Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Mary Miller’s pollster claims she’s edging ahead
Next Post: Former Sen. Tom Cullerton sentenced to year in prison
Posted in:
* Elyssa Cherney at Crain’s…
If the landmark abortion rights case Roe v. Wade is struck down this summer, Illinois won’t only become a so-called “oasis” for women across the Midwest looking to terminate pregnancies. It’s also likely to serve as a massive training ground for early-career OB-GYNs who must learn to perform abortions.
Hospitals or clinics that offer residency programs in obstetrics and gynecology are required to provide physicians with direct procedural training in abortion—or “access” to abortion training if the institution itself has moral or religious objections. That standard, established by the national accrediting agency for graduate medical education, isn’t expected to change, even as the U.S. Supreme Court moves closer to overturning the federal right to abortion.
But with as many as 26 states poised to ban or severely limit abortion after Roe falls, scores of OB-GYN residency programs around the country will have to secure training elsewhere. As a result, programs in states like Illinois, where abortion access remains protected, are already seeing a surge in training requests from outside institutions. Programs here will be especially burdened because Illinois is the only state in the region that guarantees the right to elective abortions, making it a logical choice for neighboring programs to send their residents. […]
A recent analysis published in the Obstetrics & Gynecology medical journal estimates that 43.9% of all OB-GYN residents train in states where abortion access will change—about 2,300 in states that have trigger laws or bans that predate Roe and 332 in states expected to enact new restrictions.
* Meanwhile, up north…
Anticipating a U.S. Supreme Court decision to overturn Roe v. Wade within the next week, Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin isn’t scheduling abortions after June 25.
Overturning Roe could activate Wisconsin’s near-complete abortion ban, first passed in 1849, although Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin’s legal advocacy director in May said the organization doesn’t think the statute would spring back to life. Democratic Gov. Tony Evers called for the Republican Legislature to convene Wednesday to repeal that ban — a demand the Legislature will almost certainly reject. […]
Dan Lennington, deputy counsel at the conservative legal group Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty, said he thinks the law would activate immediately. He also pointed out Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin’s decision to shut down ahead of the ruling shows “they understand the risk of prosecution.”
* To our west…
Last week, the Iowa Supreme Court ruled that the state’s constitution does not include a “fundamental right” to abortion. The court’s decision came in a challenge to a 2020 law requiring a 24-hour waiting period before an abortion. Though it’s unclear if Friday’s decision means the law signed by Governor Kim Reynolds will take effect.
Also…
Providers like Planned Parenthood implemented a 24-hour waiting period for abortions following an Iowa Supreme Court decision on the law Friday, despite no confirmation of the law’s immediate enforcement.
* To our south…
Kentucky’s Republican attorney general went to court Tuesday claiming the Democratic governor’s administration missed a deadline to set up a regulatory process for a sweeping new abortion law currently blocked by a federal court order. In a maneuver loaded with political and legal implications, Attorney General Daniel Cameron said in his lawsuit against Democratic Gov. Andy Beshear’s administration that state officials are still obligated to craft regulations and create forms associated with the new law’s restrictions, even though a federal judge temporarily halted its enforcement while the case is litigated. Cameron, who has filed paperwork to run for governor himself next year, said that order didn’t relieve the state Cabinet for Health and Family Services from fulfilling its “statutory responsibilities
* To our east…
There are seven state-approved abortion centers, most of which are in the northern half of the state. And state law requires two separate visits for an abortion – one for paperwork, and one for the actual procedure.
“So that’s twice that people have to line up childcare for the children, they have time off work, (find) transportation,” Marchbank said. “A lot of things that I think a lot of people with privilege just take for granted.”
Furthering restrictions or outright banning abortion would achieve a longtime goal for the Indiana GOP, which has been steadily increasing abortion regulations in the past decade. In 2011, Senate Republicans introduced SB 290, which would have outlawed abortion except to protect the life of the mother. The bill never got off the ground.
