Politics

NEW YORK (Reuters) – JPMorgan Chase & Co will cover travel expenses for U.S.-based employees who need to travel more than 50 miles to get a medical service like an abortion, according to a memo seen by Reuters on Friday.

“We’re focused on the health and well-being of our employees, and want to ensure equitable access to all benefits,” said a bank spokeswoman on Friday. The memo was dated June 1.

The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday took the dramatic step of overturning the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling that recognized a woman’s constitutional right to an abortion.

(Reporting by Elizabeth Dilts Marshall, Editing by Mark Porter)

source

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Public figures across the political spectrum reacted to the U.S. Supreme Court ruling on Friday overturning the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that recognized a woman’s constitutional right to an abortion and legalized it nationwide.

HOUSE SPEAKER NANCY PELOSI, A DEMOCRAT, IN A STATEMENT:

“This cruel ruling is outrageous and heart-wrenching. But make no mistake: the rights of women and all Americans are on the ballot this November.”

SENATE REPUBLICAN LEADER MITCH MCCONNELL IN A STATEMENT:

“This is an historic victory for the Constitution and for the most vulnerable in our society.”

(The decision is) “courageous and correct.”

FORMER PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA:

“Today, the Supreme Court not only reversed nearly 50 years of precedent, it relegated the most intensely personal decision someone can make to the whims of politicians and ideologues -attacking the essential freedoms of millions of Americans.”

FORMER VICE PRESIDENT MIKE PENCE IN A STATEMENT:

“Today, Life Won. By overturning Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court of the United States has given the American people a new beginning for life, and I commend the justices in the majority for having the courage of their convictions.

“Having been given this second chance for Life, we must not rest and must not relent until the sanctity of life is restored to the center of American law in every state in the land.”

(Compiled by Chris Gallagher; Edited by Howard Goller)

source

The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday overturned Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision that had provided a constitutional right to abortion. The ruling is expected to lead to abortion bans in roughly half the states. In anticipation of the decision, several states led by Democrats have taken steps to protect abortion access.

The decision also sets up the potential for legal fights between the states over whether providers and those who help women obtain abortions can be sued or prosecuted. Here is an overview of abortion legislation and the expected impact of the court’s decision in every state.

___

ALABAMA

Political control: Alabama has a Republican-controlled legislature and a Republican governor who want to ban or restrict access to abortions.

Background: In 2019, Alabama lawmakers approved what was then the most stringent abortion ban in the country, making it a felony to perform an abortion at any stage of pregnancy with no exceptions for pregnancies resulting from rape or incest. The only exception would be when the woman’s health was at serious risk. A federal judge issued an injunction, under the precedent of Roe v. Wade, blocking the state from enforcing the law. In 2018, voters agreed to amend the Alabama Constitution to say the state recognizes the “rights of unborn children” and “does not protect the right to an abortion or require the funding of abortion.”

Effect of Supreme Court ruling: If the U.S. Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade, nothing will change immediately, but the stage would be set for a court fight and access to abortion could be curtailed. Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall, a vocal critic of Roe, has said his office would move to dissolve the injunction blocking enforcement of the 2019 abortion ban. Marshall said the state would also move to lift other injunctions that blocked previous attempts to implement abortion restrictions, including a ban on abortion clinics near schools and a ban on the most common method for second trimester abortions.

What’s next: Some Republican lawmakers have said they would like to see the state replace the 2019 ban with a slightly less stringent bill that would allow exceptions in cases of rape or incest. Proponents said the 2019 ban was deliberately strict in the hopes of sparking a court challenge to Roe.

___

ALASKA

Political control: Republicans currently hold a majority of seats in the state Legislature, but the House is controlled by a bipartisan coalition composed largely of Democrats. Fifty-nine of the Legislature’s 60 seats are up for election this year. Gov. Mike Dunleavy, a Republican who believes life begins at conception, is seeking reelection.

Background: The Alaska Supreme Court has interpreted the right to privacy in the state constitution as encompassing abortion rights.

Effect of Supreme Court ruling: A decision either way by the U.S. Supreme Court is not expected to immediately affect abortion rights in Alaska, given the existing precedent in the state.

What’s next: Voters in the fall will be asked if they want to hold a constitutional convention, a question that comes up every 10 years. Many conservatives who want to overhaul how judges are selected and do away with the interpretation that the constitution’s right to privacy clause allows for abortion rights see an opportunity in pushing for a convention. Recent efforts to advance a constitutional amendment through the Legislature have been unsuccessful.

___

ARIZONA

Political control: Both legislative chambers are controlled by Republicans, who regularly pass abortion restrictions that for the past eight sessions have been quickly signed by Republican Gov. Doug Ducey, an abortion opponent.

