You mean like shooters kids.

 

Study cited by Texas judge in abortion pill case retracted

Sofia Resnick, Arizona Mirror
February 6, 2024 8:05AM ET



Mifepristone and Misoprostol - Erin Hooley/Chicago Tribune/TNS




Two of the key studies cited by plaintiffs and judges as evidence that medication abortion should be pulled from the market or heavily restricted have been retracted because of undeclared conflicts of interest and unreliable findings, academic publisher Sage announced Monday.

States Newsroom was the first to report last year that Sage had opened an investigation into some of the research featured prominently in the initial Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. U.S. Food and Drug Administration case, whose appeal goes before the U.S. Supreme Court next month. The case is centered on mifepristone, part of a two-drug regimen used to terminate pregnancies and to manage miscarriages.

Sage retracted three studies published in its journal “Health Services Research and Managerial Epidemiology,” which were funded and produced by the Charlotte Lozier Institute, the research arm of the influential Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, which works to elect federal and state anti-abortion lawmakers.

“Following Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines, we made this decision with the journal’s editor because of undeclared conflicts of interest and after expert reviewers found that the studies demonstrate a lack of scientific rigor that invalidates or renders unreliable the authors’ conclusions,” reads a statement issued by Sage.

The studies are:

“A Longitudinal Cohort Study of Emergency Room Utilization Following Mifepristone Chemical and Surgical Abortions, 1999–2015” (2021)

“A Post Hoc Exploratory Analysis: Induced Abortion Complications Mistaken for Miscarriage in the Emergency Room are a Risk Factor for Hospitalization” (2022)

“Doctors Who Perform Abortions: Their Characteristics and Patterns of Holding and Using Hospital Privileges” (2019)

The lead author for each study was James Studnicki, Charlotte Lozier’s vice president and director of data analytics, who was on the editorial board of “Health Services Research and Managerial Epidemiology” at the time the studies were published.

“Upon submission, the lead author declared no conflicts of interest and all authors declared the same within each article; however, all but one of the article’s authors had an affiliation with one or more of Charlotte Lozier Institute, Elliot Institute, and American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists – all pro-life advocacy organizations that explicitly support judicial action to restrict access to mifepristone,” the Sage statement reads. One of those groups, AAPLOG, is a plaintiff in the Alliance v. FDA lawsuit.

Neither Studnicki nor the Charlotte Lozier Institute responded to a request for comment in time for publishing.

Last year, pharmaceutical sciences professor Chris Adkins contacted Sage with his concerns about the 2021 “Longitudinal Cohort Study,” which was cited by U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk as evidence that the anti-abortion doctor-plaintiffs had standing to sue because “they allege adverse events from chemical abortion drugs can overwhelm the medical system and place ‘enormous pressure and stress’ on doctors during emergencies and complications.”

That paper looked at Medicaid patients’ visits to the emergency room within 30 days of having an abortion and concluded that medication abortion is excessively risky.

“I can’t prove that there was intent to deceive, but I struggled to find an alternative reason to present your data in such a way that exaggerates the magnitude,” Adkins told States Newsroom at the time. “They’re misrepresenting its conclusions to begin with.”

The epidemiology and public health experts who conducted an independent post-publication peer review of the three studies ultimately agreed with Adkins. Regarding the 2021 and a follow-up 2022 paper using the same dataset, the experts found “fundamental problems with the study design and methodology,” “unjustified or incorrect factual assumptions,” “material errors in the authors’ analysis of the data,” and “misleading presentations of the data.”

The 2019 article, using a different dataset, contained “unsupported assumptions,” “misleading presentations of the findings,” and “demonstrate a lack of scientific rigor and render the authors’ conclusion unreliable,” the experts found.

Experts have cited mifepristone’s safety and efficacy with more than 5.6 million uses over the past two decades. The FDA has recorded 28 deaths but has stated that the drug cannot be identified as the cause of those deaths.




Georgia Recorder is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Georgia Recorder maintains editorial independence.

https://www.rawstory.com/study-cited-by-texas-judge-in-abortion-pill-case-retracted/

 

Senate Republicans block rape and incest exceptions for Missouri abortion ban

St. Louis Post-Dispatch
February 8, 2024 7:40PM ET



The Missouri State Capitol in Jefferson City, Missouri. - Wayne Mckown/Dreamstime/TNS




Despite recent blowups among Republicans in the Missouri Senate, the majority party remained unified Wednesday to block a Democratic effort to legalize abortion in cases of rape or incest.

