“Abortion has been worse on the African-American community than the slave trade or Jim Crow,” said Robert Woodson, a panelist at a sparsely attended Conservative Political Action Conference panel on reaching out to more diverse voting populations.
Senior political reporter Andrea Grimes traveled to McAllen’s Whole Woman’s clinic, one of the last abortion clinics in the Rio Grande Valley, for a candlelight vigil marking the closure of a building where Texans have gone for safe, legal abortion care since Roe v. Wade.
The controversial measure was softened somewhat with an amendment, but advocates decry its chilling effect on medicine and its unconstitutionality.
Two clinics in underserved areas of Texas—one an abortion provider—closed their doors this week, as the effects of the omnibus anti-abortion access bill passed last summer with the support of conservative lawmakers continue to unfold across the state.
After six hours of, at times, heated and racially charged debate Tuesday, the Alabama house passed four bills restricting abortion, the most severe of which would ban abortion after a fetal heartbeat is detected and with no exceptions for rape or incest.
If SB 98 becomes law, Georgia will become the 25th state to forbid health plans on the insurance exchanges created by the Affordable Care Act from covering abortion care.
Iowa legislators want to pass a law allowing women to sue abortion providers if they regret their abortions. Why not let women sue the people who actually caused the regret—the people who shamed and guilted them about the abortion—instead?
North Dakota is far from alone in spending large sums to defend anti-choice laws. But what makes the state unusual is that fiscal conservatives are now criticizing a double standard, where the lawmakers backing these bills are more regularly seen opposing other instances of what they call government interference, and decrying so-called “big spending.”