Background: Arizona law allows abortion through about 22 weeks, but the Legislature passed a 15-week abortion ban in March mirroring the Mississippi law currently being contested before the U.S. Supreme Court. It will take effect 90 days after the Legislature adjourns, which is expected in late June. Current restrictions include bans on abortions because of gender and a 2021 law that makes it a felony for a doctor to terminate a pregnancy because the child has a survivable genetic abnormality. Arizona also has a pre-statehood law still on the books that would ban all abortions, although it has not been enforced since Roe was decided.

Effect of Supreme Court ruling: If the U.S. Supreme Court upholds the Mississippi law, the new 15-week ban would take effect as planned. If it overturns Roe, Ducey has argued in media interviews that the law he signed in late March takes precedence over the total ban that remains on the books. But the law he signed specifically says it does not overrule the total abortion ban in place for more than 100 years. Ducey is term-limited and leaves office in January.

What’s next: Abortion-rights supporters in Arizona have launched a long-shot bid to enshrine the right to abortion in the state constitution. Rolled out weeks after the draft U.S. Supreme Court decision showing Roe could be overturned was leaked, backers must collect more than 356,000 signatures by July 7 to get the initiative on the November ballot. Voters would then be able to decide.

Arizona interactive summary: Arizona passed a 15-week abortion ban in March mirroring the Mississippi law that

___

ARKANSAS

Political control: Arkansas’ legislature is controlled by Republicans who have supported dozens of abortion bans and restrictions in recent years. Republican Gov. Asa Hutchinson also has supported bans on abortion with some exceptions. He’s term-limited and leaves office in January. Republican nominee Sarah Sanders, press secretary to former President Donald Trump, is widely favored in the November election to succeed him.

Background: Arkansas law currently bans most abortions 20 weeks into a woman’s pregnancy, with exceptions for rape, incest and the life of the mother. The state has several other bans that have been struck down or blocked by the courts in recent years, including an outright abortion ban enacted last year that doesn’t include rape or incest exceptions. That ban has been blocked by a federal judge, and the state has appealed the ruling.

Effect of Supreme Court ruling: If the U.S. Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade, the state would ban abortion under a “trigger law” it enacted in 2019 that conditions a ban on such a ruling. That ban, along with the outright ban that’s been blocked by a federal judge in the state, only allows exceptions to protect the life of the mother in a medical emergency. Hutchinson has said he thinks bans should include rape and incest exceptions, but he has not called on the Legislature to add those to either of the bans.

What’s next: Arkansas’ “trigger” law banning nearly all abortions in the state takes effect if the attorney general certifies that the U.S. Supreme Court has overturned Roe v. Wade. The only exception in that ban is to protect the life of the mother in a medical emergency. The Legislature isn’t scheduled to meet until January, but Hutchinson is considering calling a special session to take up tax relief proposals. The Republican governor has not said he plans to include any legislation related to abortion on the agenda for that session.

___

CALIFORNIA

Political control: Democrats who support access to abortion control all statewide elected offices and have large majorities in the state Legislature.

Background: California outlawed abortion in 1850, except when the life of the mother was in danger. The law changed in 1967 to include abortions in the case of rape, incest or if a woman’s mental health were in danger. In 1969, the California Supreme Court declared the state’s original abortion law to be unconstitutional but left the 1967 law in place. In 1972 – one year before the Roe v. Wade decision at the U.S. Supreme Court — California voters added a “right to privacy” to the state constitution. Since then, the state Supreme Court has interpreted that “right to privacy” as a right to access abortion, allow minors to get an abortion without their parents’ permission and use public funding for abortions in the state’s Medicaid program. California now requires private health insurance plans to cover abortions and does not allow them to charge things such as co-pays or deductibles for the procedure.

Effect of Supreme Court ruling: Abortion will still be legal in California prior to the viability of a fetus. Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom has vowed to make California a sanctuary for women who live in other states where abortion could be outlawed or severely restricted. It’s unknown how many women would come to California for abortions should Roe v. Wade be overturned, but the number is expected to be significant.

What’s next: The state Legislature is considering 13 bills that would strengthen or expand access to abortion. The bills are based on a report from the Future of Abortion Council, which Newsom formed last year to study reproductive rights in California. They include proposals that would help pay for women from other states to come to California for abortions, ban enforcement of out-of-state civil judgments on California abortion providers and volunteers, and increase the number of people who can offer abortions by authorizing some nurse practitioners to perform the procedure without the supervision of a doctor. Lawmakers also plan to put a constitutional amendment on the ballot in November that would explicitly guarantee the right to an abortion and contraceptives.

___

COLORADO

Political control: The Democrats who control the Colorado Legislature support access to abortion, as does the state’s Democratic governor.