Even before the Supreme Court draft leaked in May, 110 Republican legislators sent a letter to fellow Republican Gov. Eric Holcomb, asking him to call the General Assembly into a special session if Roe were to be overturned.
* To our southwest…
Although Roe v. Wade remains the law of the land, women can no longer get a legal abortion in two states, Oklahoma and South Dakota. In at least one other, Missouri, the only clinic is booked and not accepting new appointments.
And…
ROLLA, Mo. — For more than half a century, Tri-Rivers Family Planning has operated on a shoestring budget, providing contraceptives, pregnancy testing, treatment for sexually transmitted diseases and other reproductive health care to a mostly low-income and female clientele in the Ozark Mountains.
The clinic has never performed abortions. But with the Supreme Court widely expected to revoke the constitutional right to abortion that it established in Roe v. Wade, its work has never been more essential — and its nurse practitioners and patients have never felt more threatened.
Last year, the Republican-led Missouri Senate voted to ban taxpayer funding for two common methods of preventing pregnancy: intrauterine devices and emergency contraception — the so-called morning-after pill, also known as Plan B — which many abortion opponents regard as “abortifacients” because they can prevent a fertilized egg from implanting in a woman’s uterus. Lawmakers later abandoned the effort, but some have indicated that if Roe falls, they may try again.
“The attacks are relentless — any little angle they can chip away at what we do, they are doing it,” said Lisa Ecsi Davis, the clinic’s director of operations, who has worked at Tri-Rivers for 30 years. “It’s exhausting.”
The demise of Roe would make the need for effective birth control more urgent than ever. Yet nearly six decades after the Supreme Court guaranteed the right to use contraception, and more than 10 years after the Affordable Care Act mandated that private insurers cover it, many American women still have a hard time getting access.
And…
The potential overturn of Roe v. Wade by the Supreme Court could have ramifications wider than just banning abortion in much of the United States. In a post-Roe world, in vitro fertilization (IVF)—the fertility treatment used by millions of Americans every year—could be in danger. […]
Would this be considered homicide in a state that has banned abortions under any circumstances? The answer to this question is unclear.
There’s uncertainty around how IVF is legally defined, and whether each state considers a fertilized egg as a human being with rights or not. Many of the 13 states with trigger laws that would immediately ban abortion rights once Roe is overturned—Arkansas, Idaho, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, North Dakota, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Utah, Wyoming and Texas—define life as beginning at “the moment of fertilization.”
* Meanwhile, it’s too late to do this in Illinois for November…
Fearing the U.S. Supreme Court will soon overturn Roe v. Wade, California Democrats on Tuesday moved quickly to ensure the state’s progressive voters have a chance this fall to make abortion a constitutional right in the nation’s most populous state.
A proposed amendment to the California Constitution that would explicitly ban the state from denying or interfering with abortions or contraceptives cleared two legislative committees in a single day on Tuesday, an unusually fast pace for a Legislature that many times takes two years to move a bill through its arduous process.
posted by Rich Miller
Tuesday, Jun 21, 22 @ 11:35 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Mary Miller’s pollster claims she’s edging ahead
Next Post: Former Sen. Tom Cullerton sentenced to year in prison
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
There is so much work for Planned Parenthood of IL and like organizations to do to prepare for what’s coming. I hope they are getting ready.
Comment by hisgirlfriday Tuesday, Jun 21, 22 @ 11:56 am
Contraception, and not just the emergency variety, is next up on the list. And it’s going to take a whole lot less than fifty years for them to get that one.
Comment by Roadrager Tuesday, Jun 21, 22 @ 12:00 pm
I haven’t looked into it yet, because this just came to mind reading through all this…
What protections exist in state law that would prevent local county or small town governments from creating zoning laws that would all be make abortion services unavailable in the county. Something like a zoning requirement for all medical services ‘must be 10,000ft from a school’, or requiring all medical facilities to get a special use permit(That would then be denied almost by default).
I can see this being the next prong of attack, considering the spread of how many township boards started enacting meaningless ‘gun sanctuary’ ordinances.
