Developments in Abortion, Autonomy, and Access:
This week’s Digest goes discusses the politics and ethical concerns surrounding crisis pregnancy centers, anti-abortion legislation and ballot initiatives out of Mississippi, Ohio, Missouri, and South Dakota, the story of a woman being charged with murder for allegedly taking abortion pills, and new information about how and where people are accessing abortion care. As always - please read on to the end for the news that you need to know. Want access to a detailed analysis of the abortion law in every U.S. state and territory? Please view our free Policy Resource Hub for Reproductive Health, an exclusive legal database where we update the state of the law every single day - so you’re always up to speed.
If you’d rather not receive the bi-weekly Reproductive Health Digest but still want to get other L4GG emails, you can opt out of just this newsletter here.
Reproductive Rights and Health Equity News:
This Week’s Must-Read:
This week’s must-read comes from the Dallas Morning News and tells the story of a pregnant Texas woman who underwent emergency surgery for an ectopic pregnancy after a crisis pregnancy center assured her that her ultrasound and pregnancy were normal. Crisis pregnancy centers - anti-abortion centers that often misleadingly present themselves as medical clinics - have been accused for decades of providing substandard care and inaccurate information to the people who walk through their doors. They raise serious questions about the ethics of facilities that purport to offer certain medical and diagnostic services while actually centering a mission of dissuading people from deciding to have an abortion. Although anti-abortion activists view these centers as the “front line” of their movement, experts warn that they provide a woefully inadequate alternative to comprehensive prenatal and reproductive healthcare.
Legislation & Litigation:
Overview:
Mississippi legislators are advancing legislation that would criminalize “abortion-inducing drugs” under the state’s drug trafficking laws;
Despite Ohioans passing an abortion rights constitutional amendment in 2023, Ohio lawmakers are pressing forward with bills to limit and surveil care;
South Dakota has passed a series of anti-abortion laws, including one which targets ‘advertising’ related to abortion;
The Kansas Legislature overrode the governor’s veto of a bill de-regulating crisis pregnancy centers; and
A Georgia woman is facing unprecedented murder charges for allegedly taking abortion pills.
Mississippi Legislators Aim to Criminalize Medication Abortion:
Mississippi lawmakers are advancing a bill to criminalize “abortion-inducing drugs” such as mifepristone and misoprostol under state drug trafficking laws. HB 1613 was introduced by Republican Representative Celeste Hurst as an amendment to a pre-existing drug trafficking bill. It prohibits, among other things, creating, distributing, prescribing or possessing these drugs and subjects alleged violators to up to ten years in prison. Rep. Hurst’s stated purpose is to stop the flow of abortion pills to patients in Mississippi - a state currently enforcing a total abortion ban. Although the amendment includes an exception for circumstances where these drugs are prescribed for purposes other than abortion, experts warn about the confusion and chilling effect that bills like HB 1613 create.
HB 1613 is one of many proposed state laws aiming to stop patients in ban states from accessing care. Other states have passed medication abortion bans, reclassified abortion drugs as controlled substances, introduced legislation to create causes of action against abortion pill manufacturers, limited access to telehealth, and moved to enshrine fetal personhood in state law. This crackdown comes as telehealth abortions continue to rise in states enforcing total bans, largely as a result of access to care through shield providers and online distributors in protective states.
Ohio Lawmakers Move Forward with Abortion Restrictions, Despite Constitutional Protections:
Despite Ohioans passing an abortion rights constitutional amendment in 2023, Ohio lawmakers are continuing to press for restrictions on care and abortion surveillance. The Republican-led Ohio House is pushing forward legislation implementing a mandatory 24-hour waiting period, despite there being no medically indicated reason supporting such delays in care. Although a court previously struck a similar waiting period on the grounds that it violated the amended state constitution, proponents of the new law argue that it does not contravene constitutional protections and instead provides “women with the full protection of informed medical consent when making a stressful, life-altering decision.” Far from improving quality of patient care, waiting periods actually delay and deter care, particularly for patients who are forced to travel long distances and obtain childcare and work coverage - a fact that anti-abortion lawmakers are well aware of. .
In addition to the waiting period bill, Republican lawmakers have also introduced a “Certificate of Life” bill that would require physicians to file a certificate with the state government within 10 days of detection of fetal cardiac activity and to register all fetal deaths, regardless of age or manner of death. In other words, it would effectively create a registry of all pregnant people in the state and all pregnancy terminations and losses. The bill’s sponsor openly stated that its purpose is to "acknowledge the sanctity of life beginning in the womb.”
South Dakota Passes Law Targeting Abortion Information:
In late March, South Dakota Governor Larry Rhoden signed several anti-abortion bills into law. The first - and perhaps most alarming - is HB 1274. Although South Dakota is already enforcing a total abortion ban, HB 1274 creates a new felony for any person who dispenses, distributes, sells, or advertises anything intended to be used to produce an abortion. The law allows the attorney general to pursue monetary penalties for alleged violators. South Dakota’s targeting of abortion advertising comes as Attorney General Marty Jackley is attempting to block Mayday Health - an abortion rights nonprofit - from providing abortion information in the state. Jackley stated that the new law would give prosecutors another tool for blocking out-of-state abortion providers and advertisers.
