Special Session To Overturn Old Abortion Law Ended By Wisconsin GOP

Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: Wisconsin Republicans Gavel Out Of Special Session On Abortion Laws
The Senate and Assembly meetings lasted approximately 15 and 25 seconds,  respectively, and Republican-led closures of each session were met with shouts of disapproval from attending Democrats. Evers rebuked GOP legislators' decision to gavel out, and issued a statement citing a Marquette University poll that found 70% of Wisconsinites believe abortion should be legal in all or most instances to defend his stance. "Time and time again, the people of Wisconsin have asked Republicans legislators to do what they are elected to do — to take action on pressing our state, to do the right thing, and to help the people we are elected to serve," Evers said. "Today, they once again failed to muster the courage  to perform that simple duty." (Baker, 6/22)

In abortion updates from Iowa, Illinois, and Missouri —

AP: Planned Parenthood Won't Change Waiting Period Requirement 
The Iowa attorney general’s office said Wednesday that a state Supreme Court decision that requires a 24-hour waiting period before an abortion won’t take effect until next month, but the organization that provides most abortion in the state says it will immediately implement the waiting period. A spokesman for the Iowa attorney general’s office said last week’s ruling would not take effect until the case has been returned to the lower court judge for further action, likely around July 8. Typically, Supreme Court opinions go into effect 21 days after they are released. (6/22)

St. Louis Post-Dispatch: Illinois Abortion Providers Launch Effort To Pressure Pritzker To Direct More Funds To Clinics
Illinois abortion providers on Wednesday asked supporters to urge Gov. J.B. Pritzker and his administration to immediately direct more funding toward efforts to improve abortion access, as well as allow providers like nurse practitioners to perform abortions. A U.S. Supreme Court ruling is expected by the end of June that could overturn the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision guaranteeing a right to an abortion, sending thousands seeking the procedure to abortion-friendly states like Illinois. “The governor has been a great partner, but as is always true, there is more to be done,” said Dr. Colleen McNicholas, the chief medical officer for reproductive health services at Planned Parenthood of the St. Louis Region and Southwest Missouri, which includes a clinic in Fairview Heights. “We are now just days away from a decision, so time is of the essence. We really need him to step up and lead in this moment.” (Munz, 6/22)

St. Louis Post-Dispatch: New Owners Of Metro East Abortion Clinic Prepare To Expand As Supreme Court Decision Looms
New owners have purchased one of the region’s few abortion clinics and are looking to expand as more patients travel to the Metro East for care. Three longtime pro-choice advocates took over operations this month of the Hope Clinic for Women in Granite City. The new owners include a 40-year veteran of abortion advocacy, an expert in maternal and child health, and an executive who has spent decades trying to make abortions more accessible in the Midwest. (Merrilees, 6/22)

In other news about abortion and reproductive health care —

KHN: Tribes Show Little Interest In Offering Abortions On Reservations Despite Speculation They Could
Rachael Lorenzo started hearing the questions several weeks ago from strangers on Twitter and reporters seeking interviews: Since Native American tribes are sovereign nations, with their own laws, could they offer abortion services on Native land within states that may soon outlaw abortion? And would they? The speculation began last month, after a leaked draft of a U.S. Supreme Court opinion suggested the court is poised to overturn Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision that guaranteed the right to an abortion nationwide. (Zionts, 6/23)

Stateline: Critics Fear Abortion Bans Could Jeopardize Health Of Pregnant Women
The 17 states that ban abortion after 20 weeks make exceptions to protect the life or health of the woman. But doctors and reproductive health advocates worry such exceptions are so vague or narrow that abortion providers are unlikely to invoke them—especially if they fear they could be charged with a crime. In a country that has long lagged its peers in maternal mortality, many reproductive health providers warn that stricter abortion laws are likely to make the situation worse—especially for Black women, who die of pregnancy-related causes at nearly three times the rate of White women. (Ollove, 6/22)

USA Today: If Roe Is Overturned, States Offer Maze Of Abortion Laws
If a decision is made to eliminate federal abortion rights, within a year as many as 75,000 women won’t make it to a provider, according to one estimate. They would be forced to give birth instead, marking just the start of the fallout from a ruling whose implications would stretch far beyond reproductive health care to encompass suppression of female participation in the workforce and the amplification of racial and economic inequities. States are set in some cases to revert to laws from the 1800s,  allowing abortions only in the direst of conditions, such as when the mother is on the brink of death. Other states have passed more recent laws anticipating the court will overturn Roe v. Wade. In 13, so-called trigger laws would go into effect banning abortion in nearly all instances and only sometimes offering exceptions for rape and incest. (Slack and Lee, 6/22)

Modern Healthcare: Overturned Abortion Law Would Jeopardize Doctors
Physicians and their employers are working to get ahead of the Supreme Court's pending Roe v. Wade decision, worried about their legal exposure to "trigger-happy" prosecutors in 26 states primed to restrict access to abortion services. The high court could strike down the federal law that gives women the constitutional right to end a pregnancy, setting in motion "trigger laws" limiting abortion services or pre-1973 abortion bans in around half the states, according to the Guttmacher Institute, a pro-choice research group. A draft opinion leaked in May, overturning the law, spurred conversations about legal liability among doctors, employers and their legal counsel. (Kacik, 6/22)

AP: Protesters Turn Supreme Court Front Into Forum On Abortion
A steady stream of protesters has turned the street in front of the Supreme Court building into an open-air forum encapsulating the fierce national debate over abortion after the leak of a draft opinion suggesting the justices would overturn Roe v. Wade, the 1973 landmark ruling that legalized abortion nationwide. Both supporters and foes of abortion rights have gathered during large, organized weekend marches and on weekdays when the court is scheduled to release its opinion. They march and chant; sometimes they attempt to shout the other side down. For each, the reasons for protesting are deeply personal. (Martin, 6/22)

In related news about the Supreme Court —

The Wall Street Journal: Man Charged With Attempting To Assassinate Justice Brett Kavanaugh Pleads Not Guilty 
The California man arrested outside Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s home earlier this month has pleaded not guilty to an attempted assassination charge. Nicholas Roske, of Simi Valley, formally entered the plea during a hearing on Wednesday afternoon in federal court in Greenbelt, Md. U.S. Magistrate Judge Ajmel A. Quereshi scheduled jury selection for Aug. 17 and set a trial start date of Aug. 23. (Wolfe, 6/22)

The Hill: Trump Says ‘Go To The Reporter’ To Find Source Of SCOTUS Leak
Former President Trump suggested the Supreme Court look to the journalists at Politico who broke the bombshell story last month that a draft opinion penned by Justice Samuel Alito would overturn Roe v. Wade, to find who leaked the document. The story, written by reporters Josh Gerstein and Alexander Ward, hinged on a leaked draft ruling from the court that sent shockwaves across the political and media landscape. The draft outlined the conservative majority’s decision to overturn Roe, a landmark case that ruled abortion was constitutional. (Mastrangelo, 6/22)