Alabama can't prosecute groups helping patients get abortions elsewhere, judge rules
National Alabama can't prosecute groups helping patients get abortions elsewhere, judge rules
People hold signs during a protest against recently passed abortion ban bills at the Georgia State Capitol building, on May 21, 2019, in Atlanta. (/TNS)
TNS
Reproductive rights groups in Alabama wasted no time resuming their work after a federal judge ruled in early April that the state's attorney general can't prosecute - or threaten to prosecute - people or organizations who help Alabama residents seek an abortion by traveling to another state.
One of the plaintiffs, the reproductive justice nonprofit Yellowhammer Fund, wasted no time in returning to one of its core missions: to provide financial support to traveling patients.
"The decision came at about 5:30. I think we funded an abortion at 5:45 - because that's how severe the need is, that's how urgent it is that we get back to the work that we're doing," said Jenice Fountain, executive director of Yellowhammer Fund, which advocates for abortion access.
On April 2, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments on whether South Carolina can remove Planned Parenthood clinics from the state's Medicaid program. This came just days after Planned Parenthood received notice that the Trump administration wouldwithhold funding from the Title X Family Planning Program for nine of the group's affiliates.
"We're just seeing kind of a multiplying of conflicts where we have unanswered questions about the meaning of the First Amendment in this context, about the right to travel in this context, about due process in this context - about these sort of clashing state laws and choosing which one applies," said Mary Ziegler, a law professor at the University of California-Davis who specializes in the politics and history of reproductive rights.
Alabama has one of the strictest bans on abortion in the country - with no exceptions for rape or incest. The law was approved by the state legislature in 2019 and remained at the ready should Roe v. Wade be overturned. It took effect immediately when the Supreme Court did just that on June 24, 2022, in the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organizationdecision.
At the time, Yellowhammer Fund was getting about 100 calls a week from people seeking financial help with getting an abortion, Fountain said.
For more than two years, the organization has been unable to help such callers.
"The thing with the ban was it was so vague that it was incredibly hard to interpret, especially if you weren't a person that was legally inclined," Fountain said. "So the effect that it had, which was its intention, was a chilling effect."
During that time, Yellowhammer continued to promote reproductive justice and maternal and infant health through community efforts such as distributing diapers, formula, menstrual supplies, and emergency contraception.
Beyond the alarm created by the statutory language in Alabama's abortion ban, fears were stoked by Alabama's attorney general, Steve Marshall, Fountain said.
Almost seven weeks after the 2022 Dobbsdecision, Marshall said in a radio interview that groups that assist people seeking an abortion in another state could face criminal prosecution.
"There's no doubt that this is a criminal law and the general principles that apply to a criminal law would apply to this, with its status of the Class A felony, that's the most significant offense that we have as far as punishment goes under our criminal statue, absent a death penalty case," Marshall said in the interview with Breitbart TV editor Jeff Poor.
"If someone was promoting themselves out as a funder of abortion out of state, then that is potentially criminally actionable for us," Marshall said.
Marshall was explicitly referring to such groups as Yellowhammer Fund, Fountain said.
"He mentioned the group from Tuscaloosa that helps people get to care, which is Yellowhammer Fund," Fountain said. "He all but '@'d us."
Yellowhammer Fund and other abortion rights groups filed the lawsuit against Marshall on July 31, 2023.
In his ruling, U.S. District Judge Myron Thompson of the Middle District of Alabama in Montgomery, agreed with them, saying Marshall would be violating both First Amendment free speech rights and the constitutional right to travel if he tried to bring criminal charges.
Thompson also warned against overlooking the "broader, practical implications of the Attorney General's threats," in the matter of Alabama trying to enforce laws outside the state.
"For example," Thompson wrote in his ruling, "the Alabama Attorney General would have within his reach the authority to prosecute Alabamians planning a Las Vegas bachelor party, complete with casinos and gambling, since casino-style gambling is outlawed in Alabama."
Another group involved in the case, WAWC Healthcare in Tuscaloosa (formerly West Alabama Women's Center), also resumed work that had been paused.
"We have spent the last few years worried that if we had provided any form of information to patients about where they could access a legal abortion, that that is something that the attorney general might try to prosecute us over," said Robin Marty, WAWC's executive director.
Before the Dobbs decision, WAWCprovided abortion as part of its services. It continues to offer free reproductive health care, including prenatal care, contraception, and HIV testing.
Clinical staffers at WAWC weren't allowed even to suggest to someone that they could leave the state to get an abortion, Marty said.
