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.
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?
A bill that would require physicians who provide abortions to obtain admitting privileges at a nearby hospital passed an Oklahoma senate committee Tuesday. The bill appears to be based on model legislation drafted by the anti-choice group Americans United for Life.
Under the legislation, a patient could sue a doctor within ten years of terminating a pregnancy, even after signing a form acknowledging informed consent. Bill opponents say it unfairly singles out one specific medical procedure, sets a disproportionately long statute of limitations, and is redundant.
A Houston doctor who has provided safe abortion care in Texas for 40 years has had his medical license temporarily suspended following the enforcement of HB 2.
Abortion access across the South is decreasing as anti-choice politics spread into “back-door” abortion bans through increased clinic regulation.
A lawsuit challenging North Dakota’s admitting privileges law may soon be resolved.
Reproductive rights activists help defeat a proposed abortion restriction in Louisiana, while a bunch of new restrictions pop up in states across the country.
A federal court is considering whether to permanently block the state’s requirement that doctors who perform abortions must have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals.