As Red-State Neighbors Restrict Abortion, Dem Governors Push For Protections
Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker and North Carolina Gov. Roy Cooper voice their strong defense of abortion rights during an interview with Politico. In Maryland, The Washington Post reports, top Democrats also seek more abortion protections.
Politico:
Dem Governors Pledge To Protect Abortion As Neighbors Add Restrictions
Democratic governors in two states that are regional centers for abortion access pledged on Thursday to defend access to the procedure, pushing the federal government to do more and warning against further restrictions. “We’re not an island, we’re an oasis,” Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker said in an interview with POLITICO on Thursday. “People come to Illinois to exercise what are their fundamental rights, and they’re being denied in other states, every state around us, and then another ring of states around them. So think about how if you want to exercise your rights, how far you have to travel if you don’t live in Illinois in order to exercise those rights.” (Hooper and McCarthy, 2/9)
The Washington Post:
Maryland Democrats Seek More Abortion Protections
Maryland’s top Democrats said Thursday they want to make “a safe haven for abortion,” joining a wave of blue states escalating efforts to protect patients, providers and access to the procedure. “We are going to make sure that Maryland is a safe haven for abortion rights long after I am governor of this state,” Gov. Wes Moore (D) said at a joint news conference. He joined the years-long quest of House Speaker Adrienne A. Jones (D-Baltimore County) to have voters enshrine abortion rights in the state constitution, fortifying protections in state law as federal ones erode. (Cox, 2/9)
More abortion news from South Carolina, Wyoming, West Virginia, and Florida —
AP:
South Carolina Senate Passes New Abortion Ban After Ruling
The South Carolina Senate passed an abortion ban on Thursday in the Republican-led chamber’s latest quest to craft a law that passes constitutional muster, but differences with a stricter proposal from the House could derail the effort once again. Republicans have faced several setbacks in their efforts to further restrict abortion since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned federal protections this summer, allowing the conservative state’s previous ban to take effect. (Pollard, 2/9)
Wyoming Public Radio:
Stricter Abortion Bill Passes House And Now Goes To Senate
After much debate in the Wyoming House of Representatives, a bill that would enact even stricter abortion laws than another bill currently tied up in court passed on its third reading. An adopted amendment addressed some of the lawmakers' questions about the need for it. (Kudelska, 2/9)
AP:
West Virginia House OKs Bill To Fund Anti-Abortion Centers
The GOP-dominated West Virginia House overwhelmingly passed a bill Thursday that would allow for taxpayer money to be funneled into anti-abortion crisis pregnancy centers, months after lawmakers passed a near-total ban on the procedure in one of the nation’s poorest states. West Virginia’s is just the latest of a growing number of proposals from states across the U.S. to provide taxpayer support for the centers, which are typically religiously affiliated, free and counsel clients against having an abortion. They are generally are not licensed as medical facilities. (Willingham, 2/9)
The 19th:
How Florida Judges Have Ruled On Minors’ Ability To Get An Abortion
The new report, an analysis of state court records by the advocacy group Human Rights Watch (HRW), finds that close to 1 in 10 Floridians who seek a judicial bypass each year are denied. The data suggests that approval depends on where one lives. In Hillsborough County, home to Tampa, close to half of all bypass petitions were denied in 2021. In Miami-Dade and Orange Counties — home to Miami and Orlando, respectively — none were. (Luthra, 2/9)
In related news about the Supreme Court —
The Washington Post:
Supreme Court Justices Discussed, But Did Not Agree On Ethics Code
The Supreme Court has failed to reach consensus on an ethics code of conduct specific to the nine justices despite internal discussion dating back at least four years, according to people familiar with the matter. (Barnes and Marimow, 2/9)