To win over the middle, anti-choice leaders argued at CPAC, it’s more helpful to message around “incremental” abortion restrictions like 20-week bans or insurance coverage restrictions.
“The IWF has never taken a stance on abortion,” executive director Sabrina Schaeffer wrote in an email to RH Reality Check. Certainly, that is IWF’s public position. But RHRC has found that the IWF’s behind-the-scenes relationship with anti-choice groups contradicts what its spokespeople say.
The issues might have changed, but the techniques now widely used by conservatives to distort science and, with it, public policy, remain the same.
At a forum sponsored by Alaska Family Action, an affiliate of the anti-choice group Focus on the Family, three Republican state senate candidates debated their positions on reproductive rights.
The Susan B. Anthony List is known for misleading ads. So it may come as a small surprise that a recent ad it sponsored featuring the Ryun family doesn’t mention the family patriarch’s long history as a Republican operative with close links to the Tea Party and the Koch brothers.
The Susan B. Anthony List wants to be able to run ads claiming the ACA supports taxpayer funding for abortion, and today the Roberts Court took them one step closer to being able to do so.
There’s a good chance the Roberts Court will make it easier for anti-choice advocates to influence elections by misleading the public.
The Supreme Court won’t take a look at Arizona’s 20-week abortion ban, but it will consider a bunch of free speech challenges to abortion rights protections.
The Supreme Court will consider whether the Susan B. Anthony List can challenge an Ohio law that prohibits lying in campaign ads.
Complaints against college administrators and private companies show the law is failing to hold our institutions accountable for illegal sex discrimination.