After Republicans opened debate on a plan to ban Medicaid funds from Planned Parenthood, Democrats responded with amendments aimed at loosening Missouri's near-total abortion ban.

Missouri since June 2022 has only allowed abortions in medical emergencies.

Read More


https://www.rawstory.com/senate-rep...-incest-exceptions-for-missouri-abortion-ban/

 

ABORTION IS STATE'S RIGHTS STATE'S RIGHTS STATE'S RIGHTS!!!!


Trump to unveil national abortion ban plans after locking down GOP nomination: report

Brad Reed
February 16, 2024 11:32AM ET







Former President Donald Trump has been reluctant to weigh in on the topic of abortion as he reportedly fears that endorsing anything short of a near-total ban could alienate his hardcore Christian followers.

The New York Times reports, however, that he will come out in favor of a 16-week nationwide abortion ban after he locks down the Republican Party presidential nomination later this year.

Trump apparently settled on the 16-week ban because he thinks it's a nice even number. Trump will also favor exceptions to the ban in cases of rape, incest, or where the life of the mother is at stake.

"Abortion is currently banned after 16 weeks in 20 states, including Mr. Trump’s home state of Florida," the Times writes. "The type of ban that Mr. Trump has discussed privately would restrict abortion rights in the remaining 30 states where it is legal beyond that point. And the question of exceptions limited to the life of the mother is also controversial."

RELATED: ‘Boss Trump’ is a mobster finally facing the music: new book

The politics of a nationwide abortion ban may not be good for Trump, however, even if he sets a limit at 16 weeks.

Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin campaigned on enacting a 15-week ban in his home state last year and was thoroughly rebuked at the ballot box.

What's more, Trump may have a hard time claiming the mantle of a "moderate" on the issue when his three Supreme Court appointments were the reason why the landmark Roe v. Wade decision was overturned in the first place.



https://www.rawstory.com/trump-abortion-2667299322/

 

Well, if you don't want trump in the whitehouse you have 2 choices;
Do what the current plan is and destroy America. If successful Biden will last just long enough to get the 25th. And that gives us Harris.
Or back Haley.
You already know biden can't win and you don't want Harris in there, but those are your chices at this point.
Haley or harris. To get harris you have to give up your moral high low ground.
To get Haley we all can have hope for America again.

 

This is funny. Trump got caught advocating for a national abortion ban and now has to scramble to try and lie his way out of it. Just like the treasonous conservative/America Hating/Republicans here that used to say they supported a woman's right to have an abortion. But then as soon as the Supreme Court struck down the Constitutional right suddenly agreed with the Court claiming abortion was still legal except in the states it isn't and that its a "state's rights" issue. And then will turn around again and support a national ban. Because all Trump and treasonous conservative/America Hating/Republicans do is lie.



Trump privately favors 16-week national abortion ban, New York Times reports
Alexandra Ulmer
Updated Fri, February 16, 2024 at 3:47 PM MST·3 min read
103



Former U.S. President Trump attends a hearing on a criminal case linked to a hush money payment in New York City

• 
  

By Alexandra Ulmer

(Reuters) - Republican presidential frontrunner leaving the page." data-wf-tooltip-position="bottom" data-wf-reset-every="90">Donald Trump has privately expressed support for a 16-week national abortion ban, with exceptions in cases of rape, incest or risk to a mother's life, the New York Times reported on Friday, citing two sources.

That stance would mark a pivot after Trump has for years remained vague on the hot-button issue and refused to endorse a national ban. Democratic President Joe Biden, whom Trump is likely to face in the November general election, pounced on the news, saying that Trump was "running to rip away your rights."

Reuters was not immediately able to confirm the Times' story, which the Trump campaign called "fake."

"As President Trump has stated, he would sit down with both sides and negotiate a deal that everyone will be happy with," said Karoline Leavitt, a Trump spokesperson, without providing any detail on what such a deal would look like.

A source told NBC News that Trump "had not settled" on a national ban.

Abortion rights will be a dominant theme is this year's presidential campaign and could prove a liability for Trump and his fellow Republicans.

Biden's re-election campaign is putting a spotlight on the issue to galvanize women in key battleground states, arguing that abortion access is a personal freedom that Trump and Republicans are denying women.

Republicans, meanwhile, need to turn out their culturally conservative base in what is expected to be a close contest with Biden without putting off the independents and suburban women who opinion polls show oppose sweeping abortion restrictions.

Republican strategist David Kochel said there was "no upside" in Trump making the campaign a referendum on abortion.