Background: A 1967 state law legalized abortion up to 16 weeks of pregnancy. Abortion has been accessible ever since, despite repeated legislative attempts and ballot initiatives to restrict or abolish the procedure. Colorado voters have consistently rejected such initiatives, the latest in 2020 that would have banned abortion during the third trimester of pregnancy. In 2022, Colorado Gov. Jared Polis signed a law placing the right to abortion in state statute. The law guarantees access to reproductive care before and after pregnancy and bans local governments from imposing their own restrictions. It also declares that fertilized eggs, embryos and fetuses have no independent rights. Abortion rights advocates plan a 2024 ballot initiative to add abortion rights to the state constitution and repeal a 1980s constitutional amendment that bans public funding for abortion.

Effect of Supreme Court ruling: The decision won’t have any immediate impact on Colorado law — but providers are preparing for a surge of out-of-state patients in case Roe is overturned. Democratic House Majority Leader Daneya Esgar says lawmakers must consider how to invest in a health care workforce to ensure Colorado has the capacity to meet that anticipated demand. Colorado’s health department reports there were 11,580 abortions in the state in 2021; of those 14% were for non-residents. More than 900 of those non-residents were from Texas, Wyoming and Nebraska.

What’s next: It’s impossible to predict how many more patients from states surrounding Colorado will potentially seek care if Roe v. Wade is overturned. But the Texas law could induce more people to come. Oklahoma now has an early pregnancy abortion ban; Utah and Wyoming have trigger laws banning abortion if Roe is overturned; the Kansas Constitution protects abortion rights, but Republican lawmakers placed on an August primary ballot an initiative to overturn it.

___

CONNECTICUT

Political control: Democrats who control the Connecticut General Assembly support access to abortion, as does the state’s Democratic governor.

Background: Connecticut passed a law in 1990 giving women the legal right to abortion. Having passed with strong bipartisan support, it was lauded at the time for being a rare compromise between abortion rights advocates and opponents. It affirmed a woman’s unqualified right to an abortion “prior to viability of the fetus,” as well as later-term abortions “necessary to preserve the life and health of the pregnant woman.” It also repealed state laws predating Roe v. Wade that had made it a felony to have an abortion or to perform one and required that patients under 16 receive counseling about their options. This year, Gov. Ned Lamont signed legislation to protect medical providers and patients from out-of-state legal actions. The same law allows advanced practice registered nurses, nurse-midwives or physician assistants to perform aspiration abortions in the first 12 weeks of a pregnancy.

Effect of Supreme Court ruling: Connecticut Attorney General William Tong, a Democrat, has vowed to challenge any attempt to nullify Connecticut’s abortion rights law. “Let’s not mince words. They will come for us,” Tong warned abortion rights supporters during a recent news conference. “We will fight that effort tooth-and-nail. Any court, any place, Connecticut will be there and will fight.” The state is already involved in major abortion cases across the country. And while Connecticut is surrounded by mostly pro-abortion states, it’s still bracing for out-of-state patients seeking abortions if Roe is overturned.

What’s next: Connecticut’s new law protecting abortion providers from other states’ bans takes effect on July 1. It creates a legal cause of action for providers and others sued in another state, enabling them to recover certain legal costs. It also limits the governor’s discretion to extradite someone accused of performing an abortion, as well as participation by Connecticut courts and agencies in those lawsuits. There’s discussion of possibly amending the state’s constitution to enshrine the right to abortion, making it more difficult to overturn, but that would be a multi-year process.

___

DELAWARE

Political control: Democrats control the governor’s office and both chambers of the legislature in Delaware and have taken several steps to ensure access to abortion.

Background: In 2017, Delaware became the first state following the election of President Donald Trump to codify the right to an abortion. A bill signed by Gov. John Carney, a Catholic, guarantees the unfettered right to an abortion before a fetus is deemed “viable.” The law defines viability as the point in a pregnancy when, in a physician’s “good faith medical judgment,” there is a reasonable likelihood that the fetus can survive outside the uterus without the application of extraordinary medical measures. The law also allows abortion after fetal viability if, in a doctor’s “good faith medical judgment,” abortion is necessary for the protection of the woman’s life or health, or if there is a reasonable likelihood that the fetus cannot survive without extraordinary medical measures. The law eliminated existing code restrictions on abortions, much of which had already been declared unenforceable by Delaware’s attorney general in 1973 following the Supreme Court rulings in Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton. In April of this year, Carney signed a bill allowing physician assistants and advanced practice registered nurses to prescribe abortion-inducing medications including mifepristone and misoprostol.

