This Week in Abortion: South Carolina, North Carolina; Friend and Foes

Your weekly roundup of good reads, legal updates, and legislative tracking on abortion.

Welcome back to your weekly roundup of good reads, legal updates, and legislative tracking on abortion. As usual, there is a lot to catch up on. But, it’s not all bad news. We are especially excited about the FDA advisory panel’s approval of over-the-counter birth control. For the feature, we are highlighting local stories that demonstrate the sometimes fluid definition of who is on “team access.”

Good Reads 

• If last week’s feature left you wanting even more info on ballot measures, the New York Times followed our lead (we like to think) with an article on 10 red and purple states that are the most likely candidates for a pro-access citizen’s initiative.

  • And for our Ohio (and Illinois) folks, IL billionaire Richard Uihlein has donated millions to support efforts that make it more difficult to get citizen-led ballot initiatives approved. (Action item: stop buying cardboard boxes from Uline!)

• The National Abortion Federation released its annual violence against providers report. This professional organization for abortion providers, which has been compiling data for 45 years, showed a disproportionate increase in violent acts in access states. This is not surprising given the decrease in legal providers available to threaten in anti-access states.

• Teen Vogue featured an op-ed from two Latina abortion access activists in Texas who don’t think we should count out Texas or Texas women. Worth a read. 

• News from the States had a nice piece highlighting Minnesota’s goal of becoming a beacon of access when most states around them are going in the opposite direction. 

• A few weeks ago we highlighted a proposed HHS rule around strengthening HIPPA privacy as part of the federal strategies to curb the impacts of Dobbs. This thought-provoking piece by Duke scientists and public health scholars highlights some of the potential unintended consequences of the current writing, which the authors predict will further exacerbate inequities in the system. We still encourage you all to provide public comment before it closes on June 16!

• The 19th highlights why Virginia might be the place to watch for abortion access and importantly showcases that not all Democrats are aligned on this issue.

Events of the Week

• We try not to be alarmist, but there’s a real chance that North Carolina could break its veto-proof majority and reject a 12-week abortion ban next week. (Gov. Cooper is signing to veto as we send this newsletter.) See the feature below for more details, but in the meantime, we hope readers in North Carolina know that there is still time to call their legislators. Find them here. Tell them three things: 

If protesting is more your style: 

• Advisers to the FDA unanimously approved the country’s first over-the-counter birth control pill. The approval is non-binding so FDA itself still needs to approve the progestin-only medication, but we predict it will. According to the AP, agency scientists shared concerns about the size of the manufacturer's study and the potential issues with the instructions. But, it’s hard to imagine the agency doesn’t move forward with approval after receiving a revised version of the data promised by the drugmaker.

• According to the Louisiana Illuminator the state, which has a shorter legislative session than most, is looking like it will maintain its anti-access status when the session closes in June. A bill that would have added more exemptions to the state’s ban was tanked in committee, but a bill to help fund crisis pregnancy centers is moving forward. 

• Michigan advanced a bill that would protect workers against retaliation for having an abortion. While it might seem far-fetched to think having an abortion could impact your employment, we’ve seen this happen to the LGBTQ+ community. Hope other access states follow suit. 

• Georgia amended its tax code to include “unborn dependents” as the latest impact of their fetal personhood laws. 

• Members of Congress’ Democratic Women’s Caucus wrote a letter to AmerisourceBergen, the main distributor of Mifepristone to US pharmacies, in an attempt to force documentation on why the drug is not planning on being distributed in 31 states. We’ve not seen a response yet.

Legal Updates

• The Center for Reproductive Rights filed a lawsuit on Monday against the FDA and Dept of Health and Human Services. It’s another in the saga of Mifepristone. 

  • Recall, a Texas judge tried to shut down access across the country on the same day that a Washington judge ruled access should be preserved in some specific states that sued to keep the drug available. Access is currently unchanged while the appeal of the Texas case continues.

  • The key aim of this new lawsuit, filed on behalf of clinics, is to extend legal protections to providers in Virginia, Montana, and Kansas which are not party to the Washington case.

• A federal judge denied Idaho AG’s request to allow the state to prosecute ER physicians for providing abortions to stabilize patients. This is good-ish news for doctors and patients in Idaho for now.

• Jewish Kentukians are suing the state, claiming the state’s extreme anti-abortion laws violate their religious beliefs that life begins at birth. We shall see if it moves forward, as there are some questions about legal standing. 

Feature: Friend or Foe?

So often coverage of abortion looks at the issue from a top-down angle, starting with the national view and dividing everyone into friends or foes from there on out. Legislative sessions this spring show that there is more to it than that. So, for our short feature this week, we are drawing your attention to states and stories where the line between who is on the “access” team isn’t so clear.

• The New York Times profiled the South Carolina “Sister Senators” who are stopping the state from passing a total ban on abortion. As the profile says, “Their positions hardly make them champions to reproductive rights groups. Two of the three Republican women, Ms. Shealy and Ms. Gustafson, voted in favor of a six-week ban.” That ban passed the Senate earlier this year and may pass the House next week. Like other Republicans this season, these two women draw a line on what they consider acceptable abortions at a far lower point than what most medical professionals (and we) think is reasonable. But, in the fight to stop an all-out ban starting at contraception, they held their ground despite pro-life pushback like delivering fake baby spines to their offices.

• North Carolina Representative Tricia Cotham has become the turncoat story of the year. Cotham has had an abortion and previously co-sponsored a bill to codify Roe v. Wade. But, Rep. Cotham recently switched parties from Dems to Reps and apparently switched a lot more than that. Her “Yes” vote made a recently passed 12-week ban veto-proof. As a result, Democratic Gov. Cooper spent the week traveling to her’s and Rep. John Bradford’s nearby district trying to bring out support from constituents. If he can get one of them on board, and make sure all Dems are present and accounted for (perhaps by sleeping inside the capitol building?), the veto override will fail. 

• Nebraska lawmakers have reintroduced an abortion ban, this time at 12 weeks instead of the 6-week ban that they previously failed to pass. The inclusion of the ban with an anti-trans rights bill makes the politics that much more divisive, but it’s likely to pass. The key to success will be the buy-in of Republican State Sen. Merv Riepe. Last month he held the line against a 6-week ban but was clear that he would support a 12-week ban. As we noted, it’s hard to know what to do with someone like Riepe. The 12-week ban is on him, but he also kept the state from something even worse. As the National Review says, “If it passes, the twelve-week limit is an incremental gain for life, and nothing would stop pro-lifers from passing a six-week limit if a committed pro-lifer fills Riepe’s seat in 2026.” 

• For anyone who still thinks Democrats are fully aligned on abortion policy, a recent House debate regarding Medicaid funding in Rhode Island is worth watching. Rhode Island Democrat Arthur Corvese is a known opponent of “elective abortions.” During debate on the bill, he said, “I can’t possess a firearm if I cannot afford it. Likewise, if a woman cannot afford an abortion they cannot get it…But that does not take the right away.” This is a Democrat and a Committee Chairman in a pro-access state and he is talking about abortions as a thing, a luxury good that you can possess or not possess rather than as healthcare.