"I think any time we're talking about abortion instead of the border and the economy, we're losing," Kochel said.

Trump has tried to have it both ways, taking credit for delivering the Supreme Court majority that overturned Roe v. Wade, which recognized a woman's constitutional right to abortion, while criticizing some Republican-led states' six-week abortion bans as "a terrible mistake."

He has also blamed Republicans' positions on abortion for the party's electoral losses since the June 2022 ruling. Republicans have passed restrictive abortion laws in nearly two dozen states since the Supreme Court reversal of abortion rights.

The Times reported that Trump did not want to air his abortion views publicly yet to avoid turning off conservatives who favor stricter or full bans before he has formally clinched the Republican presidential nomination.

But anti-abortion group Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, which last year criticized Trump's statement that the Supreme Court was right to leave abortion lawmaking to states, on Friday applauded Trump's reported stance.

"We strongly agree with President Trump on protecting babies from abortion violence at 16 weeks," President Marjorie Dannenfelser said in a statement.

Republicans' long campaign to end abortion rights has become a liability ahead of the 2024 elections, strategists from both parties have said.

Biden's campaign quickly issued a statement on Friday criticizing Trump's purported policy proposal.

"Donald Trump is running to rip away your rights," the statement said. "Does anyone doubt Trump has already cut a deal in private to ban abortion nationwide to get elected in 2024?"

(Reporting by Alexandra Ulmer, additional reporting by Stephanie Kelly; Editing by Colleen Jenkins, Jonathan Oatis and Alistair Bell)

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-privately-favors-16-week-175703219.html

 

Well I am in NH abortion has always been here. Also right next-door to Massachusetts / Vermont .
Those so-called red states it’s sad to see.

 

It's also still legal here in NJ, I'll never support a pro life candidate. Its all I can do.

 

"Just like the treasonous conservative/America Hating/Republicans here that used to say they supported a woman's right to have an abortion. But then as soon as the Supreme Court struck down the Constitutional right suddenly agreed with the Court claiming abortion was still legal except in the states it isn't and that its a "state's rights" issue."​

The american hater exposes what we've said about despicables all along.
Fuck the law.
Fuck the constitution.
Whatever it takes, eh?

 

And more trumptard drivel. It's trumptards that don't give a fuck about the law or the constitution. Jan 6th 2020 showed everyone just what trumpards are capable of when defending der fuhrer.

So shooter, what did Trump want Pence to do on Jan 6th?

Put up or shut up, eh

 

When do you think of the baby right to live?

 

Trump campaign scrambles over abortion ban report as Democrats seize the moment
Natasha Korecki and Jonathan Allen and Kristen Welker
Fri, February 16, 2024 at 3:18 PM MST·4 min read
1.9k

• 
  

WASHINGTON — leaving the page." data-wf-tooltip-position="bottom" data-wf-reset-every="90">President Joe Biden’s campaign and abortion rights advocates ripped into former President Donald Trump on abortion Friday following a report that he has given private signals in favor of a national ban on abortions after 16 weeks of pregnancy that would include exceptions in cases of rape, incest and when the woman’s life is in danger.

During his presidential campaign, Trump has steered clear of taking a public position on a prospective national ban — which would require congressional approval — but The New York Times reported Friday that he has indicated behind closed doors that he likes the idea of prohibiting abortion after 16 weeks in most cases.

A source familiar with conversations told NBC News that he has talked to his advisers about supporting abortion rights up to 16 weeks as well, although a separate source cautioned he had not settled on a federal ban. The Trump campaign in a statement blasted reporting suggesting otherwise as "fake news."


“As President Trump has stated, he would sit down with both sides and negotiate a deal that everyone will be happy with,” Trump campaign national press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement. “Joe Biden and virtually every Democrat in Congress is on the record supporting radical on-demand abortion.”

The Biden campaign and abortion rights advocates seized on the potential political fallout, quickly hosting a press call to frame the former president as a dangerous and extreme possibility should he be elected in November.

Biden himself released a lengthy statement laying out the impact of Roe v. Wade's reversal, including the passage of stringent anti-abortion laws in conservative states.

"Now, after being the one responsible for taking away women’s freedom, after being the one to put women’s lives in danger, after being the one who has unleashed all this cruelty and chaos all across America, Trump is running scared. He’s afraid the women of America are going to hold him responsible for taking away their rights and endangering their rights at the ballot box in November," Biden said in the statement. "The choice is very simple. Kamala and I will restore Roe v. Wade and make it once again the law of the land. Donald Trump will ban abortion nationwide."