Effect of Supreme Court ruling: “In Delaware, the privacy protections of Roe v. Wade are codified in state law, guaranteeing residents have access to legal abortion services even if Roe were to be undone at the federal level,” Democratic lawmakers noted earlier this month in unveiling legislation further broadening access to abortions. The bill, which is likely to pass before the end of June, allows physician assistants, certified nurse practitioners and nurse midwifes to perform abortions before viability. It also includes various legal protections for abortion providers and patients, including out-of-state residents receiving abortions in Delaware. Those provisions include protections from civil actions in other states relating to the termination of a pregnancy, and protecting individuals from extradition to other states for criminal charges related to terminating a pregnancy.

What’s next: According to state health officials, 2,042 abortions were performed in Delaware in 2019, with 1,765 involving Delaware residents and 277 involving nonresidents. Delaware is not likely to see a huge influx of women traveling from out of state to get abortions if Roe v. Wade is overturned, given that neighboring Maryland and New Jersey also have liberal abortion-access laws. In neighboring Pennsylvania, where Republicans control both chambers of the Legislature, future abortion access could hinge on the outcome of this year’s gubernatorial contest.

___

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Political control: The local government in the nation’s capital is completely controlled by Democrats, with a Democratic mayor and the D.C. Council split between Democrats and nominal independent politicians, who are all, invariably, Democrats.

Background: Abortion is legal in the District of Columbia at all stages of pregnancy, a status that was upheld in the 1971 Supreme Court case United States v. Vuitch. However, the U.S. Congress has oversight power over D.C. laws and Congress has already banned the city from using local funds to pay for abortions for women on Medicaid.

Effect of Supreme Court ruling: Elected officials in Washington, D.C., fear Congress could move to restrict abortion access, particularly if Republicans recapture the House of Representatives in midterm elections later this year. President Joe Biden could theoretically veto such a move, but that protection is subject to political calculations and is not guaranteed.

What’s next: Local officials have pledged defiance against any sort of Congressional move to restrict local abortion access. The D.C. Council is considering legislation that would declare Washington D.C. a “sanctuary city” for those coming to Washington from states where abortion is banned. According to federal data, most of the women getting abortions in Washington, D.C., already are coming from out of state. Those numbers could increase, particularly if new Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin moves to restrict abortion access in neighboring Virginia.

___

FLORIDA

Political control: Republicans control both chambers of the Florida Legislature and this year passed a ban on abortions after 15 weeks, which was signed into law by the state’s Republican governor.

Background: Abortion was legal in Florida until the 24th week of pregnancy, though lawmakers have been tightening access in recent years with bills requiring a one-day waiting period and requiring parents of a pregnant minor to be notified before an abortion can be provided. This year, in anticipation of a U.S. Supreme Court ruling eroding or overturning Roe v. Wade, the Legislature passed a ban on abortions after the 15th week, except to save the mother’s life, prevent serious injury or if the fetus has a fatal abnormality. It does not allow for exemptions in cases where pregnancies were caused by rape or incest. Gov. Ron DeSantis called the legislation “the most significant protections for life that have been enacted in this state in a generation.”

Effect of Supreme Court ruling: If the U.S. Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade, that will place Florida’s 15-week ban on firm legal ground, at least under federal law. However, the legislation is already being challenged in state court on arguments that it violates a guarantee of the right to privacy under the state constitution.

What’s next: Florida’s 15-week ban goes into effect on July 1, and by then a U.S. Supreme Court decision is expected on a similar Mississippi ban after 15 weeks. However, the state constitutional challenge of the legislation will likely still be pending. Though only about 2% of Florida’s abortions take place after 15th week, abortion rights advocates have expressed concern over declining access to the procedure not only for Floridians but for residents from nearby Southern states where restrictions have historically been stricter than in Florida.

___

GEORGIA

Political control: Georgia has a Republican legislature and governor who have supported abortion restrictions, but all are up for election this November. Republicans are likely to retain legislative control, but there’s a possibility a Democrat could become governor.

Background: Georgia lawmakers in 2019 passed a law by one vote that would ban most abortions after about six weeks of pregnancy, when fetal cardiac activity can be detected. The measure is unlike other “heartbeat” bills in that it also contains language designating a fetus as a person for certain state-law purposes such as income tax deductions and child support. The measure is on hold right now before the U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals awaiting a ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court in the Mississippi case.

Effect of Supreme Court ruling: The 11th Circuit is likely to allow the six-week ban to take effect relatively quickly, having already heard oral arguments in the case, although there could be fresh legal challenges. That would ban the large majority of abortions that currently take place in Georgia – about 87% according to providers. The change could happen in the middle of tightly contested races in Georgia for governor and U.S. Senate. Democratic U.S. Sen. Raphael Warnock and challenger for governor Stacey Abrams say they want to secure abortion rights. Republican Senate challenger Herschel Walker and incumbent Republican Gov. Brian Kemp support restrictions.