"There is nothing harder than looking into somebody's face when they are in crisis and saying, 'I'm sorry, I just can't help you anymore,'" Marty said. "That was really wearing on my staff because our job was to provide the best information possible. And to know that we could not give them the full care that they required was heartbreaking."
With the ruling, WAWC can now offer "all-options counseling," which includes information on how and where patients can access abortion services in other states, Marty said.
"If they do not feel like they are able to continue the pregnancy, we can tell them, 'OK, you are this far along, so you are able to go this clinic in North Carolina, because you're under their limit" for gestational age, "or you can go to this clinic in Illinois because you're under their limit,'" Marty said. "We'll be able to tell them exactly where they can go and even be able to help them with the referral process along the way."
The attorney general could file an appeal, but now it's unclear whether his office will do so. Marshall's office did not respond to NPR's request for an interview, but in a statement said, "The office is reviewing the decision to determine the state's options."
But legal expert Ziegler said she'd be surprised if Marshall didn't file an appeal, given his office's vigorous defense in the lawsuit.
In addition, the potential political costs of pursuing that kind of prosecution may have eased, because states like Texas and Louisiana have already taken legal action regarding out-of-state abortion providers, said Ziegler.
On the other hand, the attorney general might not appeal because his office was the defendant in the lawsuit, and he may not want to draw attention to the case, Ziegler said.
If Marshall did file an appeal, it would go to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit, which Ziegler called conservative-leaning. The case could ultimately go to the U.S. Supreme Court, Ziegler said, which may have to weigh in more on abortion-related cases, such as when it temporarily allowed emergency abortions in Idaho in June 2024.
"I think the takeaway is that the U.S. Supreme Court is going to be more involved than ever in fights about reproduction and abortion, not less, notwithstanding the fact that Roe is gone," Ziegler said.
____
This article is from a partnership that includes Gulf States Newsroom, NPR and KFF Health News.
Copyright (C) 2025, Tribune Content Agency, LLC. Portions copyrighted by the respective providers.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
33 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump gives Homeland Security access to immigrant Medicaid data in Washington, AP reports
The Trump administration gave federal immigration authorities access to personal data on millions of Medicaid enrollees this week, including information from Washington, according to internal documents obtained by the Associated Press. Washington is one of a handful of states that allow undocumented immigrants to receive health benefits. The data transfer was ordered by two top advisers to U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., despite opposition from Medicaid officials who warned it may violate federal privacy laws. Records show that the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) were given less than an hour on Tuesday to comply with the directive from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Emails and a memo obtained by the AP show that CMS officials tried to block the request, citing concerns under the Social Security Act and the Privacy Act of 1974. However, Trump appointees overruled those objections. The information shared with DHS included names, addresses, Social Security numbers, and Medicaid claims data from enrollees in California, Washington, Illinois, and Washington, D.C. All of these areas offer state-funded Medicaid programs for non-U.S. citizens and have committed not to bill the federal government for those services. The timing of the transfer coincided with a ramp-up of federal immigration enforcement in Southern California, including raids involving National Guard and Marines in Los Angeles. The move is part of a broader effort by the Trump administration to give immigration authorities access to more data on undocumented immigrants. In May, a federal judge declined to stop the IRS from sharing immigrant tax records with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). CMS announced last month it would begin reviewing Medicaid enrollment data from several states to ensure that federal funds were not being used to support coverage for individuals with 'unsatisfactory immigration status.' The review was triggered by Trump's February 19 executive order, 'Ending Taxpayer Subsidization of Open Borders.' In response to the AP's reporting, California Gov. Gavin Newsom's office issued a statement calling the data transfer 'extremely concerning' and potentially unlawful. 'We deeply value the privacy of all Californians,' the statement read. Democratic U.S. Rep. Laura Friedman also voiced alarm, writing on X, 'We should never use a person's need to go to the doctor against them.' ACLU of Washington sent KIRO 7 News the following statement: 'We are still waiting for complete and detailed information, but it's clear that great harm has been done. That this data was shared with the federal government and with ICE is a gross violation of Washington residents' privacy, a violation of the promises HCA made to enrollees, and a flagrant misuse of this data. Washington immigrants enrolled in the Apple Health expansion program with the expectation they would receive critical services that we all need to thrive and that their personal data would be protected – and the state promised as such, publicly and on its website. That promise was not kept. The community and advocates have long demanded a risk analysis and mitigation plan to protect the privacy and well-being of enrollees, and the state has not taken meaningful action responsive to the request. The state must treat this moment with the urgency it deserves and protect communities who put their faith and trust in a system that promised to protect them.' In contrast, a spokesman for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Andrew Nixon, defended the action. 