Abortion Ban Debates Continue Across U.S.
1 week ago
Arizona doctors could give their patients abortions in California under a proposal announced Wednesday by Gov. Gavin Newsom to circumvent a ban on nearly all abortions in that state.
It would apply only to doctors licensed in good standing in Arizona and their patients, and last only through the end of November. Arizona’s 1864 law banning nearly all abortions except if the mother’s life is in jeopardy takes effect June 8.
“Arizona Republicans continue to put women in danger—embracing a draconian law passed when Arizona was a territory, not even a state,” Newsom said in a statement. “California will not sit idly by.”
Besides Arizona, 14 other states have banned abortion at all stages of pregnancy. While abortion access in California has never been under serious threat, Newsom — widely seen as a potential presidential candidate beyond 2024 — has made defending that access a priority of his administration.
Newsom pushed for abortion access to be enshrined into the California Constitution. He approved $20 million of taxpayer money to help pay for women in other states to come to California for abortions. He signed dozens of laws aimed at making it harder for other states to investigate women for coming to California for abortions, including banning social media companies from complying with subpoenas or warrants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Conservative Supreme Court justices appear skeptical that state abortion bans that took effect after the sweeping ruling overturning Roe v. Wade violate federal health care law, even during some medical emergencies. The case heard Wednesday will determine when doctors can provide abortions during medical emergencies in states with bans enacted after the Roe v. Wade ruling. The case comes from Idaho, which is among 14 states that ban abortion at all stages of pregnancy with very limited exceptions. The Biden administration argues federal health care law says hospitals must be allowed to terminate pregnancies in rare emergencies when a patient’s life or health is at serious risk. Idaho contends that goes too far.
It would apply only to doctors licensed in good standing in Arizona and their patients, and last only through the end of November. Arizona’s 1864 law banning nearly all abortions except if the mother’s life is in jeopardy takes effect June 8.
“Arizona Republicans continue to put women in danger—embracing a draconian law passed when Arizona was a territory, not even a state,” Newsom said in a statement. “California will not sit idly by.”
Besides Arizona, 14 other states have banned abortion at all stages of pregnancy. While abortion access in California has never been under serious threat, Newsom — widely seen as a potential presidential candidate beyond 2024 — has made defending that access a priority of his administration.
Newsom pushed for abortion access to be enshrined into the California Constitution. He approved $20 million of taxpayer money to help pay for women in other states to come to California for abortions. He signed dozens of laws aimed at making it harder for other states to investigate women for coming to California for abortions, including banning social media companies from complying with subpoenas or warrants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Conservative Supreme Court justices appear skeptical that state abortion bans that took effect after the sweeping ruling overturning Roe v. Wade violate federal health care law, even during some medical emergencies. The case heard Wednesday will determine when doctors can provide abortions during medical emergencies in states with bans enacted after the Roe v. Wade ruling. The case comes from Idaho, which is among 14 states that ban abortion at all stages of pregnancy with very limited exceptions. The Biden administration argues federal health care law says hospitals must be allowed to terminate pregnancies in rare emergencies when a patient’s life or health is at serious risk. Idaho contends that goes too far.