What’s next: Some Republican lawmakers and candidates want Georgia to go further and ban abortion entirely, but Kemp is unlikely to call a special session before this November’s general election. Lawmakers are likely to consider further action when they return for their annual session in January. The Legislature or courts will have to sort out whether the provisions designating a fetus as a person are workable.

___

HAWAII

Political control: Hawaii’s governor is a Democrat and Democrats control more than 90% of the seats in both the state House and Senate.

Background: Hawaii legalized abortion in 1970, when it became the first state in the nation to allow the procedure at a woman’s request. The state allows abortion until a fetus would be viable outside the womb. After that, it’s legal if a patient’s life or health is in danger. For many years, only licensed physicians could perform the procedure. Last year, the state enacted a law allowing advanced practice care nurses to carry out in-clinic abortions during the first trimester. This helps women on more rural islands who have been flying to Honolulu to obtain abortions because of doctor shortages in their communities. The law allows the nurses to prescribe medication to end a pregnancy and to perform aspiration abortion, a type of minor surgery during which a vacuum is used to empty a woman’s uterus.

Effect of Supreme Court ruling: Existing Hawaii law would allow abortions if the Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade and allows states to determine their own abortion regulations. Even so, Gary Yamashiroya, a spokesperson for the state attorney general’s office, said the attorney general is carefully considering measures Hawaii might take to protect and strengthen reproductive rights if Roe ends. “No matter the outcome, our state remains committed to reproductive freedom and choice,” he said in an emailed statement.

What’s next: Political support for abortion rights is strong. Anti-abortion bills are rarely heard at the state Legislature. When they have been, they haven’t made it out of committee. Gov. David Ige issued a statement supporting abortion rights when the Supreme Court’s draft opinion overturning Roe leaked. ”No matter what the Supreme Court decides, I will fight to ensure a woman’s right to choose in the State of Hawaii,” he said. The Hawaii State Commission on the Status of Women earlier this month said 72% of the state Senate and 53% of state House members signed a pledge supporting abortion rights.

___

IDAHO

Political control: Republicans hold super-majorities in the House and Senate and oppose access to abortion, as does the state’s Republican governor.

Background: Following the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling, Idaho passed a law generally allowing abortions in the first and second trimester up to viability at about 23 to 24 weeks. The law allows abortions after viability only to protect the mother’s life or in cases of nonviable fetuses. This year, lawmakers passed a Texas-style ban prohibiting abortions after about six weeks of pregnancy and authorizing family members to sue medical providers for performing an abortion. That law is on hold following a challenge by Planned Parenthood. The Idaho Supreme Court is scheduled to hear arguments in August.

Effect of Supreme Court ruling: If the U.S. Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade, it will trigger a 2020 Idaho law banning all abortions except in cases of reported rape or incest, or to protect the mother’s life. That law would take effect 30 days after the decision. Under the law, the person performing the abortion could face a felony prosecution punishable by up to five years in prison. In cases of rape or incest, the law requires pregnant women to file a police report and provide a copy of the report to the provider prior to an abortion. If the Idaho Supreme Court upholds the state’s Texas-style abortion ban and Roe v. Wade is tossed aside, a medical provider who performs an abortion in Idaho could face a lawsuit and criminal charges.

What’s Next: Pregnant women seeking abortions will have to travel out of state; the nearest abortion providers would be in Washington, Oregon, Nevada and Colorado. Planned Parenthood is renting space in the town of Ontario on the Idaho-Oregon border and says it’s preparing for an influx of patients seeking abortions. Some Republican lawmakers in Idaho might propose new legislation in January to outlaw abortion pills and emergency contraception.

___

ILLINOIS

Political control: Illinois is overwhelmingly Democratic with laws providing greater access to abortion than most states. Democrats hold veto-proof supermajorities in the House and Senate, and the Democratic first-term governor seeking reelection this year, J.B. Pritzker, has promoted peaceful street protests to protect the constitutional right to an abortion.

Background: Abortion is legal in Illinois and can only be restricted after the point of viability, when a fetus is considered able to survive outside the womb. Medical science determines viability at 24 to 26 weeks, but the Illinois law does not specify a timeframe, saying a medical professional can determine viability in each case. Abortions are also allowed after viability to protect the patient’s life or health.

Effect of Supreme Court ruling: Nothing the court does would affect the ability to have an abortion in Illinois. After the Roe v. Wade decision in 1973, the Illinois Abortion Act of 1975 legalized the procedure but enacted a “trigger law” that would reinstate the ban if Roe were overturned. That trigger law was repealed in 2017 in legislation that also required Medicaid and state employees’ group health insurance to cover abortions. The 2019 Reproductive Health Act replaced the 1975 law, large parts of which were never enforced because they were found to be unconstitutional.