Comment by TheInvisibleMan Tuesday, Jun 21, 22 @ 12:00 pm
Right now there are few policy type things that can galvanize both Dems and moderate Indies… and women…
The repeal of Roe has that type of galvanizing.
Where are the GOP folks in Illinois cheering for such a ruling?
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Jun 21, 22 @ 12:08 pm
Pritzker deserves a lot of credit for leaning into this issue. The implementation of abortion bans is going to be messy, disturbing, and deeply unpopular even in moderately red states. National Democrats have responded mostly by passing a bill to “protect” SCOTUS justices from protests. Willy’s right when he points out Republicans are in a fearful crouch over the politics here. Even “moderate” voters aren’t particularly moderate on this issue. Any Democrat fearing the bad cycle can go on offense on this issue. It just requires putting aside the mealy-mouthed jargon that DC uses to talk about abortion.
Comment by vern Tuesday, Jun 21, 22 @ 12:18 pm
Roadrager @ 12:00
I agree that the Rs will go after Contraception, the Pill , morning after, etc., my question is will there be a ban on Vasectomy’s?
Comment by Are Ya Kiddin’ Me? Tuesday, Jun 21, 22 @ 12:23 pm
== It’s also likely to serve as a massive training ground for early-career OB-GYNs who must learn to perform abortions.==
I’m sure having more doctors train in the state will have no effect on the state and that we would rather make it easier for Ken Griffin to cut people’s pay.
Comment by Arsenal Tuesday, Jun 21, 22 @ 12:26 pm
Re: California,
Barabara Hernandez was ahead of the curve on this.
https://ilga.gov/legislation/BillStatus.asp?DocTypeID=HJRCA&DocNum=7&GAID=16&SessionID=110&LegID=131140
Comment by Noted Tuesday, Jun 21, 22 @ 12:40 pm
I wonder if a state constitutional amendment that encodes the right to privacy that is the basis for Roe and Obergefell might be better overall than a narrow amendment strictly about abortion.
Comment by ChicagoVinny Tuesday, Jun 21, 22 @ 12:41 pm
==I agree that the Rs will go after Contraception, the Pill , morning after, etc., my question is will there be a ban on Vasectomy’s?==
The pretzel logic you are going to see to keep that and ED medications available will put Auntie Anne’s out of business.
Comment by Roadrager Tuesday, Jun 21, 22 @ 12:58 pm
=== The pretzel logic===
How is it pretzel logic?
Isn’t a vasectomy also birth control?
The use of male birth control, in a religious framing, is deemed as wrong, the use of math (I’ll leave it there) is a chosen form accepted by some religious groups.
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Jun 21, 22 @ 1:05 pm
OW, I am calling it pretzel logic because one of the core beliefs is that a man is a full being with agency, while a woman needs to be an accepting vessel. The contortions will come from them not saying that out loud, or figuring out how close they can step to that line.
Though they’re already crossing the line and freely admitting in some instances that abortion bans are part and parcel with replacement theory, so maybe they’ll just come on out with that one as well.
Comment by Roadrager Tuesday, Jun 21, 22 @ 1:43 pm
** I agree that the Rs will go after Contraception **
No one is going after contraception, because no one but devout Catholics are opposed to it. Those talking points are hyperbole meant to stir people up.
Comment by Sir Smarmalot Tuesday, Jun 21, 22 @ 1:44 pm
==Those talking points are hyperbole meant to stir people up. ==
Such is what they told us about Roe itself.
Comment by Arsenal Tuesday, Jun 21, 22 @ 1:48 pm
===No one is going after contraception===
Yeah, the thing is, there have been cases in front of the Supreme Court, specific to contraception.
Did you miss those?
A win all but ending abortion protection, and a legal history of contraception in front of SCOTUS, no one will go after contraception after a Roe win?
That’s wishful thinking.
Yes, as a Catholic, I am aware of my own religion’s take on the issue, that doesn’t mean anything when it comes to a continued dismantling of women controlling their own bodies.
