Developments in Abortion, Autonomy, and Access:
This week’s Repro Health Digest is a bit shorter than usual, as our team has been partially out of office–but, we are determined to still hit the highlights and cover the most important updates from the past two weeks. This week’s Digest discusses the ongoing legal battle over access to mifepristone, litigation around the rights of minors, positive and negative state legislative developments, and the government’s sustained attack on the rights of trans people. 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.
Reproductive Rights and Health Equity News:
This week’s must-read: This week’s must-read from the Guardian examines how the idea of abortion ‘abolitionism,’ a movement that champions fetal personhood and endorses treating abortion as homicide, has entered the mainstream of American anti-abortion politics. At least 12 states have introduced legislation that would open the door to criminally charging pregnant people for abortion–a charge that carries the death penalty in several of these states. And, the scope of who is being targeted for punishment and what conduct is punishable continues to widen as more extreme views and voices gain traction.
Legislation & Litigation:
Overview:
The Trump Administration is continuing the Biden Administration's efforts to dismiss a case challenging FDA approval of mifepristone on jurisdictional grounds;
Lawmakers in Vermont and Colorado have passed legislation strengthening protections for reproductive healthcare in their respective states;
A Missouri abortion text hotline is challenging the state’s parental involvement requirements;
Alabama’s abortion funds have resumed providing assistance following a decision finding that the state cannot prosecute groups for helping people obtain lawful out-of-state care;
Nevada has paused enforcement of its parental notification law while Planned Parenthood seeks to stay the law pending appeal;
A federal court has declined to allow Guam’s attorney general to revive a total abortion ban in the territory;
The Texas Senate is continuing to advance a bill that purports to clarify the medical exceptions to the state’s total abortion ban;
Virginia Governor Glenn Youngkin has once again vetoed protections for contraception in the state; and
The Supreme Court will allow the Trump Administration to enforce its trans military ban.
The Trump Administration Continues to Urge Dismissal of Case Challenging Mifepristone on Jurisdictional Grounds:
On Monday, the Department of Justice filed a brief continuing to urge the Northern District of Texas to dismiss a case challenging FDA’s approval of mifepristone for medication abortion. The case was initially filed in 2022 by the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, a group of anti-abortion doctors and medical groups. The Supreme Court dismissed their claims last year for lack of standing, finding that the parties could not demonstrate how they had been injured by FDA’s actions. In a bid to keep the case alive, Idaho, Kansas and Missouri moved to intervene before the district court. The Biden Administration argued for dismissal on the grounds that the intervenor states similarly lacked standing and were not properly venued in the Northern District of Texas. While that motion was pending, however, the federal administration changed from Biden to Trump, raising the question of whether the new administration would continue to defend the suit.
On Monday, the government filed its reply brief, wherein it continued to urge the Biden Administration’s position and argue for dismissal. Although the government’s continued defense of the case is welcome, whether it signals an intention to preserve access to mifepristone remains an open question. While the law involved in this case plainly cuts against the Idaho, Kansas and Missouri’s current arguments, the government’s brief left open the possibility of the states filing an independent challenge in a proper jurisdiction.
Vermont and Colorado Lawmakers Pass Legislation Strengthening Protections for Reproductive Healthcare in Their States:
Lawmakers in both Vermont and Colorado have passed legislation to strengthen protections for providers and recipients of reproductive healthcare in their states.
In Vermont, legislators passed a bill that would streamline access to medication abortion by allowing providers to use an online questionnaire for prescription purposes, further regulate advertising around reproductive health care under existing consumer protection laws, and put in place additional privacy protections for providers. In Colorado, Governor Polis signed two new bills protecting abortion rights. The first repeals a prohibition on the use of state funds for abortion, following the passage of an abortion rights amendment last November. The second increases protections for providers by allowing them to remove their individual names from prescriptions and requiring subpoenas seeking patient information to affirm that the information is not sought for the purpose of investigating lawful healthcare.
A New Lawsuit is Challenging Missouri’s Parental Involvement Requirements:
Abortion support text line ‘Right By You’ has filed a lawsuit in Missouri seeking to overturn two of the state’s restrictions on minors accessing care. The lawsuit argues that these statutes violate the recently-passed reproductive rights constitutional amendment. Together, the challenged laws require parental consent and notification prior to a minor obtaining an abortion and prohibit the provision of practical or financial support to a minor without the requisite parental involvement. The lawsuit challenging parental involvement requirements comes as Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey continues to argue for enforcement of additional medically unnecessary restrictions on abortion in the state.
Alabama Abortion Fund Resumes Providing Assistance:
For the first time in almost three years, the Yellowhammer Fund has resumed funding abortion in Alabama. The Fund’s mission has been in legal limbo for the past several years while litigation unfolded over the state’s ability to prosecute groups for helping patients obtain out of state care. In April, Judge Myron Thompson ruled against the state, finding that such prosecutions would violate constitutionally protected rights to speech and travel. This is an important victory both for Alabamians and nationally, as states across the country test whether they can extend their abortion bans beyond their own borders.
Nevada has Paused Enforcement of its Parental Notification Law:
As we reported in April, U.S. District Court Judge Anne Traum ruled last month that, in light of the Dobbs decision, Nevada can revive its parental notification requirements for minors seeking abortions in the state. Although the law was set to go into effect on April 30th, Judge Traum has granted Planned Parenthood’s request to pause enforcement of the law while it seeks a stay from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals pending appeal.
A Federal Court Declines to Allow Guam to Revive its Abortion Ban:
Last week, the Ninth Circuit issued a ruling dismissing Guam Attorney General Douglas Moylan’s attempt to revive a total abortion ban. The Court determined that a Guam Supreme Court decision finding the ban to be legislatively repealed rendered the case moot. The U.S. Supreme Court has declined to review the Guam Supreme Court’s ruling.
The Texas Senate has Advanced a Bill that Purportedly Clarified the State’s Abortion Ban:
The Texas Senate is moving forward with a controversial bill that Republican lawmakers claim will help clarify the state’s abortion ban. Prompted by reports of Texans dying or facing devastating health outcomes as a result of the current ban’s vague language, the amended law would clarify that a medical emergency need not be imminent or actively causing injury to the patient at the time of treatment. Critics of the bill argue that, in practice, it will make little meaningful difference to doctors and patients. They also point to the fact that the amendment fails to create exceptions for lethal fetal anomalies or cases of rape or incest
Virginia Governor Glenn Youngkin has Once Again Vetoed Protections for Contraception:
Virginia Governor Glenn Youngkin has once again vetoed a bill that would expressly protect the right to full-spectrum contraception in the state. Although Governor Youngkin claims that the bill is unnecessary and anti-choice actors continue to insist that concerns about the future of birth control access are alarmist exaggerations, Republican lawmakers at the state and federal levels have repeatedly blocked protective bills. Some of those same lawmakers have erroneously claimed that contraception methods like IUDs and emergency contraception are ‘abortifacients,’ or abortion-causing drugs.
The Supreme Court Supreme Court Will Allow the Trump Administration to Implement its Trans Military Ban:
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled this week that the Trump Administration’s ban on transgender service members may go into effect while legal challenges continue to play out in the lower courts. The opinion was unsigned and provided no legal reasoning for the Court’s determination. Justices Sotomayor, Kagan and Jackson dissented. If implemented, the ban would not only block trans people from joining the military, it would also force out those currently serving.