Latest news with #FACE)Act
The Hill
30-04-2025
- Health
- The Hill
4 ways Trump has stunted abortion access
Trump committed to leaving decisions on abortion access up to states during his campaign and has not tried to outlaw the procedure nationally. But his administration has supported anti-abortion activists and tried to cut access to abortion in the U.S. and around the world. Here are four ways the Trump administration has chipped away at abortion access so far: Pardoned anti-abortion activists Trump signed an executive order pardoning 23 anti-abortion activists ahead of a March for Life protest in Washington, D.C. Some of those pardoned included activists convicted of violating the Freedom of Access to Clinics Entrance (FACE) Act. The FACE Act is a federal law meant to protect abortion clinics from obstruction and threats and was passed in the mid-1990s when crimes against abortion providers were rising. Reinstated the Mexico City policy Trump reinstated a controversial policy, called the Mexico City policy, in January that prevents U.S. foreign aid recipients from discussing abortion with their patients or providing referrals for the procedure. The policy has a long history of being rescinded by Democratic presidents and being reinstated by Republican presidents. Supports of the policy claim in prevents U.S. taxpayer dollars from being spent on abortion abroad while opponents argue it reduces access to critical health care and that there is legislation already in place that stops taxpayer money from being used on abortions overseas. Pulled Title X funding The Trump administration froze millions of dollars in federal funds meant to provide affordable birth control and reproductive health services earlier this year. On April 1, more than a dozen reproductive health organizations received notices that their funding under the Title X program was being rescinded. Title X is the country's only federal program aimed at providing affordable contraception and reproductive health care to low-income Americans. The first Trump administration similarly withheld Title X fundings by issuing a rule that barred reproductive health care clinics from entering the program if they spoke about abortion or referred patients out for the procedure. Dropped high-profile Idaho abortion case Last month, the Trump administration dropped a lawsuit filed by the Biden-era Justice Department seeking to protect access to an emergency abortion in Idaho, where abortion is severely restricted. A 'trigger ban' went into effect in Idaho after the 2022 overturning of Roe v. Wade that made performing or assisting in an abortion a crime punishable by five years in prison. The Biden-era lawsuit argued the state ban made it impossible for doctors in the state to provide abortions when needed to save the life of the mother violating a federal law called the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act.
Yahoo
30-04-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
What Trump Has Done on Reproductive Health Care In 100 Days
President Donald Trump speaks during a rally at Macomb Community College on April 29, 2025 at Warren, Michigan. Trump held the rally to mark his first 100 days in office. Credit - Scott Olson—Getty Images This week marks 100 days since President Donald Trump took office for a second term. In that time, Trump has made several moves that affect abortion and reproductive health care access across the country. Within his first month in office, Trump acted quickly on a number of issues related to reproductive health. He pardoned several anti-abortion protesters convicted of violating the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act, a law intended to protect abortion clinics and patients by barring people from physically blocking or threatening patients. The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) said it would be curtailing prosecutions against people accused of violating the FACE Act. The Department of Defense rescinded a Biden-era policy that helped facilitate travel for active service members and their families to obtain certain reproductive health care services, including abortion. Internationally, the Trump Administration's freeze on foreign aid halted reproductive health care services for millions of people. Trump also reinstated what's known as the Mexico City Policy or the Global Gag Rule, a policy often implemented by Republican presidents that prohibits foreign organizations receiving U.S. aid from providing or discussing abortion care. Since February, the Trump Administration has taken additional actions that have limited or threatened access to reproductive health care. Here's what else Trump has done on reproductive health care in his first 100 days—and what reproductive rights advocates fear could happen next. In March, the DOJ filed a motion to dismiss a lawsuit it had inherited from the Biden Administration. The original lawsuit was about a federal law known as the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA), which requires emergency rooms that receive Medicare dollars to stabilize patients experiencing medical emergencies before discharging or transferring them, whether or not the patient is able to pay. The Biden Administration had argued that emergency abortion care is required because of EMTALA, and that Idaho's near-total abortion ban conflicted with the federal law. The state of Idaho has rejected that claim. The Trump Administration dropping the lawsuit would have allowed Idaho to fully enforce its near-total abortion ban, even in medical emergencies. But the state's largest health care provider, St. Luke's Health System, had filed its own lawsuit a few months earlier in anticipation of the Trump Administration dropping the case, and a judge temporarily blocked Idaho from fully carrying out its ban. Abortion rights advocates condemned the Trump Administration's decision to drop the lawsuit. Amy Friedrich-Karnik—director of federal policy at the Guttmacher Institute, which researches and supports sexual and reproductive health—says the case was, at its core, about protecting people's access to 'life-saving care' in the most urgent situations. On April 1, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) began withholding Title X funding from 16 organizations. Enacted in 1970, Title X is