'HHS acted entirely within its legal authority,' he said, describing the data transfer as necessary to ensure only lawful residents receive Medicaid. DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said the department is working with CMS to 'ensure that illegal aliens are not receiving Medicaid benefits that are meant for law-abiding Americans.' Critics say the decision could have far-reaching consequences for both immigrant communities and the states that provide them with health coverage. Sara Vitolo, deputy director of Medicaid, authored a June 6 memo warning that sharing personal data with DHS could deter states from cooperating with future federal requests and expose them to legal risk. Vitolo also wrote that sharing the data would violate long-standing policy and federal law, which restricts CMS from distributing personal health information for non-Medicaid administration purposes. Despite those concerns, HHS leadership directed the data to be transferred by June 10. Former CMS officials described the decision as highly unusual. 'DHS has no role in anything related to Medicaid,' said Jeffrey Grant, a former CMS career employee. California, Illinois, and Washington provided CMS with the requested data. Other states that allow undocumented immigrants to access full Medicaid coverage — New York, Oregon, Minnesota, and Colorado — had not yet submitted information as of this week, according to a public health official familiar with the process. Newsom, whose state plans to freeze new enrollment into its immigrant health care program due to budget constraints, later said the data handover 'will jeopardize the safety, health, and security of those who will undoubtedly be targeted by this abuse.' Illinois is also planning to shut down its program next month for approximately 30,000 undocumented enrollees. Health officials in Illinois, Washington, and D.C. did not respond to AP's request for comment.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
‘No Kings' events to protest Trump, military parade happening Saturday
WASHINGTON () — Nearly 2,000 protests of the Trump Administration are scheduled to coincide with the massive military parade in D.C. on Saturday. National action group, No Kings, which recently protested on President's Day in D.C. to support federal workers amid widespread government cuts, promotes the weekend protests in communities within every state. 'We're coming together to say, 'no kings' in the United States of America today or any day,' said Chris Adair, social media coordinator of We of Action Virginia, an advocacy group promoting election fairness and civil rights. Military displays on the National Mall spark mixed feelings for some 'We said it in 1776. We'll say it again this year,' Adair added. Drivers should expect to see protestors staged along the pedestrian bridge overpasses, local town squares and highly trafficked corridors before and during the military parade, which is slated for just after 6 p.m. near the White House, according to Adair. President Donald Trump was asked about the No Kings protests by a reporter this week at the White House. 'No kings? I don't feel like a king. I have to go through hell to get stuff approved,' Trump said. Army 250: Could weather impact the military parade in DC? The president also told reporters in the Oval Office this week that anyone protesting the parade in D.C. 'will be met with very heavy force.' 'We are exercising a First Amendment privilege, that is the right to protest, that is the right to free speech. We can organize peacefully, and we will, peacefully,' Adair said of Trump's comments on protests. No King's website says that weapons are not brought to any protests. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Why People Are Having Fewer Kids, Even If They Want Them
The global fertility rate has, on average, dropped to less than half what it was in the 1960s, according to the United Nations. Credit - Getty Images People across the world have been having fewer and fewer children, and it's not always because they don't want them. The global fertility rate has, on average, dropped to less than half what it was in the 1960s, the United Nations has found, falling below the 'replacement level' required to maintain the current population in the majority of countries. Amid that historic decline, nearly 20% of adults of reproductive age from 14 countries around the globe believe they won't be able to have the number of children they want to, the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), the UN's sexual and reproductive health and rights agency, said in a report released this week. For most of them, the report found it isn't infertility keeping them from doing so. They pointed to factors including financial limitations, barriers to fertility or pregnancy-related medical care, and fears of the state of the world that they say are hindering them from making their own fertility and reproductive choices. 'There are a lot of people out there who are willing to have children—and have more children than they have—if the conditions were right, and the government's obligation is to provide those measures of well-being, of welfare, which enable good work-life balance, secure employment, reduce the legal barriers, provide better health care and services,' says Shalini Randeria, the president of the Central European University in Vienna and the senior external advisor for the UNFPA report. But she says policies that some governments are implementing—such as cutting Medicaid in the U.S. and enforcing restrictions on reproductive health and autonomy—are both a step backward for people's rights and 'counterproductive from a demographic point of view.' Read more: Why So Many Women Are Waiting Longer to Have Kids For the report, UNFPA conducted a survey, in collaboration with YouGov, of people in 14 countries in Asia, Europe, North America, South America, and Africa that, together, represent more than a third of the world's population. 