Two Texas doctors say a hospital caved to anti-choice activist “demands” when it revoked their privileges because they provide legal abortion care.
To listen to conservatives tell the story about the “war on women” is to pretend it doesn’t exist at all. To listen to Democrats, though, is to limit the fight for gender equity to the issue of abortion, which, while important, is part of a larger fight for justice on all fronts.
A clinic in El Paso was forced to stop providing legal abortion care, and found no relief in a federal court on Wednesday when it asked for a restraining order against Texas’ omnibus anti-abortion law.
When West Virginia’s legislature voted to ban abortion after 20 weeks’ gestation in March, West Virginia Democrats overwhelmingly backed the ban, deliberately defying the national party’s support of abortion rights.
A Texas appeals court ruled a state court action, which challenges a 2012 rule blocking Planned Parenthood from participating in the state-run Texas Women’s Health Program, can proceed.
What does “choice” mean in an age of targeted restrictions on abortion providers?
Reproductive rights advocates filed a petition to have the entire panel of judges on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit consider whether Texas’ admitting privileges requirement is constitutional.
Until now, attempts to track the legislative journey that ultimately led to the passage of one of the most restrictive anti-choice laws in the country would have been a daunting task. With the launch of RH Reality Check’s interactive database, however, a picture of the long road to HB 2 begins to emerge.
The $5 million San Antonio facility is being planned in anticipation of the enactment of the final provision of Texas’ new omnibus anti-abortion law that mandates all abortion procedures be performed or administered in ambulatory surgical centers.
In May, a federal court will hear evidence on the impact of Alabama’s admitting privileges law in considering whether to let it take effect.