the country's sole federally funded family planning program. The program, which does not fund abortion services, allocates more than $200 million a year for clinics that provide birth control, cancer screenings, STI testing, and other health care services for people from low-income households. HHS said it was withholding funds from the organizations in the Title X program 'pending an evaluation of possible violations' of federal civil rights laws, and the President's Executive Order that said undocumented immigrants are prohibited 'from obtaining most taxpayer-funded benefits.' The National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association (NFPRHA), a membership organization for family planning providers, and the American Civil Liberties Union have sued the Trump Administration over the freeze. According to NFPRHA, the freeze is threatening about $65.8 million in Title X funds, potentially affecting more than 840,000 patients. Reproductive rights advocates have said the freeze would prevent some of the most vulnerable community members from accessing a range of health care services. 'When you go after Title X for contraceptive access, there's a ripple effect across all types of reproductive health care,' Friedrich-Karnik says. On March 27, HHS announced that it would reduce its staff from 82,000 to 62,000 full-time employees—about 10,000 from layoffs and an additional 10,000 from staffers who retired or resigned. Included in those cuts was eliminating 'the majority of employees' in the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) reproductive health division, according to the legal advocacy group Center for Reproductive Rights. A team at the CDC focused on compiling data on abortion access—including the number of people getting abortions and what methods they choose—has been eliminated, according to Shannon Russell, federal policy counsel at the Center for Reproductive Rights. 'It really stymies efforts to understand the impact of state abortion bans in the aftermath of [Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization],' Russell said during a press briefing. The staff working on the CDC's Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAMS), which collected data on maternal and infant health, was cut. The team working on the National Assisted Reproductive Technology Surveillance System, which provided patients with information about options such as in vitro fertilization (IVF), was also eliminated. 'This is really hampering HHS's efforts to ensure that people are getting quality, essential reproductive health care and that they know their options,' Russell said. Experts are waiting to see what actions the Trump Administration will take on mifepristone, a drug that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved for abortion use more than two decades ago. Years of research have proven that the drug is safe, but anti-abortion groups have tried—so far unsuccessfully—to challenge it in court, and during his confirmation hearing, HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said Trump has expressed an interest in launching further research into mifepristone. Russell said the Center for Reproductive Rights also anticipates that the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) will seek to limit abortion care. In March, the VA submitted for review an interim final rule regarding reproductive health services; the details of the rule have not been publicized, but abortion rights advocates fear that the rule will reinstate the VA's previous abortion ban, repealing a Biden-era policy that had allowed VA medical facilities to offer abortion counseling and abortion care to veterans and their beneficiaries in certain situations. Friedrich-Karnik says the Trump Administration could withhold additional Title X funds or place restrictions on grant recipients, as the Administration did during Trump's first term. She adds that the DOJ may continue to take an anti-abortion stance in various cases, such as declining to prosecute protesters accused of violating the FACE Act. Trump's actions on reproductive rights have drawn support from anti-abortion activists. Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of the anti-abortion group Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, said in a statement that Trump 'set the bar for a pro-life president' in his first term, and applauded the actions he's taken within the first 100 days of his second term. In March, Trump said that he would be known as the 'fertilization president,' and the New York Times reported last week that the White House has been evaluating ways to convince women to have children. But Russell criticized the Trump Administration for offering what she called 'sweepstakes style incentives' to encourage people to have children without implementing policies to ensure that people have the support and resources they need to do so, while curtailing access to reproductive health care. 'They have made it more dangerous to be pregnant,' Russell said, 'and they've done nothing to ensure that people who want to grow or build their families are able to do so more affordably and more accessibly.' Contact us at letters@
Time Magazine
30-04-2025
- Health
- Time Magazine
What Trump Has Done on Reproductive Health Care In His First 100 Days
This week marks 100 days since President Donald Trump took office for a second term. In that time, Trump has made several moves that affect abortion and reproductive health care access across the country. Within his first month in office, Trump acted quickly on a number of issues related to reproductive health. He pardoned several anti-abortion protesters convicted of violating the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act, a law intended to protect abortion clinics and patients by barring people from physically blocking or threatening patients. The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) said it would be curtailing prosecutions against people accused of violating the FACE Act. The Department of Defense rescinded a Biden-era policy that helped facilitate travel for active service members and their families to obtain certain reproductive health care services, including abortion. Internationally, the Trump Administration's freeze on foreign aid halted reproductive health care