What’s next: Like other states providing access to abortions, Illinois has seen a steady influx of patients crossing the state line for abortions in recent months and those numbers are expected to increase.The state could see an additional 20,000 to 30,000 patients seeking abortions in the first year if Roe is reversed, said Brigid Leahy, vice president of public policy for Planned Parenthood of Illinois.

___

INDIANA

Political control: Indiana has a Republican-dominated Legislature and a Republican governor in favor of restricting abortion access.

Background: Abortion in Indiana is legal up to about 20 weeks, with some provisions for medical emergencies. Before an abortion, patients must undergo an 18-hour waiting period. Medical providers must tell patients about the risks involved in abortion and must say the fetus can feel pain around 20 weeks, which is disputed. Providers must report complications related to abortion; failure to report can result in a misdemeanor, 180 days in jail and a $1,000 fine. Federal courts have blocked several restrictions in Indiana, including an attempt to ban a common second-trimester abortion procedure and a law that would have required doctors to tell pregnant women about a disputed treatment to potentially stop a drug-induced abortion.

Effect of Supreme Court ruling: No immediate change would take effect in Indiana if Roe v. Wade is overturned or if the U.S. Supreme Court supports Mississippi’s 15-week ban. But legislators unwilling to wait until the 2023 session could ask Indiana Gov. Eric Holcomb to call a special session this summer to start modifying the state’s abortion laws.

What’s next: Shortly after the Supreme Court’s draft decision was leaked, Republican lawmakers said they would not make any moves to change Indiana’s abortion laws until the court releases its official decision. Some have expressed interest in adopting a law that bans abortions at the point when a medical practitioner can discern a fetal heartbeat. That’s usually around six weeks, when many women don’t even know they are pregnant.

___

IOWA

Political control: Iowa’s legislature is controlled by Republicans who want to ban or restrict abortion access and a Republican governor who agrees and is up for reelection this year.

Background: Iowa allows most abortions until the 20th week of pregnancy, when they’re banned except to save a patient’s life or prevent a substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function. In 2018, the state Supreme Court declared access to abortion a “fundamental” right under the state constitution, granting stronger protections to abortion rights than the U.S. Constitution. The state’s high court, now with a conservative majority, overturned that decision June 17, thus allowing a state law requiring a 24-hour waiting period to go into effect immediately. That requirement is being challenged in district court.

Effect of Supreme Court ruling: If the U.S. Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade, nothing will change immediately in Iowa. The GOP-controlled Legislature has been working to get an amendment on the ballot in 2024 that would declare the state constitution does not grant a right to abortion, but if the high court ruling shifts power back to state government as expected, Iowa lawmakers could ban abortion without completing that lengthy process.

What’s next: Now that the Iowa Supreme Court has struck down its 2018 ruling, the state Legislature can convene a special session this summer and pass abortion restrictions. Republicans could still move to get the constitutional amendment on a public ballot in 2024.

___

KANSAS

Political control: Kansas has a legislature controlled by Republicans who want to ban or restrict access to abortions but a Democratic governor who supports access and is up for re-election this year.

Background: Under current law, Kansas does not ban most abortions until the 22nd week of pregnancy, when they’re allowed only to save a patient’s life or to prevent “a substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function.” The state Supreme Court in 2019 declared that access to abortion is a “fundamental” right under the state constitution, granting stronger protections to abortion rights than the U.S. Constitution does currently. State law, however, doesn’t allow providers to dispense abortion medications through telemedicine consultations.

Effect of Supreme Court ruling: If the U.S. Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade, nothing will change immediately in Kansas, and that will be true even if the court merely upholds Mississippi’s ban at 15 weeks without explicitly overturning Roe. The state Supreme Court blocked enforcement of a 2015 legislative ban on a common second-trimester procedure, and abortion opponents fear a host of other rules could fall to legal challenges in the near future. The GOP-controlled Legislature responded by putting a constitutional amendment on the ballot during the Aug. 2 primary, when turnout is expected to be much lower than in a general election and will likely see a higher proportion of Republicans voting. The amendment would declare that the state constitution does not grant a right to abortion. It would allow lawmakers to restrict abortion as much as the federal courts will allow — and to ban it if Roe is overturned.

What’s next: If voters approve the amendment, the Legislature would still have to approve the new restrictions, and lawmakers are out of session until January 2023. They can call themselves into special session with two-thirds majorities, but they’re likely to wait until after voters decide in the November general election whether to give Democratic Gov. Laura Kelly a second term.

___

KENTUCKY

Political control: Republicans have a supermajority in the Kentucky Legislature and have been restricting abortion rights since the 2016 election over the vetoes of Democratic Gov. Andy Beshear, who supports abortion rights and will seek a second term in 2023.