In a January NBC News poll of registered voters, 44% said they thought Biden would handle abortion better than Trump, with 32% saying the reverse. Trump, who appointed three of the Supreme Court justices who voted to overturn Roe v. Wade abortion protections in 2022, has blamed Republican electoral losses on GOP candidates pushing stricter abortion bans at the state and national levels.

“I just want folks to understand that all abortion bans are radical and voters dislike them deeply,” Reproductive Freedom for All President Mini Timmaraju said on a call hosted by the Biden campaign on Friday. “Exceptions are designed not to work, and they’re impossible to enforce in these incredibly draconian states with these extreme bans. So it’s gonna be our job as advocates to make that clear to the American people, this is not a moderate position, and we have to debunk that aggressively and often.”

Marjorie Dannenfelser, a key Trump ally on the issue and president of the anti-abortion SBA List, lauded the idea of a 16-week ban Friday.

"We strongly agree with President Trump on protecting babies from abortion violence at least by a point when they feel pain," Dannenfelser said in a statement to NBC News. "President Trump wants to lead in finding consensus, and this is around where the nation is."

Trump once took credit for his role in limiting access to abortion, having boasted in May: “I was able to kill Roe v. Wade.” In a September interview with NBC’s “Meet the Press,” he toned down his talk but mentioned 15 weeks as a possible number.

Trump said then that “people are starting to think of 15 weeks” as “a number that people are talking about right now” in terms of a federal abortion ban, but quickly added, “No, no,” when asked if he would sign such legislation as president.

“We’re going to agree to a number of weeks or months or however you want to define it,” he said. “And both sides are going to come together, and both sides — both sides, and this is a big statement — both sides will come together. And for the first time in 52 years, you’ll have an issue that we can put behind us.”



https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-campaign-scrambles-over-abortion-221825027.html

 

Ah here we go. They use the work baby to conjure up thoughts of infanticide. Which of course has nothing to do with a woman's right to choose.

 

It has everything to do with it.

 

I lean to the right, but think this abortion ban is BS

 

‘Fleeing under the cover of darkness’: How Idaho’s abortion ban is changing pregnancy in the state
https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/10/health/idaho-abortion-laws/index.html

 

Trump’s Abortion Plan Leak Inflamed His Campaign and Energized Democrats
Asawin Suebsaeng and Tessa Stuart
Wed, February 21, 2024 at 3:34 PM MST·7 min read
516

• 
  

Late last week, the New York Times reported that leaving the page." data-wf-tooltip-position="bottom" data-wf-reset-every="90">Donald Trump privately told his allies he backs a 16-week national abortion ban with some exceptions. Inside the Trump campaign, the news was immediately met with deep annoyance, anger, and a scramble for damage control, two people familiar with the matter tell Rolling Stone.

Prior to the report, the former president and 2024 GOP frontrunner had repeatedly stressed to advisers that he wants to avoid announcing specific abortion policy positions, at least during this stage of the election cycle, sources close to him say. This is, of course, largely because he understands the dismantling of Roe v. Wade — which he engineered — has become a grave political liability for Republicans.

Members of Trump’s senior staff were maddened by the leak to the Times, venting to one another that whoever blabbed to the media about this wasn’t being helpful, the two sources recount. They weren’t the only ones upset by it: The report also served to inflame some of the anti-abortion movement’s most uncompromising figures, who lashed out at Trump for being insufficiently “pro-life.” Some Republican lawmakers on Capitol Hill winced at the news too; they, like Trump, hoped to spend the first half of 2024 talking about abortion as little as possible, according to one GOP lawmaker who bemoaned the recent string of conservatives’ election losses that have largely been attributed to “the Dobbs effect.” Democrats, on the other hand, were thrilled.


To Democrats and their allies in the movement for reproductive rights, Trump’s decision to back a national abortion ban is viewed as both an electoral gift and a major political blunder on his part. In recent months, President Joe Biden’s team has determined that campaigning on abortion rights, including by elevating highly personal experiences of specific women willing to tell their stories, has been particularly powerful and effective. According to one Biden campaign official, his team is preparing to prominently wield these attacks against Trump between now and Election Day. Hours after the Times report was published, the Biden campaign called a press conference to highlight the contrast between the candidates.

The Times reported that Trump favors a national ban at 16 weeks in part because it is “a round number.” His campaign counters that Trump hasn’t settled on a specific gestational limit he would support yet. Over the course of the campaign, some of Trump’s most senior aides, including GOP operative Susie Wiles, have strategized that his road to victory includes Trump running as a “moderate” on abortion — despite his comments and record as president, including the appointment of three of the Supreme Court justices responsible for obliterating Roe.