services for millions of people. Trump also reinstated what's known as the Mexico City Policy or the Global Gag Rule, a policy often implemented by Republican presidents that prohibits foreign organizations receiving U.S. aid from providing or discussing abortion care. Since February, the Trump Administration has taken additional actions that have limited or threatened access to reproductive health care. Here's what else Trump has done on reproductive health care in his first 100 days—and what reproductive rights advocates fear could happen next. The Administration dropped a Biden-era lawsuit seeking to protect access to emergency abortions In March, the DOJ filed a motion to dismiss a lawsuit it had inherited from the Biden Administration. The original lawsuit was about a federal law known as the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA), which requires emergency rooms that receive Medicare dollars to stabilize patients experiencing medical emergencies before discharging or transferring them, whether or not the patient is able to pay. The Biden Administration had argued that emergency abortion care is required because of EMTALA, and that Idaho's near-total abortion ban conflicted with the federal law. The state of Idaho has rejected that claim. The Trump Administration dropping the lawsuit would have allowed Idaho to fully enforce its near-total abortion ban, even in medical emergencies. But the state's largest health care provider, St. Luke's Health System, had filed its own lawsuit a few months earlier in anticipation of the Trump Administration dropping the case, and a judge temporarily blocked Idaho from fully carrying out its ban. Abortion rights advocates condemned the Trump Administration's decision to drop the lawsuit. Amy Friedrich-Karnik—director of federal policy at the Guttmacher Institute, which researches and supports sexual and reproductive health—says the case was, at its core, about protecting people's access to 'life-saving care' in the most urgent situations. The Administration froze Title X funding for 16 organizations On April 1, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) began withholding Title X funding from 16 organizations. Enacted in 1970, Title X is the country's sole federally funded family planning program. The program, which does not fund abortion services, allocates more than $200 million a year for clinics that provide birth control, cancer screenings, STI testing, and other health care services for people from low-income households. HHS said it was withholding funds from the organizations in the Title X program 'pending an evaluation of possible violations' of federal civil rights laws, and the President's Executive Order that said undocumented immigrants are prohibited 'from obtaining most taxpayer-funded benefits.' The National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association (NFPRHA), a membership organization for family planning providers, and the American Civil Liberties Union have sued the Trump Administration over the freeze. According to NFPRHA, the freeze is threatening about $65.8 million in Title X funds, potentially affecting more than 840,000 patients. Reproductive rights advocates have said the freeze would prevent some of the most vulnerable community members from accessing a range of health care services. 'When you go after Title X for contraceptive access, there's a ripple effect across all types of reproductive health care,' Friedrich-Karnik says. Mass layoffs at HHS On March 27, HHS announced that it would reduce its staff from 82,000 to 62,000 full-time employees—about 10,000 from layoffs and an additional 10,000 from staffers who retired or resigned. Included in those cuts was eliminating 'the majority of employees' in the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) reproductive health division, according to the legal advocacy group Center for Reproductive Rights. A team at the CDC focused on compiling data on abortion access—including the number of people getting abortions and what methods they choose—has been eliminated, according to Shannon Russell, federal policy counsel at the Center for Reproductive Rights. 'It really stymies efforts to understand the impact of state abortion bans in the aftermath of [ Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization ], ' Russell said during a press briefing. The staff working on the CDC's Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAMS), which collected data on maternal and infant health, was cut. The team working on the National Assisted Reproductive Technology Surveillance System, which provided patients with information about options such as in vitro fertilization (IVF), was also eliminated. 'This is really hampering HHS's efforts to ensure that people are getting quality, essential reproductive health care and that they know their options,' Russell said. What experts anticipate could happen next Experts are waiting to see what actions the Trump Administration will take on mifepristone, a drug that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved for abortion use more than two decades ago. Years of research have proven that the drug is safe, but anti-abortion groups have tried —so far unsuccessfully —to challenge it in court, and during his confirmation hearing, HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said Trump has expressed an interest in launching further research into mifepristone. Russell said the Center for Reproductive Rights also anticipates that the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) will seek to limit abortion care. In March, the VA submitted for review an interim final rule regarding reproductive health services; the details of the rule have not been publicized, but abortion rights advocates fear that the rule will reinstate the VA's previous abortion ban, repealing a Biden-era policy that had allowed VA medical facilities to offer abortion counseling and abortion care to veterans and their beneficiaries in certain situations. Friedrich-Karnik says the Trump Administration could withhold additional Title X funds or place restrictions on grant recipients, as the Administration did during Trump's first term. She adds that the DOJ may continue to take an anti-abortion stance in various cases, such as declining to prosecute protesters accused of violating the FACE Act. Trump's actions on reproductive rights have drawn support from anti-abortion activists. Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of the anti-abortion group Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, said in a statement that Trump 'set the bar for a pro-life president' in his first term, and applauded the actions he's taken within the first 100 days of his second term. In March, Trump said that he would be known as the 'fertilization president,' and the New York Times reported last week that the White House has been evaluating ways to convince women to have children. But Russell criticized the Trump Administration for offering what she called 'sweepstakes style incentives' to encourage people to have children without implementing policies to ensure that people have the support and resources they need to do so, while curtailing access to reproductive health care. 'They have made it more dangerous to be pregnant,' Russell said, 'and they've done nothing to ensure that people who want to grow or build their families are able to do so more affordably and more accessibly.'
The Hill
29-04-2025
- Politics
- The Hill
How Trump chipped away at abortion access in his first 100 days
President Trump steadily chipped away at abortion access during the first 100 days of his second term. Trump campaigned on leaving abortion decisions to the states, and has so far made no push to outlaw the procedure on a national level. But since he returned to office in January, he and his administration have taken steps to support anti-abortion activists and restrict access to abortion care not only in the United States, but around the world. Here are four moves the Trump administration has made on abortion so far in the president's second term. Pardoned anti-abortion activists Three days after returning to the White House, Trump signed an executive order pardoning 23 anti-abortion-rights protesters, some of whom were convicted of violating a federal law meant to protect abortion clinics from obstruction and threats. The law, the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act, was passed in 1994 when crimes against abortion providers were on the rise. 'They should not have been prosecuted. Many of them are elderly people,' Trump told reporters while signing the order. 'This is a great honor to sign this.' Trump's pardons included a group of protesters convicted of forcing their way into a Washington, D.C.-area abortion clinic and blockading the entrance in 2020. Protesters live-streamed the blockade on social media for several hours before they were arrested. Abortion clinics have expressed concern that the pardons will spark an uptick in protests and threats of violence towards patients and workers. Reinstated the Mexico City Policy In late January, the president re-instated a controversial policy that bars U.S. foreign aid recipients from discussing abortion. The Mexico City Policy, introduced during the second Reagan administration, has been rescinded by every Democratic president and subsequently reinstated by every Republican president since then. Trump previously restored the policy four days into his first term, and President Joe Biden rescinded it a week into his own four years later. Supporters of the policy argue that it prevents American taxpayer money from being spent on abortions overseas. But opponents of the policy, who refer to it as the 'global gag rule' due to the restrictions it places on what reproductive health providers can talk about with patients, say that there is already legislation in place that prevents this from happening. They contend that Trump reinstating the policy will weaken access to abortion care across the globe. Dismissed high-profile Idaho emergency abortion case In March, the Trump administration dropped a lawsuit filed by the Biden-era Justice Department that sought to protect the right to an emergency abortion in Idaho, where the procedure is severely restricted. After the 2022 overturning of Roe v. Wade, an Idaho 'trigger ban' on abortion went into effect that made performing or assisting in an abortion a crime punishable by up to five years in prison. The Biden administration then sued the state, arguing that the ban made it impossible for emergency room doctors to provide emergency abortions to patients under their care and violated a federal law called the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor (EMTALA) Act. Under the law, hospitals are required to provide immediate and life-saving stabilizing treatment for patients with emergency medical conditions. Last year, the Supreme Court returned the case to a lower court, which temporarily paused Idaho's abortion ban. But by dropping the case, the Trump administration paved the way for the state's abortion ban to be reinstated. Abortion rights advocates said the administration's decision put the lives of pregnant women at risk. Meanwhile, some anti-abortion groups praised the Justice Department for dropping the case. Pulled Title X funding The Trump administration earlier this year froze millions of dollars of federal funding intended to enable Americans to access birth control, cancer screenings and reproductive health care. The funding had been allocated under Title X, the U.S.'s only federal program solely aimed at providing affordable birth control and reproductive health care to low-income Americans. The program has been around since the 1970s and supported 4,000 clinics serving close to 2.8 million people in 2023 alone, according to the health advocacy nonprofit KFF. At least nine Planned Parenthood affiliates received notices about the program's funding being withheld beginning April 1. The first Trump administration similarly restricted Title X funding, issuing a rule in 2019 that barred reproductive health providers from receiving funds under the program if they mentioned abortion or referred patients for abortions. Planned Parenthood left the program because of the rule and re-entered in 2021 after the Biden administration reversed it. While freezing funds to some recipients, the president's second administration has also restored some Title X funding to two state health program s that were kicked out of the program under President Biden for failing to comply with some of its rules.
