Minnesota lawmakers this month have introduced five anti-choice bills, each designed to make safe abortion less accessible in the state.
Most legislators—including lawmakers in California, Maine, and Minnesota—are attempting to close loopholes and make it more difficult for people to get around inoculation requirements. Some, however, are actually trying to make it easier for parents to say “no” to vaccines.
The premise of the Taco or Beer Challenge was simple: Eat a taco and/or drink a beer, and donate to an abortion fund. And the fundraising numbers were, in some cases, surprising and staggering.
Until reproductive rights and justice leaders make disability rights an integral issue for the movement, anti-choice advocates will continue to dictate—and skew—the conversation in order to restrict abortion.
The law provides an expansive host of benefits, including requirements that employers provide basic accommodations for pregnant workers. To get a better sense of this law and the strategy that made it win, RH Reality Check spoke with Debra Fitzpatrick of the University of Minnesota Humphrey School of Public Affairs.
Taking the temperature of the anti-choice movement post-Hobby Lobby, one thing becomes clear: Its members are getting braver all the time about admitting out loud that they’re just anti-sex and out to get your birth control.
Among other things, the new law requires that inmates have access to mental health assessments and treatment during pregnancy and postpartum, and mandates that correctional facilities offer pregnancy and STD tests to inmates.
The 49th anniversary of Griswold v. Connecticut shows how little progress we’ve made in the fight for reproductive autonomy.
The complaint was filed by a local urologist who said he’s seen a number of cases of priapism in patients of a Minnesota clinic who end up in the ER.
Conservative legal advocates argue that the state is wrongfully paying for abortions for low-income women in Minnesota, but the courts disagree.