Since the Times piece was published, several Trump advisers and allies speculated to each other, with some talking about it with the ex-president directly, where the leak may have originated — including the prospect that anti-abortion conservatives, frustrated with Trump’s lack of public commitment to a federal ban, might have shared information about internal discussions in the hope of locking Trump into a position they favor before the general election race against Biden begins in earnest.

According to the Times, Trump was persuaded to support a 16-week ban by polling that showed majorities of voters were amenable to that limit. But advocates for reproductive rights say that data is misleading. “When you stop asking voters, ‘At what point are you okay with us taking away your rights?’ And start asking them: ‘Are you ever okay with us taking away your rights? You get two different answers, and only one of those answers is an accurate measure of how people will behave when they go to vote,” says Angela Vasquez-Giroux, vice president of communications and research at Reproductive Freedom for All.

Vasquez-Giroux points to polling data that shows that voters, by a two-to-one margin, would rather leave abortion care up to patients and their doctors than enact a 15-week ban. Even among Republicans alone, only a very narrow majority support such a ban — 54 percent, according to the survey. The same pollster found that a majority of voters who cast ballots for Trump in 2020 believe that abortion restrictions enacted since the end of Roe have gone too far.

Deirdre Schifeling, a former Biden administration official who is now the chief political and advocacy officer at the American Civil Liberties Union, points to Virginia, where last November, Gov. Glenn Youngkin (R) attempted to rally voters behind a 15-week ban.

“There, you had the governor actively running on passing a 15-week ban, and saying: ‘Give me the majorities in the House of Delegates and in the Senate to pass this 15-week ban,’” Schifeling says. “And what happened is voters did quite the opposite: they flipped control to Democrats in both houses.”

She adds, “From our polling and our research, voters think [abortion] is a choice that should be up to the pregnant person and their doctor, not something that politicians should be involved in. I think voters, especially in the wake of Dobbs, are very suspicious of and against abortion bans, period.”

While Democrats and their allies were hastily working to draw attention to the Times report, operatives at the hardline anti-abortion political action group Students for Life — who supported Trump in 2016 — were fuming.

“We absolutely reject the idea that our federal government would give its legal blessing to more than nine in 10 abortions,” Kristi Hamrick, vice president of media and policy at Students for Life Action, tells Rolling Stone of the proposed 16-week ban, pointing to data that shows 95 percent of abortions take place before 16 weeks gestation.

From the group’s perspective, a story like the one that ran in The New York Times on Friday could only depress the anti-abortion vote. “Who would want this story? People who want to tell pro-life voters, you probably can’t vote in this election. Nothing to see here, walk away. That is one reason for such a story: to depress voter turnout,” she says. “If the Trump administration really was going to give its support to more than nine in 10 abortions, that is a problem for most pro-life voters.”

Originally, the Trump campaign called the Times “fake news” but did not deny or dispute its reporting. On Wednesday, however, Trump’s chief spokesman Steven Cheung was more emphatic with his denial: “The New York Times story is fake and untrue,” he said.

Though it is common for the notoriously mercurial Trump to endorse policies then later adjust or reverse himself, a source with direct knowledge of the situation confirms to Rolling Stone that this month, the ex-president privately expressed enthusiasm for a 16-week federal prohibition, claiming this is a position that most Americans share.

“He said it,” this source bluntly adds. “Sixteen with exceptions.”

In recent weeks, the former president has endorsed a 16-week ban in conversations with a large enough number of allies and confidants that it was inevitable it would leak, this source and another two people briefed on the matter say.

Trump and his team’s irritation at the leak isn’t that surprising, given how much he and his lieutenants have been working to thread a needle that at first glance seems nearly impossible for him — as the self-described “most pro-life president ever” and the man most responsible for destroying the federal right to an abortion.

On one hand, sources close to him say, Trump is petrified at the thought of alienating independents and suburban female voters in the general election. At the same time, his quiet support for some form of national ban has been driven by his desire to keep influential pro-life figures firmly in his corner during a general election, even though they were largely powerless to pressure him to publicly commit to their wish lists in the GOP primary.

