigation, under indictment, in disbarment proceedings. It’s the whole creepy ‘big lie’ apparatus that came in with that and I’m not sure the court wants to take a look at that crowd and say, yeah, we’re going with them to develop a completely wacky new argument that nobody’s ever accepted as being anything but a fever dream before. That’s just a bad combo.”Whitehouse, 67, has been a senator for Rhode Island, America’s smallest state, since 2007 and is currently chairman of the Senate budget committee. He has spent years delivering speeches on the Senate floor in two series: “Time to Wake Up”, about the climate crisis, and “The Scheme”, about a decades-long plot to remake the supreme court in service to shadowy billionaires and big special interests.One of his “The Scheme” speeches came to the attention of Lawrence O’Donnell, an MSNBC host and former congressional aide, who suggested that the subject would make good podcast material. Whitehouse discovered that the Senate’s own studio could produce it. The first episode of Making the Case offers an accessible history lesson with Congressman Hank Johnson, Slate senior editor Dahlia Lithwick and Lisa Graves of True North Research.Whitehouse reflects on the new venture while sitting in an airy Capitol Hill office surrounded by photographs of himself with Democratic presidents Bill Clinton, Barack Obama and Joe Biden. There are also pictures of Bruce Sundlun, a former governor of Rhode Island and mentor, and President Franklin Roosevelt – with a hand-signed note to Whitehouse’s grandfather, also named Sheldon Whitehouse, who served as a foreign service officer.The senator is speaking just hours before the ProPublica website published an article raising questions about Alito’s failure to report taking a private jet to Alaska for a luxury fishing trip in 2008, provided by a billionaire hedge fund manager whose business interests have come before the court. Whitehouse will tweet in response: “This just keeps getting worse.”ProPublica previously reported that Thomas accepted decades of undisclosed trips from a longtime friend, the Republican mega-donor Harlan Crow, that included stays at Crow’s private resort, flights on his jet, and a vacation onboard Crow’s yacht in Indonesia. Crow also purchased property from Thomas and paid private school tuition for a Thomas great-nephew.Opinion polls show that such revelations have shaken public faith in the court as never before. A Quinnipiac poll published this week found that it has a 30% approval rating among registered voters – the lowest since Quinnipiac first asked the question in 2004. This mood has created an appetite for speeches, podcasts and journalistic investigations to lift the curtain on an institution that once seemed above the political fray and beyond reproach.Whitehouse, who wrote about Thomas’s relationship with Crow in a book about dark money and the supreme court, tells the Guardian: “A couple of things are happening and they interact with each other. One is that people are just grossed out by the Harlan Crow/Clarence Thomas revelations.“I checked: in Rhode Island, if you’re a municipal employee, you can have three lunches not exceeding $25 and they have to be reported, and here’s this guy who’s supposedly a judge going on quarter-million-dollar free vacations and not reporting it.”He added: “Then people are beginning to realise that this is not a conservative court. This is a special interests-captured court. But we don’t have a very ready narrative in American society for explaining the difference and we still get people who cover the court and know a fair amount about it saying the ‘conservative’ justices. Yeah, in what way?”In 2022 the court upended precedents at an astonishing clip, curtailing or revoking rights such as abortion and due process while expanding religious rights and rights to carry guns. It twice delivered blows to the ability of the Environmental Protection Agency to combat pollution.Whitehouse believes that the term conservative has been “obsolete” since dark money began funding groups such as Leonard Leo’s Federalist Society to handpick justices for the court. “There’s nothing about the way they’re behaving as judges that meets any definition of small ‘c’ conservative.”He continues: “Little by little, the facts of the decisions they’ve been up to are beginning to break through with something more than just them being ‘conservative’. There’s this overlay of who’s in charge behind the scenes. Of course that pops up everywhere, in the amicus briefs, in the dark money behind their confirmations. You can’t make it stop. Harlan Crow intersects with it. And then Dobbs was a clang the gong moment where everybody realised, oh, this is a little not normal.”One fix might lie with Congress. Dick Durbin, chairman of the Senate judiciary committee, has announced plans to take up supreme court ethics legislation. But in April the chief justice, John Roberts, turned down an invitation from Durbin to testify, citing the “exceedingly rare” nature of such an appearance.Whitehouse comments: “I can understand that he had horrible questions he’d have to answer and, for that reason, he didn’t want to. I very much disagree that his separation of powers argument holds any water at all. That’s pure window dressing for, ‘I just don’t want to come over and have to explain what he did’ – thinking of Thomas. I have some human sympathy for him not wanting to come over and answer questions for his wayward colleague but he was very slippery about the way he did it,” he said.Whitehouse wants Roberts to demonstrate that he is taking the ethics issue seriously and believes he might be pushed to do so by the judicial conference, the policymaking body of the federal courts that has a code of conduct followed by lower court judges. At an awards ceremony last month, Roberts acknowledged that “we are continuing to look at things we can do” to adhere to the highest standards of conduct.But no action by the current court has been as tangible or devastating for millions of people as Dobbs, which resulted in the decision to overturn Roe v Wade, the 1973 ruling that had in effect legalised abortion nationwide. Alito’s majority opinion stated that “a right to abortion is not deeply rooted in the Nation’s history and traditions”. The procedure is now almost completely banned in 14 states.Whitehouse naturally has a podcast episode marking the first anniversary. He reflects: “If you really are going to throw out a decision that stood for so long and matters so much to so many people, you expect that they try to keep within existing law. Instead, they make up a whole new analysis that allows them to get where they want to get – the whole ‘history and tradition’ shtick that they pulled together,” he said.The ruling was a prime example of the court being out of step with public opinion. Republicans paid the price in last year’s midterm elections. Now candidates for president in 2024 are tiptoeing around the issue, with Trump refusing to commit to a national abortion limit and rival Ron DeSantis, the governor of Florida, facing scrutiny over a six-week ban in his home state.Whitehouse comments: “There’s a huge liability that they’ve opened up for themselves in a party that has hung with the extremists.”The Dobbs decision galvanised activists to demand Thomas’s resignation, push for reforms such as expanding the number of justices and make the case to voters that the supreme court is a defining issue at the ballot box, not merely a nice-to-have.“A lot of the advocacy groups that work in this space – whether it’s environmental groups, civil rights groups, labour groups – have awakened to the nature of the problem at the supreme court and are now taking it on in a whole different way, looking at the dark money, looking at the capture, looking at the mischievous and mysterious briefing just prepared.“Looking at that whole scenario and realising, wow, we got outplayed for about 20 years now and we’re going to have to figure out how to fight back. This can’t be issue 15 for us any longer. This has to be right at the top across a whole array of advocacy areas.” More

    • 250 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘How dare they?’ Kamala Harris says in fiery speech on Roe’s overturn as protests mark anniversary – as it happened

      by

      From 4h agoVice-President Kamala Harris took the stage in North Carolina on Saturday and delivered an impassioned address on restoring nationwide reproductive freedoms following a year since the supreme court’s decision to strip them.Speaking to a crowd full of supporters including healthcare professionals and activists, Harris said:
      “How dare they? How dare they attack basic healthcare? How dare they attack our fundamental rights? How dare they attack our freedom?…
      In the midst of this healthcare crisis, extremist so-called leaders in states across our nation have proposed or passed more than 350 new laws to restrict these freedoms and the right to have access to reproductive healthcare. Right now in our country, 23 million women of reproductive age live in a state with an extreme abortion ban in effect…
      Most of us here know is that many women don’t even know they are pregnant in six weeks. Which by the way tells us most of these politicians don’t even understand how the body actually works. They don’t get it,” Harris continued.
