Tennessee appears poised to increase restrictions on access to abortion care, as state lawmakers passed bills to mandate a 48-hour waiting period and increase regulation of clinics that provide abortion services.
A Tennessee house committee passed two bills that would restrict access to abortion care in the state. Among the bills considered priories by anti-choice policymakers are those designed to reinstate laws struck down by the state supreme court ruling in 2000.
Minnesota lawmakers this month have introduced five anti-choice bills, each designed to make safe abortion less accessible in the state.
First, anti-choice advocates said Texas abortion clinics were too small. Now, I guess, they’re too big.
Tennessee lawmakers have introduced multiple anti-choice bills in the wake of a constitutional amendment approved by voters that permits state lawmakers to pass laws regulating abortion.
RH Reality Check Senior Political Reporter Andrea Grimes interviews reproductive justice activists from Texas’ Rio Grande Valley who traveled to New Orleans this week to witness the proceedings at the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals on Texas’ omnibus anti-abortion law, HB 2.
At stake is the question of whether Texas’ remaining legal abortion clinics—16 currently operate in the state, down from 41 a little more than 18 months ago—will be allowed to stay open without making costly renovations or leasing new facilities to comply with hospital-like standards imposed by state lawmakers in 2013.
Texas’ omnibus anti-abortion access law, which in part requires abortion providers to operate as mini-hospitals, will return to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals this week.
If anti-choicers truly cared about women to the degree they claim, surely they would treat abortion procedures just like any other reproductive health need—and leave decisions about safety and comfort up to women and their doctors.
The emails show Texas’ key consultant putting words into the mouths of the state’s so-called expert witnesses, attempting to persuade them to selectively exclude data that did not match his anti-choice bias, and, in one case, walking extremely close to the line of outright ghostwriting what were supposed to be independent reports.