“He is a negotiator by trade, and I think he will negotiate a good deal on this issue, and on a whole host of other issues,” says Robert Jeffress, a megachurch pastor who has advised Trump for years. “Just about three weeks ago, I was talking to President Trump about this issue, and he and I agreed that a 6-week ban with no exceptions policy is not going to fly in America today, because the overwhelming majority of Americans are against something that is that ‘extreme.’ But he also said they are against the ‘extreme’ abortion-on-demand. So he’s clearly trying to get to a position that is staunchly pro-life, but also realistic, given where most Americans are.”


https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-abortion-plan-leak-inflamed-223418208.html

 

Days after Alabama’s Supreme Court ruling that frozen embryos are children, a third clinic pauses IVF treatment
Isabel Rosales, Christina Maxouris, Meg Tirrell, Chris Youd and Maxime Tamsett, CNN
Thu, February 22, 2024 at 4:23 PM MST·10 min read
2.8k





A third fertility clinic in Alabama has halted part of its IVF treatment programs following the state Supreme Court ruling that frozen embryos are children.

The Center for Reproductive Medicine at Mobile Infirmary said it will stop treatments on Saturday “to prepare embryos for transfer,” according to a statement from the clinic.

Mark Nix, the CEO of Infirmary Health, said in the statement that the Alabama Supreme Court decision “has sadly left us with no choice but to pause IVF treatments for patients. We understand the burden this places on deserving families who want to bring babies into this world and who have no alternative options for conceiving.”

Earlier Thursday, Alabama Fertility’s clinic in Birmingham “paused transfers of embryos for at least a day or two,” according to Penny Monella, the chief operating officer at Alabama Fertility Specialists.

The University of Alabama at Birmingham health system on Wednesday became the first organization in the state to confirm that it is pausing IVF treatment out of legal concerns in the wake of the court’s ruling.

Its announcement could be the start of what reproductive rights advocates and medical experts have been warning about for days: The high court’s decision could have devastating consequences for Alabamians seeking infertility treatments each year to build their families – and it could soon have profound impacts far beyond the state’s borders.

Dr. Andrew Harper, an Alabama fertility doctor, said the ruling disrespected “women’s reproductive autonomy, their reproductive rights,” and will cause him to change how he does business.

Harper, who has been operating his Huntsville clinic for some 20 years, said the ruling provided “motivation to move embryos from in-house to outside, off-site storage facility.” He said he would move more embryos to a facility in Minnesota.

If the embryos are out of state, Harper said, it’s up to the patient to decide what happens to them. “The embryos are ultimately the patient’s … Ultimately, it should be her right to make the disposition, however she chooses,” he said.

His primary concern is advocating for his patients, he said, adding: “If some DA or Attorney General wants to come after me, bring it on.”

State legislators, meanwhile, worked to find a solution.

Democrats in the State House introduced a bill on Thursday that would declare “any fertilized human egg or human embryo that exists outside of a human uterus is not considered an unborn child or human being for any purposes under state law.”

House Bill 225, filed by House Minority Leader Anthony Daniels, would become effective if approved by both chambers and signed into law.

State legislative sources told CNN that Republicans and Democrats in both chambers are working to come up with “clarifying” legislation to “protect” IVF and allow treatments to resume at clinics that have paused the procedure.

One source said Republicans in the state Senate are soon expected to file legislation with language “similar” to what has already been filed in the House, but they were unsure of the timing.

Alabama AG has issued no guidance
In its unprecedented ruling, the state’s Supreme Court said embryos are children – no matter if they’re within or out of a uterus – and those who destroy them can be held liable for wrongful death. That decision will likely not only make the already high costs of infertility treatments substantially higher, but will likely also discourage many providers from offering them at all in the state in fear of being held liable for wrongful death, reproductive rights advocates warned.

The Alabama Attorney General’s Office, meanwhile, said it hasn’t issued any guidance on the matter.

“It’s not our case,” Amanda Priest, spokesperson for Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall, told CNN Thursday. “We have not been involved at all.”

Priest said she couldn’t share whether the office had received inquiries from clinics seeking legal guidance. She didn’t immediately respond to specific questions about whether the state would charge people who destroy embryos with a crime.

Alabama Fertility has two satellite offices in Huntsville and Montgomery that do not perform embryo transfers and are unaffected, according to Monella.

Alabama Fertility said it made the “impossibly difficult decision to hold new IVF treatments due to the legal risk to our clinic and our embryologists.”

In a post on its Facebook page Thursday, the clinic said it’s contacting patients who will be affected “to find solutions for them.” It also said it’s “working as hard as we can to alert our legislators as to the far reaching negative impact of this ruling on the women of Alabama.”

“At a time when we feel so powerless, advocacy and awareness is [sic] our strongest tools. Check back in later today for links to advocacy opportunities,” the clinic wrote.