'There is a gap between the number of children people would have liked to have had and the number they had,' Randeria says. 'For us, it was important to then figure out—by asking them—what it is that causes this gap.' The most significant barriers survey respondents identified to having the number of children they desired were economic: 39% cited financial limitations, 19% housing limitations, 12% lack of sufficient or quality childcare options, and 21% unemployment or job insecurity. The prices for all kinds of goods and services have climbed precipitously in recent years. Global inflation reached the highest level seen since the mid-1990s in July 2022, according to the World Bank Group. While it has declined since then, the current levels are still significantly above those seen before the COVID-19 pandemic. Read more: Why Affordable Childcare Is Out of Reach for So Many People Rising costs have hit both housing and childcare hard. In the U.S., for instance, the Treasury Department has found that housing costs have increased faster than incomes for the past two decades, surging about 65% since 2000 when adjusted for inflation. And research has found that the cost of child care in the U.S. has shot up in recent years, surpassing what many Americans pay for housing or college. The current housing crisis is impacting 'every region and country,' the United Nations Human Settlements Programme said in a report last year, estimating that between 1.6 billion and 3 billion people around the world do not have adequate housing. People cited other factors getting in the way of them having as many children as they want as well, including barriers to assisted reproduction and surrogacy. Several countries—including France, Spain, Germany, and Italy—have banned surrogacy. The UNFPA report also points out that many countries restrict or ban access to assisted reproduction and surrogacy for same-sex couples. In Europe, for instance, only 17 out of 49 countries allow medically-assisted insemination for people, no matter their sexual orientation or gender identity, according to the report. The UNFPA notes that, as global fertility rates are declining, some governments are taking 'drastic measures to incentivize young people to make fertility decisions in line with national targets.' But the report argues that the 'real crisis' is 'a crisis in reproductive agency—in the ability of individuals to make their own free, informed and unfettered choices about everything from having sex to using contraception to starting a family.' According to the Center for Reproductive Rights, 40% of women of reproductive age around the world live under restrictive abortion laws. Many countries—including Brazil, the Philippines, and Poland, among others—have severely restricted abortion. In 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the landmark ruling Roe v. Wade, striking down the constitutional right to abortion. Since then, more than a dozen states have enacted near-total bans or restricted abortion. There have been many reports of pregnant people being denied critical care because of state laws restricting abortions, and many women have said they don't feel safe being pregnant in states where abortion is banned. And while a growing share of women around the world are having their family planning needs met, around 164 million still were not as of 2021, the UN found in a report released in 2022. In addition to considering access to family planning a human right, the UN also notes that it is key to reducing poverty. About 14% of respondents in the UNFPA report said concerns about political or social situations, such as wars and pandemics, would lead or have already led to them having fewer children than they had wanted. And about 9% of respondents said concerns about climate change or environmental degradation would lead or had already led to them having fewer children than they had desired. Read more: Terrified of Climate Change? You Might Have Eco-Anxiety Violence and conflict have been on the rise around the globe in recent years. The period between 2021 and 2023 was the most violent since the end of the Cold War, according to the World Bank Group, and the numbers of both battle-deaths and violent conflicts have climbed over the past decade. That violence has contributed to years of rising displacement: More than 122 million people across the world have been forcibly displaced, the UN's refugee agency reported Thursday, nearly double the number recorded a decade ago. The impact of the global pandemic has been even more widely felt, and is unlikely to fade from anyone's memory any time soon as COVID-19 continues to spread, develop new variants, and take a toll on people whose recovery from the virus can take months, or even years. Even beyond COVID, outbreaks of infectious diseases are becoming more commonplace—and experts predict that, in the years ahead, the risk of those outbreaks escalating into epidemics and pandemics will only rise. In a 2024 UN Development Programme survey, which statistically represents about 87% of the global population, about 56% of respondents said they were thinking about climate change on a daily or weekly basis. About 53% of the respondents also said they were more concerned about climate change now than they were a year before. A third of respondents said that climate change is significantly affecting their major life decisions. 'I want children, but it's becoming more difficult as time passes by,' a 29-year-old woman from Mexico is quoted as saying in the report. 'It is impossible to buy or have affordable rent in my city. I also would not like to give birth to a child in war times and worsened planetary conditions if that means the baby would suffer because of it.' Contact us at letters@