Background: Kentucky bans abortions after 20 weeks, but all abortion services were temporarily halted in April after the legislature imposed new restrictions and reporting requirements on the state’s two abortion clinics. The clinics, both in Louisville, said they suspended abortions because state officials hadn’t written guidelines on how to comply with the new law. Noncompliance could result in stiff fines, felony penalties and revocation of physician and facility licenses. Abortions resumed after a federal judge temporarily blocked key parts of the law, including a provision banning abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy.

Effect of Supreme Court ruling: If the U.S. Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade, abortion services in Kentucky would immediately become illegal under a “trigger law” enacted in 2019. The measure contains a narrow exception allowing abortion to prevent the death or permanent injury of a pregnant woman. Kentuckians will be able to vote this November on a proposed amendment declaring there is no right to an abortion in the state constitution.

What’s next: Abortion-rights activists say the suspension of abortion services in April foreshadowed what would happen in Kentucky and other Republican-leaning states if Roe v. Wade is overturned. It likely would end several legal challenges pending against other Kentucky abortion laws including a 2018 measure that abortion-rights supporters say would effectively ban a standard abortion method in the second trimester of pregnancy. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in March that Kentucky’s Republican attorney general, Daniel Cameron, can defend the measure that was struck down by lower courts.

___

LOUISIANA

Political control: Louisiana’s legislature is controlled by Republicans who want to ban or restrict abortion access. Its Democratic and Catholic governor also opposes abortions, though he supports exceptions for victims of rape or incest.

Background: Voters approved a constitutional amendment in 2020 stating that “a right to abortion and the funding of abortion shall not be found in the Louisiana Constitution.” Of the about 2 million people who voted, 62% approved the amendment. Abortion is legal in Louisiana through the 19th week of pregnancy. After that, it is legal only if the fetus would die anyway or if continuing the pregnancy would threaten the mother’s life or health. An ultrasound and counseling are required at least 24 hours before the procedure. For medication abortion, a doctor must prescribe the drug in person; telemedicine prescriptions are not allowed.

Effect of Supreme Court ruling: The legislature has sent Gov. John Bel Edwards a bill that would criminalize nearly all abortions if the U.S. Supreme Court overturns Roe v Wade or upholds Mississippi’s 15-week ban. Penalties for those who perform abortions would be mandatory: up to 10 years in prison and a fine of $10,000 to $100,000. He is expected to sign.

What’s next? Edwards also has a bill that would require the doctor to certify that a drug used for abortion was being prescribed for another medical reason. The bill would make it illegal to deliver abortion medication to a state resident “by mail-order, courier, or as a result of a sale made via the internet.”

___

MAINE

Political control: Both chambers of the Maine Legislature, which has adjourned, are controlled by Democrats. Democratic Gov. Janet Mills has vowed to protect the right to an abortion, saying she will “fight with everything I have to protect reproductive rights.”

Background: A Republican governor in 1993 signed a Maine law affirming the right to abortion before a fetus is viable. After that, abortion is only allowed if the life or health of the mother is at risk, or if the pregnancy is no longer viable. In 2019, lawmakers eliminated a physician-only rule and Mills signed it into law, allowing nurse practitioners, physician assistants and other medical professionals to perform abortions.

Effect of Supreme Court ruling: If the U.S. Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade, nothing will change in Maine, and that will be true even if the court merely upholds Mississippi’s ban at 15 weeks without explicitly overturning Roe. Any attempt to restrict abortions when lawmakers reconvene next year would face fierce pushback. Abortion providers, meanwhile, said there could be an influx of patients seeking abortions from states that outlaw the procedure.

What’s next: Any major changes are unlikely unless former Gov. Paul LePage, a Republican, unseats Mills and Republicans take control of both chambers of the Legislature in November. LePage, a Catholic who opposes abortion rights, has said it’s up to lawmakers to address the abortion issue as they see fit.

___

MARYLAND

Political control: Maryland’s legislature is controlled by Democrats who expanded abortion access this year by ending a restriction that only physicians can provide them and requiring most insurance plans to cover abortion care without cost. The legislature overrode Republican Gov. Larry Hogan’s veto of the bill in April.

Background: The right to abortion is protected in Maryland law. The state approved legislation in 1991 to protect abortion rights if the Supreme Court should ever restrict access. Voters approved the right in 1992 with 62% of the vote. Maryland law prohibits restrictions on abortion prior to viability. Maryland does not have a gestational limit. After viability, clinicians make the determination, based on clinical standard of care.

Effect of Supreme Court ruling: If the U.S. Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade, nothing will change immediately in Maryland law, and that will be true even if the court merely upholds Mississippi’s ban at 15 weeks without explicitly overturning Roe.