      She went on to issue a strong warning towards Republican lawmakers in Congress, saying:
      Extremist Republicans in Congress have proposed to ban abortion nationwide. But I have news for them. We’re not having that. We’re not standing for that. We won’t let that happen. And by the way, the majority of Americans are with us.
      The majority of Americans, I do believe, agree that one does not have to abandon their faith or deeply held beliefs to agree the government should not be telling her what to do with her body…
      The United States Congress must put back in place what the Supreme court took away.”
      It is slightly past 4pm in Washington DC. Here is a wrap up of the day’s key events:
      President Joe Biden has issued a statement to mark the one-year anniversary of the supreme court’s overturn of Roe, which he said “has already had devastating consequences.” “States have imposed extreme and dangerous abortion bans that put the health and lives of women in jeopardy, force women to travel hundreds of miles for care, and threaten to criminalize doctors for providing the health care that their patients need and that they are trained to provide.”
      Vice-President Kamala Harris took the stage in North Carolina on Saturday and delivered an impassioned address on restoring nationwide reproductive freedoms following a year since the supreme court’s decision to strip them. Speaking to a crowd full of supporters including healthcare professionals and activists, Harris said: “How dare they? How dare they attack basic healthcare? How dare they attack our fundamental rights? How dare they attack our freedom?”
      A handful of Democratic lawmakers have pledged their support on Saturday to protect and fight for reproductive rights as the country marks first anniversary of Roe’s overturn. “House Dems are working hard to stop these extremists and restore reproductive freedom. Together we will win,” wrote Hakeem Jeffries, House minority leader. US representative Jamie Raskin of Maryland tweeted: “Pro-choice America won’t rest until we restore women’s freedom as law of the land.”
      As reproductive rights activists protested against the end of Roe v Wade, anti-abortion leaders celebrated one year since the landmark decision was overturned. Speaking at the Faith & Freedom Coalition’s Road to Majority conference in Washington, Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of the anti-abortion group Susan B Anthony Pro-Life America, framed the end of Roe as just the beginning of right-wing activists’ work.
      Arizona’s Democratic governor Katie Hobbs has signed an executive order that will further protect reproductive rights across the state and curtail restrictive reproductive legislation from Republicans. On Friday, Hobbs tweeted about her executive order, saying, “I will not allow extreme and out of touch politicians to get in the way of the fundamental rights of Arizonans.”
      Several reproductive rights organizations have announced their endorsement of the Biden-Harris administration in the upcoming 2024 presidential election. The organizations include Planned Parenthood, NARAL (National Association for the Repeal of Abortion Laws) Pro-Choice America , and EMILYs List, a political action committee dedicated to electing Democratic pro-choice women into office.
      More than a quarter of registered US voters say they will only vote for candidates who share their beliefs on abortion, according to a poll released earlier this week, a total (28%) one point higher than last year. The survey, from Gallup, was released before the first anniversary of Dobbs v Jackson, by which conservatives on the supreme court removed the right to abortion that had been safeguarded since Roe v Wade in 1973.
      That’s it from me, Maya Yang, as we wrap up the blog for today. Thank you for following along.Human rights organization Amnesty International has issued a statement condemning the supreme court’s decision a year ago to strip federal reproductive right protections.Tarah Demant, the national programs director at Amnesty International USA said:
      “One year after the Supreme Court shamefully stripped millions of their rights, women, girls, and people who can become pregnant in the United States are facing an unprecedented human rights crisis.
      A patchwork of devastating laws now blankets the country. One in three women and girls of reproductive age now live in states where abortion access is either totally or near-totally inaccessible…and a climate of fear is being purposefully sewn to restrict women, girls, and people who can get pregnant from finding legal abortion care.
      “Yet despite these coordinated and vitriolic attacks on our rights, Americans continue to overwhelmingly support access to safe and legal abortion, multiple states have added new protections, and activists across states continue to advocate for their rights. Abortion is a human right and basic healthcare, and activists across the country and around the world are more determined than ever to ensure that people across the USA will be able to access this right.”
      A Planned Parenthood abortion-providing clinic in Fairview Heights, Illinois saw a 700% increase in abortion-seeking patients from out of state.According to a new report by Jezebel, Planned Parenthood said that the 700% increase in out-of-stage patients seeking abortions in their Fairview Heights clinic comes along with a 35% increase in abortion patients overall who came to the clinic in the last year.Speaking to the outlet, Yamelsie Rodriguez, president and CEO of Reproductive Health Services of St. Louis region’s Planned Parenthood branch, said that the patients coming to her clinic hail from 29 states and are “mostly from the South.”The Guttmacher Institute has categorized Illinois as a state with “protective” abortion policies. Currently, abortion is banned at fetal viability, generally 24–26 weeks of pregnancy, and state Medicaid funds cover abortions.In addition, Illinois has a shield law that protects abortion providers from investigations launched by other states.Following the overturn of Roe vs. Wade, women of color have found themselves struggling even more to access reproductive healthcare in a medical and political landscape that has traditionally failed them.The Guardian’s reproductive rights reporter Poppy Noor profiled two women, Anya Cook and Samantha Casiano, on their experiences of being denied abortions in post-Roe America.Here is the full story on Cook and Samantha’s experiences and how they reflect the harsh realities faced by countless of other women of color in America:In a video address on Saturday, New York attorney general Letitia James reaffirmed New York’s status as a safe haven for abortion seekers and promised to continue fighting for reproductive rights. James said:
      “A ban on abortions will not ban abortions. It will only ban safe abortions.
      But it’s important to know that New York is a sanctuary city and state and that we provide assistance to young women, individuals who need reproductive care…
      Here in New York, we believe in you having control over your body and we believe in providing you with healthcare.
      I will continue to fight and to use the law to protect your rights each and every day.”