In addition to the anti-advertising law, Governor Rhoden also signed an abortion “clarification” law, which excepts specific treatments from the state’s abortion ban - namely, miscarriage treatment, ectopic pregnancy treatment, removal of a deceased fetus and procedures that are intended to preserve the pregnancy or that unintentionally result in pregnancy loss. These kinds of clarification laws do little to actually inform providers of when they are able to intercede to help their patients and fail to account for even a fraction of the complications and risks inherent to pregnancy.
The final abortion-related law targets public school education on human reproduction and requires South Dakota schools to show students a video depicting fetal development from fertilization to birth. By law, the video cannot be provided by an organization affiliated with abortion. Critics are concerned that the video provided to students will be created by anti-abortion groups or biased towards anti-abortion sentiment and will not show a scientifically accurate portrayal of fetal development.
Kansas Governor Vetoes Legislation De-regulating Crisis Pregnancy Centers:
Kansas lawmakers successfully overrode Democratic Governor Laura Kelly’s veto of a law that prohibits regulation of crisis pregnancy centers in order to “protect [their] ability to provide life-affirming care.” Although Governor Kelly explained that Kansans have made clear that they do not want their tax dollars going towards regulating private medical decisionmaking, the House and Senate both easily defeated her veto. The now-passed law aims to block the state from regulating or limiting what kinds of information and resources can be provided by CPCs, despite the anti-abortion centers’ long history of presenting biased, inaccurate, and medically contradicted information to pregnant people while prioritizing discouraging abortion over patient care. The law also creates a private right of action for individuals to sue and allows the state legislators to join in such cases. Reportedly, the state has given over $7 million to CPCs since 2022, and they outnumber abortion clinics 44 to 7.
A Georgia Woman has Been Charged with Murder After Taking Abortion Pills:
Georgia prosecutors have brought murder charges against 31-year-old Georgia woman Alexia Moore after she allegedly took abortion pills and delivered a premature fetus. Although Georgia bans abortion after detection of fetal cardiac activity (around 6 weeks gestational age), it - along with other abortion ban states - bars the state from prosecuting the pregnant person themselves and instead targets the person performing the abortion. In a bond hearing, both the DA and Moore’s defense attorney pointed out this fact, and the judge agreed. The DA also reportedly stated that the Kingsland Police Department did not seek his office’s support before bringing the murder charge, but he was nonetheless not yet prepared to drop it. Moore’s case represents one of the first times that a person has been charged with a crime like murder for self-managing an abortion, and experts on pregnancy criminalization have spoken out to condemn the charges. At this time, Moore has been released on bond, with the Superior Court Judge setting a symbolic $1 dollar bond for the murder charge and expressing doubt about the state’s ability to succeed in the charges.
Trend and Policy Watch:
New Data from Guttmacher Shows how Abortion Rates and Methods Changed in 2025:
Guttmacher’s 2025 abortion reporting data demonstrates how, nearly four years after the Dobbs decision, overall abortion numbers remain roughly steady, while the ways in which people are accessing care have shifted. Despite vigorous efforts from anti-abortion advocates and lawmakers, things like shield laws and telehealth have allowed people to continue to obtain abortions - even while living in states that ban such care. Guttmacher’s latest reporting shows that, in states without total bans, abortion numbers “declined slightly from 1,049,000 to 1,036,000,” while in states with total abortion bans in place, telehealth provision increased from 74,000 to 91,000 between 2024 and 2025. Additionally, the number of people crossing state lines to obtain care declined slightly from 154,000 in 2024 to 142,000 in 2025. What this tells us is that people are increasingly turning to telehealth and self managed abortion to obtain care - rather than traveling to other states in person.
Anti-Abortion Groups in Missouri Aim to Overturn Abortion Rights Constitutional Amendment:
This November, anti-abortion groups in Missouri hope to overturn the abortion rights constitutional amendment passed by citizen-led ballot initiative in 2024. Reportedly, they are hoping that increased coordination, funding, and support from Republican lawmakers will help them succeed in 2026 where they failed in 2024. The anti-abortion campaign - misleadingly called “Her Health, Her Future” - aims to reinstate a total abortion ban, with narrow exceptions for rape, incest, or medical emergencies. Although they have the benefit of time and increased public awareness this time around, they are still being outspent by the opposition “Stop the Ban” campaign. The 2024 win was a somewhat narrow one, with abortion rights supporters garnering only 52% of the vote, and access to abortion in the state has remained in flux as arguments over the constitutionality of remaining abortion restrictions play out in state courts. This election cycle, the anti-abortion amendment also includes a ban on gender-affirming care for minors, which recent polling shows may increase Missourians likelihood of supporting the measure.
HHS Investigating States for Alleged Violations of “Conscience” Laws:
The Department of Health and Human Services is reportedly opening investigations into 13 blue states over alleged violations of the Weldon Amendment. The Weldon Amendment, which was first implemented in 2005, is a refusal of care policy that prohibits federally funded healthcare entities from ‘discriminating’ against healthcare institutions, providers and insurers who decline to provide, cover, or refer for abortions. HHS alleges that the targeted states have unlawfully ‘coerced’ healthcare entities into providing care over conscience objections. Notably, officials involved disclosed that the investigations were not prompted by any actual complaints from individuals or entities who allege they were subject to coercion. This investigation reflects a broader move by the current administration to restrict and defund abortion coverage.