Recent findings directly contradict the charge often made by anti-choice politicians that pushing through abortion restrictions is based on an overarching desire to protect the health and safety of women.
A new lawsuit filed in state court argues a law signed by Gov. Fallin in May that requires doctors performing abortions to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital violates the Oklahoma Constitution.
Advocates asked a federal court to block the measure before it takes effect next month.
The stories of women who participated in focus groups led by SisterSong, included in a new report, convey the gross under-education and discriminatory treatment of Black women living in the South, in particular, where sexual and reproductive health education is nonexistent and stigma is rampant.
Issued by a federal district court, Wednesday’s order permanently blocks the law, which would have banned abortions as early as six weeks of pregnancy.
A group of Texas doctors filed suit against the State of Texas Wednesday, challenging part of a new omnibus anti-abortion law that requires abortion providers to meet the standards of ambulatory surgical centers.
The ruling means that abortion providers in Arizona will be forced to adhere to outdated protocol when performing medication abortions.
A bill that would make it a separate crime to kill or injure a fetus in crimes committed against a pregnant woman passed the Florida House Judiciary Committee on Monday, and now heads to a vote on the house floor.
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.”
A lawsuit challenging North Dakota’s admitting privileges law may soon be resolved.