      Barbara Lee, a US representative from California since 1998, has pledged to continue fighting for reproductive rights in light of the first anniversary of Roe’s overturn.“I’m going to keep fighting for every person who finds herself in the same situation I was once in: pregnant, out of options, and forced to take extreme measures,” Lee tweeted.Lee, a longtime champion of women’s rights, is the author of the EACH Woman Act which would repeal the discriminatory Hyde Amendment that has restricted many women’s access to reproductive healthcare, her website said.Singer Demi Lovato has released a new song inspired by the first anniversary of Roe v Wade’s overturn.Lovato titled the pro-choice song “Swine,” which was released on Thursday.
      “It’s been one year since the Supreme Court’s decision to dismantle the constitutional right to a safe abortion, and although the path forward will be challenging, we must continue to be united in our fight for reproductive justice.
      I created ‘SWINE’ to amplify the voices of those who advocate for choice and bodily autonomy. I want this song to empower not only the birthing people of this country, but everyone who stands up for equality, to embrace their agency and fight for a world where every person’s right to make decisions about their own body is honored,” Lovato wrote in an Instagram caption.
      The music video features Lovato in front of men who appear to represent supreme court justices as she leads a revolt.
      “My life, my voice/My rights, my choice/It’s mine, or I’m just swine,” she sings. “My blood, my loins/My lungs, my noise/It’s mine, or I’m just swine,” she sings.
      Here are some images coming through the newswires as people across the country attend rallies marking the one-year anniversary of Roe’s overturn:Chelsea Clinton has also chimed in on first anniversary of the supreme court’s decision that stripped federal protections of reproductive rights from women, saying that she’s “really f**king angry.”In an interview at Aspen: Health in Aspen, Colorado, NBC host Kristen Welker asked the daughter of former president Bill Clinton and former secretary of state Hillary Clinton on her thoughts about the supreme court’s decision.Clinton replied:
      “I’m really f**king angry and I am — and that is an uncomfortable place to be because of the historical women tropes that so often have been used to kind of silence and diminish women and our voices, not just in this country but throughout human history. But I’m really angry because we know that women have died.”
      Vice-President Kamala Harris took the stage in North Carolina on Saturday and delivered an impassioned address on restoring nationwide reproductive freedoms following a year since the supreme court’s decision to strip them.Speaking to a crowd full of supporters including healthcare professionals and activists, Harris said:
      “How dare they? How dare they attack basic healthcare? How dare they attack our fundamental rights? How dare they attack our freedom?…
      In the midst of this healthcare crisis, extremist so-called leaders in states across our nation have proposed or passed more than 350 new laws to restrict these freedoms and the right to have access to reproductive healthcare. Right now in our country, 23 million women of reproductive age live in a state with an extreme abortion ban in effect…
      Most of us here know is that many women don’t even know they are pregnant in six weeks. Which by the way tells us most of these politicians don’t even understand how the body actually works. They don’t get it,” Harris continued.
      She went on to issue a strong warning towards Republican lawmakers in Congress, saying:
      Extremist Republicans in Congress have proposed to ban abortion nationwide. But I have news for them. We’re not having that. We’re not standing for that. We won’t let that happen. And by the way, the majority of Americans are with us.
      The majority of Americans, I do believe, agree that one does not have to abandon their faith or deeply held beliefs to agree the government should not be telling her what to do with her body…
      The United States Congress must put back in place what the Supreme court took away.”
      A handful of Democratic lawmakers have pledged their support on Saturday to protect and fight for reproductive rights as the country marks first anniversary of Roe’s overturn.“House Dems are working hard to stop these extremists and restore reproductive freedom. Together we will win,” wrote Hakeem Jeffries, House minority leader.“A year after SCOTUS’ disastrous Dobbs decision, I’m highlighting that districts like mine – and Black women in particular – are hurting the most,” said US representative Jasmine Crockett of Texas’s 30th district.
      “My district is 40% Black and majority women. It’s the people I represent that are hurt by life-saving medical care the most … North Texas has the highest rate of hospitalization due to pregnancy complications in the entire state … For all their talk about protecting babies, let me ask you this: What happens to the already born children of a mother who dies from pregnancy complications because she can’t get the treatment she needs during an ectopic pregnancy? Who’s protecting them?” Crockett added.
      US representative Jamie Raskin of Maryland tweeted: “Pro-choice America won’t rest until we restore women’s freedom as law of the land.”Senator Tammy Duckworth of Illinois echoed similar sentiments, saying:
      “Let’s be honest: Republicans’ anti-choice agenda is not about protecting life. If it was, perhaps they would help us tackle our maternal mortality crisis or do something–anything–to help end gun violence. But they don’t. Because it’s not about saving lives. It’s about control…
      Look, I know that a lot of us are tired from the seemingly endless fight to protect our most basic human rights. But we have to do more. Congress has to do more.”
      House Democrats also joined the pledges as they released compilation of various members promising to protect reproductive freedoms:As reproductive rights activists protested against the end of Roe v Wade, anti-abortion leaders celebrated one year since the landmark decision was overturned.Speaking at the Faith & Freedom Coalition’s Road to Majority conference in Washington, Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of the anti-abortion group Susan B Anthony Pro-Life America, framed the end of Roe as just the beginning of right-wing activists’ work.
      “We are at the starting line,” Dannenfelser said. “We have just begun. We have just begun a journey to start saving lives.”
      More people are feeling backed into a corner after the supreme court struck down the nationwide right to abortion last year, with many turning to birth control. In one of our latest features in our ‘A year without Roe’ series, Ema O’Connor explores the way that people’s relationships with birth control have evolved over the past year.O’Connor reports:Dr Rachel Neal, an OB-GYN working out of Atlanta, Georgia, said she has seen a trend toward LARCs nationally over the past six years, in part due to Trump’s presidency, as well as medicaid expansion and more insurance plans covering long term contraceptives. But in the past year Dr Neal has also seen an increased skepticism about any methods – including many birth control pills and IUDS – that pause or stop menstruation altogether. Before Roe was overturned, Dr Neal said that patients often saw not getting their periods as a positive side effect because they didn’t have to deal with cramps or spend money on tampons.
      “Now they’re uneasy towards methods that cause them to have no periods because they want to … prove to themselves that they’re not pregnant,” Dr Neal said.
      For the full story, click here:President Joe Biden has issued a statement to mark the one-year anniversary of the supreme court’s overturn of Roe, which he said “has already had devastating consequences.”
      “States have imposed extreme and dangerous abortion bans that put the health and lives of women in jeopardy, force women to travel hundreds of miles for care, and threaten to criminalize doctors for providing the health care that their patients need and that they are trained to provide.
      Yet state bans are just the beginning. Congressional Republicans want to ban abortion nationwide, but go beyond that, by taking FDA-approved medication for terminating a pregnancy, off the market, and make it harder to obtain contraception. Their agenda is extreme, dangerous, and out-of-step with the vast majority of Americans.