Yahoo
14-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Clinton-era law 'weaponized' by Biden against pro-lifers must go, Pence group urges House GOP
FIRST ON FOX: Former Vice President Mike Pence's nonprofit conservative coalition, Americans Advancing Freedom (AAF), is urging House Republicans to "end the weaponization" of a Clinton-era law that they say unfairly targets pro-life activists. The Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act was signed into law by then-President Bill Clinton in May 1994. The FACE Act made it a federal crime to use force, threats or obstruction to interfere with individuals seeking or providing abortion services, which includes blocking access to clinics, threatening or using violence against patients or clinic workers, and damaging abortion-related property. In one of his first actions since taking office, President Donald Trump pardoned nearly two dozen pro-life activists who were serving multiyear sentences for participating in 2020 pro-life demonstrations at abortion clinics. Three of those pardoned were elderly. The Biden administration's Department of Justice (DOJ) had charged them with violating the FACE Act. Trump said during the pardons that the advocates "should not have been prosecuted." Chip Roy Leads House Republicans In Effort To Repeal Law Used By Biden Administration To Prosecute Pro-lifers "Congress must do its part to support President Trump's effort to end the weaponization of government by repealing the FACE Act in its entirety," reads the AAF memo, sent to Republican members of the House Judiciary Committee on Thursday afternoon. "There's no question that the Biden Administration weaponized the FACE Act against pro-life Americans." "During the Biden Administration, pro-life Americans faced early morning SWAT team raids, unjust prison sentences, and alleged mistreatment while in custody," the memo continues. Read On The Fox News App Last month, the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Oversight held a hearing, "Entering the Golden Age: Ending the Weaponization of the Justice Department," where Peter Breen, the executive vice president and head of litigation at the Christian nonprofit law firm Thomas More Society, testified that one of his clients was subject to such SWAT raids and a lengthy prison sentence. Biden Doj Weaponized Face Act To Imprison Pro-life Activists, Attorney Tells House: 'Systematic Campaign' "The Biden DOJ engaged in a systematic campaign to abuse the power of the federal government against pro-life advocates, while that same DOJ ignored hundreds of acts of vandalism and violence against pro-life churches, pregnancy help centers, and other advocates," Breen said. Pro-life Activist Prosecuted By Biden Doj Reacts To Trump Pardon: 'I Want To Give Him A Hug' While the tide is turning in a different direction from the previous administration's pro-abortion agenda, conservative lawmakers are now looking at the FACE Act as the next step in the pro-life movement. In January, Trump also revoked two previous executive orders from the Biden administration that expanded abortion services. The new order reaffirms the policy established by the Hyde Amendment, which prohibits the use of federal taxpayer dollars for elective abortions. Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, re-introduced legislation in January around the same time to repeal the law. Roy's office presented data indicating that 97% of FACE Act prosecutions between 1994 and 2024 targeted pro-life individuals. He is supported in this effort by 32 co-sponsors in the House, and Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, introduced companion legislation in the Senate. In 2023, several media outlets reported that under the Biden administration, the DOJ initiated at least 15 criminal cases under the FACE Act involving approximately 46 pro-life defendants since January 2021, with victims in all but one case being abortion-rights article source: Clinton-era law 'weaponized' by Biden against pro-lifers must go, Pence group urges House GOP