“AFS will not close,” the statement concluded. “We will continue to fight for our patients and the families of Alabama.”

The Medical Association of the State of Alabama has said that other providers in the state are also likely to stop providing IVF treatments.

CNN has contacted other fertility clinics in the state to inquire about disruptions to their IVF services.

UAB said it was pausing IVF treatments while it evaluates the court’s decision.

“We are saddened that this will impact our patients’ attempt to have a baby through IVF, but we must evaluate the potential that our patients and our physicians could be prosecuted criminally or face punitive damages for following the standard of care for IVF treatments,” its statement said.

“We want to reiterate that it is IVF treatment that is paused. Everything through egg retrieval remains in place. Egg fertilization and embryo development is paused.”

Medical Association of the State of Alabama said, “The significance of (the court’s ruling) impacts all Alabamians and will likely lead to fewer babies—children, grandchildren, nieces, nephews, and cousins—as fertility options become limited for those who want to have a family,” the association said in its statement.

“IVF is oftentimes the only option for couples wanting to conceive,” it added.

What the court ruling means
Though the state Supreme Court’s decision – which was released Friday – does not prohibit IVF, it’s the first known case in which a US court says frozen embryos are human beings, and that could have profound impacts on how the fertility industry in Alabama operates, critics warned.

They say it could send liability costs skyrocketing, making fertility treatment prices prohibitive for many families; it could discourage medical providers from performing infertility treatments in fear of being held liable each time an embryo does not turn into a successful pregnancy; and it could mean parents will now be forced to pay for lifelong storage fees of embryos they will never be allowed to discard, even if they don’t want any more children.

In the sole full dissenting opinion to the decision, Alabama Supreme Court Justice Greg Cook warned of the potential consequences.

“No rational medical provider would continue to provide services for creating and maintaining frozen embryos knowing that they must continue to maintain such frozen embryos forever or risk the penalty of a Wrongful Death Act claim,” Cook wrote.

The decision will also mean higher costs for people seeking fertility treatments, according to Progyny, a large fertility benefits management company.

“If doctors are now fearful about the penalties associated with offering IVF to their patients, they will instead recommend intrauterine insemination (IUI) treatments, which is a higher risk option that is less likely to result in a pregnancy – so that’s an added cost on the front end for patients,” Progyny Chief Medical Officer Dr. Janet Choi told CNN.

The company also said patients may now have to travel out-of-state to get the care they need as some providers may choose to leave the state – adding a new cost for those seeking fertility treatments.

‘Horrifying signals of what’s to come’
Reproductive rights advocates said they were “heartbroken” by the UAB announcement.

“The University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAB) health system – the largest healthcare system in the state – has been forced to make an impossible decision: pause IVF procedures for those hoping to build their families, or put their patients and doctors at risk of prosecution,” said Barbara Collura, president and CEO of the patient advocacy organization RESOLVE: The National Infertility Association.

And patients who were already amid a physically and emotionally difficult medical process have had “their lives, their hopes and dreams crushed,” Collura said in a statement Wednesday.

Sean Tipton, chief advocacy and policy director for the American Society for Reproductive Medicine, told CNN’s “The Lead with Jake Tapper” patients in the state might get substandard care.

“There is a lot we don’t know about the impact of this (state Supreme Court) decision. What we do know is that it is already leading to fewer babies and fewer grandbabies that are desperately wanted for their parents and grandparents in Alabama. UAB is the first system to stop. I don’t think it’s going to be the last,” Tipton said.

A fertilized egg in a freezer at a fertility facility is not the same as a born child, he said.

“And I think that legal reality needs to adjust to empirical natural scientific reality,” he said. “If you seek to say that a fertilized egg in a freezer is the same as a born child, you can sign patients to getting suboptimal care,” he added.

Critics have also expressed concerns the ruling creates a road map that groups and legislators across the country who have previously targeted fertility treatments can now follow.

Liberty Counsel –- a nonprofit that says it works to advance “religious freedom, the sanctity of human life and the family” -– said it is using the Alabama ruling as a precedent to argue a proposed amendment in Florida aiming to protect abortion rights will take away “a protected right to life for the unborn.”

Collura told CNN she worries about how other groups and legislators who have previously targeted fertility treatments could use the recent ruling as a precedent.

“This cruel ruling, and the subsequent decision by UAB’s health system, are horrifying signals of what’s to come across the country,” she said in her Wednesday statement.