      My administration will continue to protect access to reproductive health care and call on Congress to restore the protections of Roe. vs. Wade in federal law once and for all.” More

    • 113 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Republicans scramble to limit electoral backlash against abortion bans

      by

      In the months since the supreme court voted to overturn Roe v Wade last year, the effects of the court’s decision in Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization have become clear. Over a dozen states across the country have passed legislation limiting or outright banning access to abortions, severely restricting reproductive rights for millions of people and threatening to imprison abortion providers.But as Republicans have pushed through these bills, voters have also taken every opportunity to rebuke them in elections – leading to defeats in midterms and emerging as one of the GOP’s largest vulnerabilities.After initially celebrating victory in their nearly five-decade campaign to end the constitutional right to abortion, Republicans now find themselves scrambling to simultaneously lessen their electoral losses and defend unpopular anti-abortion policies. Reproductive rights are set to be a key issue in the general election next year, with implications from the presidential campaign all the way down the ballot. While the GOP has not stopped passing anti-abortion bills, including in South Carolina and North Carolina last month, it has begun to worry about the price that it is paying for them.“As Republicans we need to read the room on this issue,” the South Carolina Republican representative Nancy Mace, who supports anti-abortion policies, said on ABC News in April. “We’re going to lose huge if we continue down this path of extremities.”Polling after the Dobbs decision showed that a majority of Americans disapproved of the court overturning Roe, with a Pew Research Center survey from last July showing that nearly six in 10 adults opposed the ruling. Pew’s survey also showed a majority of Americans in the largely conservative states where abortion bans were set to take place also disapproved of the decision. A separate NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist poll from April this year found support for abortion access around an all-time high, and notably showed that about one-third of Republicans mostly supported abortion rights.The electoral implications of Republicans’ post-Dobbs anti-abortion push began to reveal themselves early on, when heavily conservative Kansas voted no in a referendum last August on whether the state should remove abortion rights from its constitution.“The vote in Kansas sends a decisive message that Americans are angry about the efforts to roll back their rights and won’t stand for it,” Sarah Stoesz, then the president of Planned Parenthood for the region, said after the vote.Despite the warning from the Kansas contest, Republican leaders still believed they would capitalize on President Joe Biden’s low approval ratings and concern over inflation to sweep back into power in a “red wave” during midterm elections. That never materialized, and instead Republicans underperformed as an energized Democratic base came out to vote. Michigan Democrats flipped the state legislature for the first time in nearly 40 years, Pennsylvania Democrats secured victories against anti-abortion candidates and, ballot measures in five states, including Kentucky and Montana, all resulted in voters choosing to support abortion rights.Following the midterms, Republican leaders realize that they have a problem. The Republican National Committee chairwoman, Ronna McDaniel, appeared on Fox News Sunday in April to discuss the issue, saying that abortion had played a major role in key swing states and that party candidates needed to face the issue “head on”.“Many of our candidates across the board refused to talk about it, thinking, ‘Oh we can just talk about the economy and ignore this big issue,’ and they can’t,” McDaniel said.But Republicans have struggled to find a consistent line on abortion, with lawmakers divided over what level of restrictions they would put on reproductive rights. Republican leaders’ opinions range from insisting on total abortion bans to cutting access off at 15 weeks of pregnancy to washing their hands of the issue and saying it is up to states to decide.Presidential candidates have similarly found themselves caught between different factions of the party and voter interests. Donald Trump reportedly told allies that he views a federal abortion ban as a losing proposition for the election and his campaign spokesperson has said Trump believes bans should be left up to states, threatening a rift with evangelical voters that have been a large part of his base.Governor Ron DeSantis of Florida, who is currently Trump’s most prominent challenger, has taken a harder line and signed a six-week abortion ban in April – causing one major Republican donor to halt his funding to DeSantis. Other candidates have vacillated over taking a specific stance, including Nikki Haley who last month refused to name the specific number of weeks into pregnancy she would limit abortion.Influential and deep-pocketed Christian conservative groups have further complicated the dynamic, insisting that without Roe to stop them Republican politicians should pass strict abortion bans. Susan B Anthony Pro-Life America, a major anti-abortion non-profit and political organization, vowed to campaign against Trump if he would not support a 15-week abortion ban.Meanwhile, Democrats have been centering abortion access in speeches and campaigns. Vice-President Kamala Harris told a crowd at Howard University that “this is a moment for us to stand and fight” in an April speech, while the Democratic senator Dick Durbin chaired a Senate judiciary committee hearing that same month titled “The Assault on Reproductive Rights in a Post-Dobbs America”.Democrats also secured a huge victory in Wisconsin earlier this year when the liberal judge Janet Protasiewicz won a seat on the state supreme court. Protasiewicz, who openly discussed her personal support for abortion during the campaign, defeated a conservative opponent who had accepted $1m in campaign donations from an anti-abortion political action committee.Protasiewicz’s win ended a 15-year conservative majority on the court, and could mean that liberal justices overrule an 1849 law banning abortion which went into effect in the state when Roe was overturned. More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Biden puts abortion rights at center of campaign on Roe reversal anniversary

      by

      Joe Biden on Friday put reproductive rights squarely in the middle of his 2024 re-election campaign as the US president hosted a rally based around defending abortion rights, notched three high-profile endorsements from groups dedicated to the issue, and announced an executive order aimed at boosting access to contraception.The moves came in stark contrast to the Republican field of candidates, many of whom were attending the Faith & Freedom Coalition annual conference in Washington DC.Abortion has become a tough issue for Republicans because most Americans support the right to an abortion after the conservative-dominated US supreme court last year axed the federal right to terminate a pregnancy.Nonetheless, former vice-president Mike Pence on Friday doubled down on his hardline stance in a speech calling for national restrictions on abortion – a position seen as unlikely to win much wide support. Pence’s former boss Donald Trump will address the same conference on Saturday and has in recent weeks sought to take a less extreme stance.Biden and the Democrats, meanwhile, are on the attack on abortion, pointing out the huge loss of reproductive freedoms for millions of women since the US’s highest court overturned the landmark Roe v Wade decision that had protected abortion freedoms.Biden and Vice-President Kamala Harris on Friday were being endorsed by Planned Parenthood Action Fund, Naral Pro-Choice America and Emily’s List. The groups are throwing their early support behind the re-election effort in part to highlight the importance of the issue for Democrats heading into the election year, the groups’ leaders told the Associated Press.