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Jun 21, 22 @ 1:50 pm
===No one is going after contraception, because no one but devout Catholics are opposed to it.===
It has nothing to do with Catholics vs Protestants regarding contraception. It was in Griswold v Connecticut, which legalized access to contraception nationwide, that SCOTUS established a right to privacy in the Contitution, which was the foudation of Roe. That’s what Republicans are after.
Comment by Nick Name Tuesday, Jun 21, 22 @ 1:52 pm
** Roe itself **
Not really, there’s always been a strong prolife movement, contraception and such, not so much. They exist of course, but aren’t very noisy. The Supreme Court may be conservative, but its not the Vatican.
Comment by Sir Smarmalot Tuesday, Jun 21, 22 @ 1:58 pm
=== Not really, there’s always been a strong prolife movement, contraception and such, not so much===
Popularity versus legality/statutes, two different animals.
Republicans are Dan good to women’s health.
That will be the political framing.
You, I guess, you realize there were cases already where contraception was in front of SCOTUS…
Contraception is next. Why wouldn’t it be, do in large part that the pro-life religious prong has already gone after contraception, as you now seemingly realize.
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Jun 21, 22 @ 2:02 pm
===Court may be conservative, but its not the Vatican.===
You *know* how the courts and SCOTUS will rule?
That’s an interesting flex
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Jun 21, 22 @ 2:04 pm
Saying the Court may overturn Griswald without criminalizing contraception is the equivalent to saying the Court may overturn Roe without criminalizing abortions.
No one is suggesting that the Court’s rulings will outlaw abortions or contraception.
Rather, people are observing that when the conservative Court voids the privacy basis for those rights, conservative lawmakers will subsequently move to criminalize them.
And one need only google the words “roe” and “contraception” to see the truth of that observation.
The Court may not be so conservative that they’d literally criminalize abortion or contraception, but by stripping away the constitutional basis of those rights, the Court will make that a distinction without a difference.
– MrJM
Comment by MisterJayEm Tuesday, Jun 21, 22 @ 3:08 pm
==No one is going after contraception, because no one but devout Catholics are opposed to it.==
You should take a quick gander at who’s steering the ideological bent of the Court these days, and who they have historically been very receptive and accommodating to.
Comment by Roadrager Tuesday, Jun 21, 22 @ 3:13 pm
“There’s uncertainty around how IVF is legally defined, and whether each state considers a fertilized egg as a human being with rights or not.”
Can’t wait to hear the pretzel logic about IVF. If the GOP tries to save IVF, they will invalidate their own laws and will be a hot mess over the next few years.
Comment by DeeLay Tuesday, Jun 21, 22 @ 4:14 pm
===No one is going after contraception, because no one but devout Catholics are opposed to it.===
Dismissive statements like this are exactly why we are where we are.
Comment by Politix Tuesday, Jun 21, 22 @ 4:24 pm
== there’s always been a strong prolife movement==
I’m not talking about the strength of various movements; anti-contraceptive nuts only need five people.
I’m talking about how “no one will ever do X, that’s just alarmist” was exactly what they said about Roe.
So you understand if I’m not just gonna take your word for it.
Comment by Arsenal Tuesday, Jun 21, 22 @ 6:28 pm
Illinois should also prepare for violence. the extreme right is getting more and more strange about all sorts of issues including this one and the bombing record was bad enough against clinics. I have zero trust that it will be peaceful. and yes, they are coming for your IVF and birth control pills too. The Roman Catholic church’s positions and domination of the opinions of the high court are approaching what we criticize in other countries…theocracy.
Comment by Amalia Tuesday, Jun 21, 22 @ 6:51 pm
===The Supreme Court may be conservative, but its not the Vatican. ===
Gotta tell ya, I think the Supreme Court is considerably MORE conservative than the Vatican right now. Most of the Catholics on the Supreme Court are affiliated with Catholic groups that reject Pope Francis as way too liberal and consider him a heretic.
Comment by Suburban Mom Wednesday, Jun 22, 22 @ 7:45 am