Could this go to the Supreme Court?
While the US Supreme Court does have the power to review state top court rulings, the justices in Washington, DC, do not typically take up appeals of state court rulings that don’t include an interpretation of the US Constitution or federal law.

The majority ruling in this case rested solely on the justices’ interpretation of state law and an amendment to Alabama’s constitution.

Most likely, there’s no route to the US Supreme Court for this case, said Steve Vladeck, CNN Supreme Court analyst and professor at the University of Texas School of Law.

“The US Supreme Court’s ability to review state supreme court decisions is limited to decisions that turn on a question of federal law,” Vladeck said. “Here, the issue is how Alabama is interpreting its own state constitution.”

“There could be a case claiming that Alabama’s constitution as so interpreted violates the federal Constitution, but unless I’m missing something, that’s not this case,” Vladeck added.



https://www.yahoo.com/news/days-alabama-supreme-court-ruling-205606844.html

 

HEY WAIT A MINUTE!! WHAT EVER HAPPENED TO STATE'S RIGHTS STATE'S RIGHTS STATE'S RIGHTS??


What happened is what the fuck did you think would happen once you took away the Constitutional right to abortion? Of course a bunch of old impotent White men would go too far. So now its fuck you and your state's rights you have gone too far.







Trump calls on Alabama to protect IVF treatment after bombshell ruling

by Brett Samuels - 02/23/24 2:39 PM ET

Share
Tweet





Current Time 1:34
/
Duration 2:02







Former President Trump voiced support Friday for preserving access to in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatments in the wake of a controversial Alabama court ruling that frozen embryos are people.

“Under my leadership, the Republican Party will always support the creation of strong, thriving, healthy American families. We want to make it easier for mothers and fathers to have babies, not harder! That includes supporting the availability of fertility treatments like IVF in every State in America,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.


“Like the OVERWHELMING MAJORITY of Americans, including the VAST MAJORITY of Republicans, Conservatives, Christians, and Pro-Life Americans, I strongly support the availability of IVF for couples who are trying to have a precious baby,” Trump wrote.

The former president called on the Alabama Legislature to “act quickly to find an immediate solution to preserve the availability of IVF” in the state after multiple IVF providers there paused treatments in the wake of the court ruling.

Hours later, Trump repeated the same message during a rally in South Carolina on the eve of the state’s GOP primary.

Trump’s message marked a rare instance of the former president weighing in on an issue related to reproductive health care. He has steadfastly avoided taking a specific stance on abortion restrictions, other than to say he supports exceptions for rape, incest and cases where the life of the mother is threatened.

It comes as the Senate GOP campaign arm has urged candidates to voice support for IVF in the wake of the court ruling, and as Democrats have directly connected the Alabama decision to the Supreme Court’s ruling to overturn Roe v. Wade.

“American women couldn’t care less what Donald Trump posts on Truth Social, they care that they can’t access fertility treatment because of him,” Biden campaign manager Julie Chavez Rodriguez said in a statement. “Let’s be clear: Alabama families losing access to IVF is a direct result of Donald Trump’s Supreme Court justices overturning Roe v. Wade.”


“Trump cannot run from his record and neither can the millions of women who his actions have hurt,” she added. “Trump and his extreme MAGA allies are planning to ban abortion nationally, limit contraception, and destroy women’s health care coast to coast.”

Trump has frequently bragged that he ended Roe v. Wade through the appointment of three conservative Supreme Court justices, and Democrats have won a series of legislative victories thanks in large part to their messaging on protecting abortion access.

The Alabama Supreme Court ruling marked the first time a court has ever given rights and protections so early after conception. The ruling did not ban IVF and is limited to Alabama, but it has far-reaching potential and seems poised to open a new front in the fight over reproductive rights in the country, as millions of Americans have relied on IVF to have children.


While many Republicans have come out in support of IVF treatment, they have had a harder time finding a position on the court ruling, which found that frozen embryos are children and subject to legislation dealing with the wrongful death of a minor.

“That’s a hard one. It really is,” Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.) told reporters at the Conservative Political Action Conference on Thursday, when asked what he would say to women in Alabama who will not have access to in vitro fertilization as a result of the ruling.

Nikki Haley, Trump’s last remaining rival in the 2024 GOP primary, said she agreed that an embryo is a baby, but didn’t necessarily agree with the court’s decision.


“The difference is — and this is what I say about abortion as well — we need to treat these issues with the utmost respect,” she added in an interview Wednesday.

https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/4485465-trump-alabama-ivf-treatment-frozen-embryo-ruling/