“I think that President Biden has been an incredibly valuable partner, along with Vice-President Harris, in fighting back against the onslaught of attacks that we have seen,” said Alexis McGill Johnson, president and chief executive of Planned Parenthood Action Fund.Biden and fellow Democrats have already seen the power of the issue: a majority of Americans want legalized abortion nationwide. In the lead-up to the 2022 midterm elections, many political pundits dismissed the issue, but it was among the top concerns for voters, who consistently rejected efforts to restrict abortion in the states when given the chance.Biden’s campaign manager, Julie Chavez Rodriguez, said the president and the vice-president were proud to have earned the support of the groups. Since the decision last year by the supreme court, “we have seen the horrifying impact that the extreme Maga agenda has on women’s health,” she said, referring to Trump’s “Make America Great Again” slogan.Biden has said he will work to protect reproductive health care, including enshrining abortion rights in federal law. He is expected to convey that message in remarks on Friday at a rally with the first lady, Jill Biden, Harris and the second gentleman, Doug Emhoff.Meanwhile, Biden’s executive order aims to strengthen access to contraception, a growing concern for Democrats after some conservatives have signaled a willingness to push beyond abortion into regulation of contraception. In 2017, nearly 65% – or 46.9 million – of the 72.2 million girls and women age 15 to 49 in the US used a form of contraception.In a statement, Biden highlighted reproductive health as a top priority of his administration in the wake of the Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization ruling from the conservative-led court that reversed Roe v Wade.“Contraception is an essential component of reproductive health care that has only become more important in the wake of Dobbs and the ensuing crisis in women’s access to healthcare,” Biden said.Biden is seeking to strengthen access to “affordable, high-quality contraception and family planning services”, the statement added. It’s his third executive order on reproductive health care access since the Dobbs ruling.The measures include expanding access and services through Medicaid, improving coverage of contraception through Medicare and seeking ways to compel private health insurance companies to provide contraception and family planning services as needed.The consequences of restricting abortion access in America have quickly moved beyond ending an unwanted pregnancy into miscarriage and pregnancy care in general.Women in states with tight restrictions are increasingly unable to access care for pregnancy-related complications. Doctors facing criminal charges if they provide abortions are increasingly afraid to care for patients who aren’t sick enough yet to be considered treatable.Over the last year 22 US states have passed either a ban or highly restrictive policies on abortion. Other states, though, have expanded access to abortion care. The Biden administration has brought together leaders from all 50 states to talk strategy on how to expand access and work together to help people in more restrictive states.Most of the states with severe abortion restrictions are also states that have a high maternal mortality rate and higher rates of stillbirth and miscarriage. Black women are disproportionately affected – they are more than three times more likely to die from pregnancy-related causes than white women, according to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.The Associated Press contributed to this story More

    • 150 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      A year after Roe’s fall, fears of US abortion bans become reality

      by

      The day the constitutional right to abortion ended in the US, Americans faced an unusual moment of regression. The current generation now has fewer constitutional rights than their parents and their grandparents.What has happened since then has been almost unfathomable.Many states have passed bans restricting access to abortion care. Most are full bans, which prevent abortion at any stage of pregnancy, with limited or no exceptions. In Georgia, abortion is banned after six weeks of pregnancy, when most people do not yet know they are pregnant. In some other states, abortion is severely restricted; Nebraska, Arizona, Florida, Utah, and North Carolina have bans that begin at 12, 15, 18 and 20 weeks of pregnancy, respectively.Data suggests far fewer people have been able to get legal abortions since Roe was overturned, despite the need for abortion going up before 2022. WeCount, an effort to track abortion access post-Roe by the Society of Family Planning, calculated 66,000 fewer abortions took place in states that banned abortion between June last year and March this year. Although some states saw increased abortion rates, they did not offset the losses. As a recent WeCount report put it: “People in states with abortion bans were forced to delay their abortion, to travel to another state, to self-manage their abortion, or to continue a pregnancy they did not want.”Preliminary data suggests many have managed their abortions through pills procured online. For others, in real terms, the loss of the constitutional right to abortion now means traveling hundreds of miles, across multiple state borders if they want an abortion. The existing inequalities along race and income lines in the US have only widened.The impact of Roe being overturned will probably be felt worst among people of color, who are more likely to live in restrictive states and more likely to need abortions. Wealthier pregnant people can travel and get abortions, but those who can’t face worse economic outcomes.“An already bad situation has gotten worse,” said Kelly Baden, a public policy expert at the Guttmacher Institute. “Accessing abortion in a state like Louisiana was already hard before the Dobbs decision. But now, abortion is banned in Louisiana and every state that touches its borders. That means having to cross one, two, three, four borders before accessing abortion safely for people from that state.”Further, a huge national court case that could block access to mifepristone, a crucial pill used in more than half of all US abortions, is ongoing. Blocking access to that drug would be yet another win for the anti-abortion movement, making medication abortion hard to access all over the US, not just in states with bans.In the majority opinion overturning Roe vs Wade, written by Justice Samuel Alito, he called Roe “egregiously wrong from the start”. Stating that the constitutional federal right to abortion had “enflamed debate and deepened division”, he ended with a call to leave abortion decisions up to the states.“It is time to heed the constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people’s elected representatives,” Alito wrote.The decision led to all-time low trust in the supreme court, whose approval rating dropped to below 40% by September 2022. Recent numbers suggest the court’s approval ratings have steadied once again, though the country remains changed.Instead of returning the question of abortion to the states, battles – theoretical ones, at least for now – have ensued. Pro-choice and anti-abortion states are increasingly trying to extend the reach of where their authority lies.Massachusetts, California, Colorado and New Jersey are some of the states that have enacted shield laws protecting people who travel to their states for abortions and providers who provide them; Vermont aims to protect medication abortion access, regardless of what happens in the national mifepristone case. Idaho, meanwhile, recently passed a law criminalizing anyone helping a minor travel out of state for abortion care, and Texas has threatened legal repercussions for companies that help people travel out of state for abortion.Pregnant people continue to be jailed for their conduct during pregnancy, which was already happening long before Roe was overturned.This week, Pregnancy Justice, a charity that advocates on behalf of women who are criminalized in pregnancy, released data suggesting at least 41 cases of women criminalized in their pregnancies since Roe was overturned. The cases were across 14 states, with more than half of them being in Alabama. The organization suspects those numbers are a huge undercount.What stands out to Pregnancy Justice the most over the last year is how commonplace the language of pregnancy criminalization has been since Roe was overturned.“Since Dobbs, we’ve seen increasingly alarming rhetoric in abortion-hostile states, lifting the veil on their true intentions: control and criminalization,” said Pregnancy Justice’s acting executive director, Dana Sussman. “The Alabama attorney general threatened to prosecute people for abortion under the chemical endangerment law. A South Carolina bill sought to make abortion punishable by death. And a Kentucky bill proposed homicide charges for having an abortion.“Whether these bills pass or not is almost irrelevant because the confusion and fear still remain. And as we’ve long said, this is not just about abortion. Once you become pregnant, you become vulnerable to state control.”The Dobbs decision has also had a seismic impact on the US healthcare system. Doctors have fled restrictive states, with lasting impact on maternal and other routine care. In Idaho, one hospital had to stop delivering babies completely, because the state’s total abortion ban has made it too hard to attract doctors. Dozens of abortion clinics have closed their doors; and hundreds of miles have opened up between patients and essential healthcare.Despite medical exceptions allowing abortions in cases of rape, incest, medical emergencies and pregnancies incompatible with life in many states, there are still countless cases where pregnant people have been denied miscarriage care, life-saving care, and other vital health services – all of which continue to make headlines.But there are also rays of hope. As a national election looms, the public are making it clear that they do not support abortion bans. In every state where the public has had a chance to directly vote on abortion restrictions since Roe was overturned – whether in states that are purple, blue or ruby red – people have voted to protect abortion.“From Kansas, to the Wisconsin special election, to the midterm election, there’s a real recognition now, even among anti-abortion lawmakers, that perhaps they might experience some political blowback for this,” said Baden.Legislators who have been clear on their abortion stances have seen repercussions at the ballot box. And as a result, the Republican party is having to soften its messaging.That’s why Lindsey Graham has floated a 15-week abortion ban on the national stage, and why in places like North Carolina and Nebraska, 12-week bans have been floated as compromises.“It’s this false idea that, really, what the American public wants is different kinds of abortion bans,” said Baden. “It is about politics and maintaining a shred of what they think will be credibility come next election season. And hopefully voters won’t fall for that.” More

    • 213 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      What it’s like to cover abortion while pregnant: ‘People saw me as a container for a child’

      by

      I was six weeks and two days gone when I found out I was pregnant. I had just gotten back from covering the US midterms in such a sickeningly frantic way that I hadn’t had time to think about the changes going on in my body, but the signs were there: a creeping nausea that felt like seasickness, breasts as sore as swollen pimples, sheer exhaustion that willed me into bed for three days upon my return.I had reasoned this was a normal response to a week spent shuttling across hundreds of miles, working 21-hour days on the abortion beat in the fury of election season.If I had wanted an abortion at that stage of my pregnancy, I would have already lost that right in 15 US states. On 24 June 2022, five months before I discovered my pregnancy, the US supreme court had undone the constitutional right to abortion, curtailing the rights of some 22-million women of reproductive age as easily as untying a shoelace.An influx of bans and restrictions quickly followed suit. Old laws sprang back into action, some of which had been written in the Victorian era – before women had the right to vote or had a legal protection against being raped within marriage. New laws were introduced, too, although their content – including murder charges for people who have abortions, and allowing members of the public to track anyone down like a bounty hunter, clearing the way for them to sue for “aiding and abetting” abortions – felt equally antiquated.I’ve driven across America’s varied terrain as a reporter throughout this tidal wave, bearing witness to a monumental assault on women’s rights. I have faced, head on, the fury that comes from anti-abortion extremists for daring to write about abortions. And I have seen the dogged organization and jubilance of those who have protected abortion rights in their states after months of pounding on doors, rain or shine.None of it has changed the way I’ve reported the news. It’s our job as journalists to see what is happening, not what we want to see. But covering this beat, especially while pregnant, has changed my depth of vision. To see this assault up close and personal is to see it for what it is: not a journey to protect life; but to stifle, suppress and suffocate freedom.I am not one of those people who loves the experience of being pregnant. I’m not excited about birth; I don’t believe it will be magical. I’ve been lucky enough to be healthy throughout my pregnancy but I miss being able to put my own socks on and being able to bend over with ease; I miss playing sports; I miss getting a full night’s sleep.I have, at the best of times, felt complicated emotions when it comes to learning to love the thing inside me, and all the changes in my body that come with it. I’m a fiercely independent person, and I have a tendency towards wanting to control my body and what happens to it. I’ve often fixated on the idea that I can undo bad experiences in my life by bolstering my health. In that vein, I have raced in a mini-triathlon, learned to do clap pushups and lifted heavy weights at the gym.Early in pregnancy, as double the amount of blood began to flood my body like an enemy army, ramping up my blood pressure, I felt I no longer knew myself. I felt trapped in my new body, denied all my usual escape routes. I realized I wouldn’t be able to compete in the New York City half marathon, an event I was looking forward to. I was used to running regularly, now speed-walking to the station felt like a humiliatingly difficult ordeal. My old stress relievers became suddenly out-of-bounds.These are all small things. But small details about a person matter. Small things make a person who she is, and influence how she interacts with a life-changing, all-consuming, body-throttling experience like pregnancy.Here in America, where abortion is now banned or severely restricted in 20 US states every person I report on is as complicated as me.It’s July, and I am hurtling across Kansas City in a rental car covering a monumental vote. In just a few days, Kansas will be the first state to directly ask its people if they want to protect abortion rights under the new status quo.Republicans are wide-eyed and hopeful: recent polls suggest people in Kansas, a ruby-red midwestern state, have far more complicated feelings about abortion restrictions than the rest of the country. While lots of American voters do not want more abortion restrictions, in Kansas, in 2022, polling analysis by the New York Times suggests they might be equally split. Nonetheless, it is currently a safe haven for abortion rights in the midwest, where a slew of bans have come down since Roe was overturned. If voters restrict abortion rights in the coming week, a refuge for millions who want access to abortion may soon be lost.I found Christy McNally – a former science teacher, a grandmother and dog lover – through a friend of hers who was working at the Johnston county Republican party. McNally is soft-spoken and sweet. She is the kind of person you feel would stop to pick up a stranger in the middle of a storm and take them where they needed to go.One night, before we speak on the phone, she sends me a photo of her meeting Bill Clinton in 1996. Back then, she was lobbying for an abortion bill aiming to criminalize doctors for performing a dilation and extraction procedure. These procedures are a rarity in the grand scheme of abortion care, because most abortions happen in the first 12 weeks of pregnancy, when simpler, less invasive options are available. Dilation and extraction in the third trimester, which anti-abortion advocates often reference, accounts for less than 1% of abortions each year and is used primarily in cases where the pregnancy is incompatible with life or puts the pregnant person at risk.The language used by the National Right to Life Committee around that bill in the 1990s was deliberately emotive and included a newly invented term: “partial-birth abortion”.Despite the fact these abortions are most commonly performed at a time when the scientific consensus agrees fetuses feel no pain, and often when life is not viable outside the womb, lobbyists switched to a graphic depiction of the procedure, which requires forceps to pass a fetus through the birth canal, in an attempt to foster anti-abortion sentiment.People outside the US often ask me how a country shifts to having no federal right to abortion. This is how: by evoking emotion that humanizes the fetus at all costs – often on shaky scientific grounding – while diminishing the humanity of the person delivering it. Eventually, these ideas are repeated enough, and become part of the mainstream. Today in America, federal judges refer to “unborn children”, “killing” and “personhood” when talking about abortion care even in the earliest stages of pregnancy.In 1996, the bill McNally lobbied Clinton over had no chance of passing. But in 2022 that rhetoric – of broken limbs, fetal pain and the murderous intent of those who perform and seek out abortions – already sat comfortably in the US vernacular.It is also this language that activates a lot of the anti-abortion advocates I have met during my reporting, who do not see themselves as radical. McNally tells me she believes abortions should be allowed in medical emergencies (she has a friend whose fetus had no skull). She also supports exceptions for rape and incest. When I probe, I can see McNally is conflicted on abortion: there are very particular, intimate circumstances where the case for abortion has won her over, but mostly, outright bans are appealing to her. To me, she most wants to talk about abortions in the third trimester – the most unusual, and incredibly rare type of abortion – as do most anti-abortion advocates I speak to.But the vast majority of bills that have been passed since Roe v Wade was overturned don’t target late-term abortions. Almost every single ban is instead a full ban on abortion with limited exceptions.Those limited exceptions are rarely enacted, because doctors are too scared to intervene. I have talked to women who were denied abortions after they were told their fetuses had no skulls – precisely because of the types of restrictions that would surely come if this referendum in Kansas were to pass.Perhaps most American people, including Republicans, know and care about this. In August 2022, 59% of Kansans voted to protect abortion rights in a state where, just a decade earlier, the abortion doctor George Tiller had been murdered. At the watch party on the night of the vote, the room interrupted in cheers, screams and tears as the result was read out.Nearing the end of the night, I noticed an older man happily perched on the corner of the stage, cradling his drink and looking a little giddy. His name was James Quigley. He was a 72-year-old Republican and a retired doctor, and he looked like he wanted to have his say.“Abortion is a much more nuanced issue than anti-choice individuals would have you think,” Quigley told me.“It is deeply personal, sometimes tragic, but also sometimes a liberating decision – and we should trust women, their physicians, and their God on that.”At some point during my pregnancy, I realized that I was no longer considered a full, complete, messy human – one with autonomy, quirks and desires. At best, what I wanted was important only in proportion to my ability to protect my pregnancy. At worst, people saw me as a container for a child.I was frequently advised that from now on, I should not “take any risks”, which, of course, is ridiculously unhelpful advice. “I just don’t see why you would [take any],” one friend told me – seemingly unaware that to leave your house in the morning is a risk. To drive at 28mph on a stressful day when you’re late for an appointment, instead of at 25mph, is a risk. Going for a run is a risk – but so is choosing to forgo exercise.I have found being treated like a child in this way difficult. I don’t have to listen to any of these people, but the experience of constantly being told what to do is tiring; usually becoming an adult means we get to make our own calculations over what’s best for us, pregnant or not.For many pregnant people in America, this is no longer the case. By accident of birth, circumstance, or both, they live in a state that now limits their opportunity to end a pregnancy. If they’re rich, and unafraid, they might travel for care. But often, they don’t have the money, or can’t get the time off work, or can’t spend the numerous days and thousands of dollars to travel to another state for care. Their personhood has been reduced beyond all measure, in defense of the potential person living inside them.In March, I reported on the case of a South Carolina woman who was arrested a year after allegedly taking pills to end her pregnancy. On the police report, her offense was listed simply as: “abortion”.Pregnancy now converts legal behavior for everyone else, into a potential charge of child abuse, or child neglect, or attempted murder just for women – as the CEO of a charity explained it to me at the time.It is hard for me not to feel that viscerally, in a context where I have sometimes had to decide whether it’s worth it for me to go to report in a state with a total abortion ban, where I know miscarriage could make me a crime suspect, or result in me being denied healthcare. Other people don’t get to make that choice, they just live there.In a country where drinking alcohol, overexerting yourself in a yoga class, or hanging out the top of a truck while someone drives fast is not a crime, it could become illegal just for pregnant people. Teenagers whose grade point averages don’t satisfy judges are told they are too immature to have abortions; but not to raise a child. This is not rhetoric: politicians have spoken brazenly about manipulating laws not meant for abortion to police proper conduct in pregnancy since Roe was overturned.Reporting on this while pregnant means I’ve sometimes found it hard not to feel anger when I should have been feeling happy. At our first ultrasound appointment, at six weeks and five days, I struggled to feel joy when the nurse played the “fetal heartbeat” to me and my husband.Watching the zigzags bounce up and down on the screen in a dimly lit room, and seeing my husband’s face light up, I suddenly felt indignant. At that point, our “baby” was barely a yolk sac and some villi. Still, in many places it had more rights than me.“That’s not actually a heartbeat, you know?” I told my husband as soon as the nurse left the room. I felt like a killjoy. This was supposed to be an intimate moment. But all I could think about was the many US states that had brought “fetal heartbeat bills” in recent years. Those were now a legal reality, banning abortions at a point when I did not yet know I was pregnant.At six weeks, a fetus has not yet developed a heart. It has developed a small cluster of cells that may eventually turn into a heart – if the pregnancy is healthy – and the noise is the electrical activity coming from those cells. This is amazing, sure, but it’s not a heartbeat. There is no heart, no chambers, no blood pumping.In these early stages of pregnancy – between four and 12 weeks – pregnancy tissue removed in an abortion looks, first, like something that comes out of your nose; then tiny little egg whites; then more like a sprawling jellyfish. I know this because I worked with doctors to publish photos of what pregnancy tissue looks like after it’s extracted in an abortion before 12 weeks of pregnancy. I have seen early abortions performed at a clinic, and looked at the tissue directly after.Still, to point out what early abortion tissue looks like is often met with rage, sometimes with confusion and disbelief. In a way, I understand this. I wanted to report this story precisely because it goes against the grain of the pregnancy images we are shown. So many pregnancy images show the fetus through a microscope, or make it seem more humanized: when you look at images of early fetal development online, or even scientific imagery provided in textbooks, the depictions are very human-like. Even the perspective on an ultrasound can be misleading, highlighting the fetus in black and white so features are more visible, and showing the growing form in contrast to the tiny surrounding container of the amniotic sac.After I published this story, angry readers sent me ultrasound images; graphic descriptions of what fetuses look like in miscarriage; and videos of early fetal development under microscope. Some sent me the Guardian’s own coverage of Lennart Nilson’s photos of the earliest stages of life, taken in 1965. That imagery shows a nascent embryo, which first forms around 11-12 weeks, at a time when, if you view the fetus through a macro lens, you will see the early beginnings of a trunk and head developing.These are all different perspectives of life – neither I nor any single person can determine which is right. Different perspectives don’t have to discount one another. Sometimes, they just add to the knowledge we draw upon to make decisions about the world. I see it as my job as a journalist to give people more of this information, so they can make more informed decisions.I understand that images are incredibly powerful; I often come back from my scans feeling bursts of excitement; rare moments when I feel ready. I also understand the way in which personifying my pregnancy helps me to connect with it. Early on, my husband and I debated for a long time whether or not to find out the sex. Still feeling detached and confused about the changes going on inside me, I reasoned that knowing more might help me to feel more connected. It has.Later in my pregnancy, I have paid attention to when the little kicks come – sometimes after I eat raspberries, or drink orange juice, or when I have a chocolate bar. “He loves sugar!” I tell my husband – although I actually have no idea what the correlation is.I have also reported on the stories of people who do not feel this way about kicks or scans. One woman, Samantha Casiano, told me every new kick was a reminder of the inevitable moment when her baby would die, after she was refused an abortion in the state of Texas, despite her pregnancy not being viable.I can imagine how the descriptions of whether her fetus is now the size of a mango, or a cantaloupe, might bring on horror and fear. I can’t imagine what it must be like to be bombarded with this imagery after being told you no longer have agency over your own body.Carrying many perspectives can be helpful. It’s not my job to tell you what to believe, or even what to feel – just to let you know that these images are factual, and the lens you choose to put on them is yours, not mine.When I think about the decisions a person who wants an abortion has to make in places where it is banned, I think about the hormones that have cascaded through my body like a tornado during pregnancy.One day was so bad I had to call my friend to come over and console me while I cried for hours in my living room. That was a day when every decision I made felt certain to result in the sky falling in on me: the offending decision was over whether to buy a more expensive bar of soap, that smelled nicer. One day, I cried after a friend gave me a batch of her maternity clothes. I was in my 16th week of pregnancy, and increasingly feeling like nothing was my own. I wanted to go home to London. I worried about losing my career. I was watching my body balloon up in real time, and worried about looking at myself after pregnancy and not knowing who I was any more.Recently, when I couldn’t sleep at 4am, I read a book about the first month postpartum. The author used the word “capacious” to describe the vagina after birth. Even though I knew the word, I felt a need to Google it. “She rummaged in her capacious handbag,” was the sentence example returned to me in the search. I cried again.The changes the body goes through during pregnancy are not small. But in an abortion context obsessed with a very particular kind of religious morality, the changes a body goes through in a pregnancy sometimes feel like an afterthought.When 22-year-old Chloe tells me about being forced to deliver a baby at 37 weeks that did not go on to live, I feel a crushing sense of empathy for her. It is her struggles with her body image that she finds difficult, precisely because it is seen as so unimportant.“I’ve gained a ton of weight. And you know, I don’t know what to do about it,” she told me in a recent phone call. “If I ask anybody for help, people will probably just tell me, you should go work out. It sucks, a lot,” she says.On a reporting assignment last winter, I sat in a doctor’s office nextdoor all day while they saw clients. One woman came in, her face flooded with tears, already knowing the doctor couldn’t help – the state had a total ban. The woman was too poor to afford another child, and too poor to travel out of state to get an abortion.This is not unusual, the doctor told me: people still need abortions all the time. The conflict for the doctor has become what to do. Help, and you risk losing your license, or going to jail. Don’t help, and the patient might be failed at a time when one doctor’s decision could change their lives forever.One doctor told me about a single weekend during which she saw two infected pregnant women on her emergency shift when she checked in. One had gone into sepsis; the second patient eventually hemorrhaged, although she did not die. The doctors, one on the prior shift, and one at another hospital, had ignored them both – too scared to intervene, because administering an abortion was legally risky.They are not wrong to be scared. I’ve documented the consequences for doctors who stick their heads above the parapet: one was fined thousands for speaking out about a 10-year-old rape victim forced to travel to her state for care, another was publicly chased from her job.Working on those stories, I’m often told by people denied abortions that they feel America should be described as pro-birth, rather than pro-life. States have no intention of cleaning up the mess after an abortion has been denied, just to stop it happening in the first place.This exact scenario unfolded for Samantha Casiano, the Texas woman who was forced to deliver her baby with ancephaly. Her baby was breech – for which people are often offered a C-section, to reduce pain and severe complications. Casiano was not offered this, and found the entire birthing experience traumatic. “Your baby is going to pass away so we don’t need to do all that,” the doctors told her.“I felt degraded,” Casiano told me. “There was a lot of things I felt like wouldn’t have happened in a normal pregnancy, but with me, it’s like they were like, ‘OK, let’s just get this over with,” she said.She was made to carry the pregnancy for 13 weeks, knowing her daughter wouldn’t survive – just so, in her eyes, the doctors could “get it over with”.Mostly, the impacts of abortion bans don’t fall on people who are sick; or who have wanted pregnancies; or medically complicated pregnancies. They fall on people who want abortions because giving birth doesn’t fit with school work, with work-work, with raising the children they already have. They fall on people with few economic options, further entrenching inequality along race and class lines. Sometimes, they fall on people in domestically violent relationships. Other times, on people who know they won’t make good parents.These are all complicated reasons why someone might not be ready to have a child. In America, they aren’t good enough reasons to justify an abortion, but what happens after the abortion is denied?I recently moved back to England to give birth and be closer to family for a while. Here, I have often felt that people like to exaggerate America’s differences with the UK, because it helps deflect from our own very sordid political realities. “At least we’re not America,” people often say with a wink and a nod, often bypassing shattering political moments like Brexit, the story of a young Black boy being murdered, or our own legacy of slavery.These are the assurances I am sure people may feel reading this article: that the rest of the world is nothing like America when it comes to abortion.That may be true, but our prime minister has abstained every time he has been asked to vote on abortion since he became an MP; this includes voting to stop protesting outside of abortion clinics and to legalize abortion in Northern Ireland. In the UK, our chancellor of the exchequer has called to cut the time that abortions are legal in half, from 24 weeks to 12. Our health minister said that protesters outside clinics could just be trying to “comfort” women.This is the UK, too: where a woman was this month sentenced to two years in prison for taking abortion pills after the legal limit.As I write this, two weeks before my due date, I don’t know whether to feel hope or despair. Nor do I know what to make of America’s complicated abortion landscape, where people have repeatedly shown at the ballot box that they do not want abortion restrictions; that they are willing to oust politicians who want to bring them; and that they will continue to find innovative ways to continue to protect abortion.It’s a strange dynamic to see play out in a country where people are so obsessed with freedom. Because this is, at its core, an issue of freedom, as well as an issue of equality and fairness. When you curtail abortion – whether it is an abortion you agree with or not – you fundamentally alter someone’s right to make choices about their own chequebooks, their bodies and their families.I’m glad I had a choice, but I still burn with rage at how normal it has become in America for people not to. More