What’s next: Maryland’s new law that will enable nurse practitioners, nurse midwives and physician assistants to provide abortions with training is set to take effect July 1. However, $3.5 million in state funding to provide training isn’t mandated until fiscal year 2024. Hogan, who is term limited, has indicated he will not approve the money sooner. Some nurse practitioners, nurse midwives and physician assistants already have received training on medication abortion and will be able to provide those services starting next month.

___

MASSACHUSETTS

Political control: The Democrats who control the Massachusetts Legislature support access to abortion, as does the state’s Republican governor, although they differ on specific policies.

Background: Massachusetts once had a contentious relationship with abortion, in part due to the powerful influence of the Catholic Church, which opposes abortion. In recent years, that influence has waned and Massachusetts has become a strong supporter of abortion rights. In 2018, in anticipation of a conservative tilt on the U.S. Supreme Court, the state removed an 1845 abortion ban from its books that was not enforced. Two years later, Democratic state lawmakers clashed with Republican Gov. Charlie Baker — who says he supports abortion rights — over an effort to codify abortion rights into state law, allow abortions after 24 weeks of pregnancy in cases where the child would not survive after birth, and lower from 18 to 16 the age at which women could seek an abortion without consent from a parent or guardian. Lawmakers passed the bill — dubbed the Roe Act — over Baker’s veto.

Effect of Supreme Court ruling: Baker has vowed to fight to keep abortion legal in Massachusetts, but it is his last year in office. Both Democratic candidates for governor — state Sen. Sonia Chang-Diaz and Attorney General Maura Healey — support abortion rights. Republican candidate Geoff Diehl said he believes in “the need to protect human life wherever and whenever possible.” Fellow GOP candidate Chris Doughty said he would “not seek any changes to our state’s abortion laws.”

What’s next: Absent new federal abortion laws, there’s little chance Massachusetts will restrict abortion rights. As of 2017, there were 47 facilities providing abortion in Massachusetts, 19 of those were clinics, according to the Guttmacher Institute, which supports abortion rights. If Roe v. Wade is overturned, it’s unclear how many people would travel there from states that ban or restrict abortion. The state Senate has proposed additional money to help maintain access to abortion services, including barring providers and patients from being extradited to other states to face abortion-related lawsuits.

___

MICHIGAN

Political control: Both chambers of Michigan’s legislature are controlled by Republicans who want to ban or restrict abortion access, but the state’s Democratic governor supports access.

Background: A dormant 1931 law bans nearly all abortions in Michigan but it hasn’t been enforced since Roe v. Wade. The law made it a felony to use an instrument or administer any substance with the intent to abort a fetus unless necessary to preserve the woman’s life. It has no exceptions in cases of rape and incest. Anticipating that Roe could be overturned, Planned Parenthood of Michigan filed a lawsuit challenging Michigan’s ban. A state judge suspended the law in May, saying it violates the state’s constitution. Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and Attorney General Dana Nessel, both Democrats, hailed the decision.

Effect of Supreme Court ruling: The injunction granted in the Planned Parenthood case ensured that abortion would not immediately become illegal if the U.S. Supreme Court cut down Roe. Planned Parenthood of Michigan and other supporters hope the injunction indicates abortion rights in the state will be preserved. But in a statement to The Associated Press, Nessel’s office said “given the ongoing lawsuits, we cannot speculate what the state of abortion rights will be in Michigan” if Roe is overturned.

What’s next: Whitmer also filed suit asking the state’s Supreme Court to declare the 91-year-old law unconstitutional. It has not acted yet. Michigan abortion rights supporters hope to put the issue on ballots this fall. Their proposed constitutional amendment would affirm the right to make pregnancy-related decisions without interference, including about abortion and other reproductive services such as birth control. The Reproductive Freedom for All committee needs to collect about 425,000 valid voter signatures by July 11 to make the November ballot. The measure would become law if voters approved it. The issue also is expected to shape statewide elections — Whitmer and Nessel are both up for reelection in the fall — and legislative races.

___

MINNESOTA

Political control: The Minnesota Legislature is divided; Anti-abortion Republicans control the Senate and Democrats have the House, but the majorities are slim in both chambers, so control will be up for grabs in the November elections. Most legislative Democrats support abortion rights. Democratic Gov. Tim Walz has said “no abortion ban will ever become law” while he’s governor. But he faces a challenge this year from Republican Scott Jensen, who opposes abortion rights.

Background: Abortion is legal in Minnesota up to the point of fetal viability, around the 24th week of pregnancy. The state has some restrictions, including a 24-hour waiting period with state-mandated counseling, both parents generally must be notified prior to a minor getting an abortion, and only physicians can perform abortions.

Effect of Supreme Court ruling: Nothing will change immediately in Minnesota if the U.S. Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade because the Minnesota Supreme Court ruled in 1995 that the state constitution protects abortion rights. If Republicans take control of both chambers, they could put a constitutional amendment on the ballot as soon as 2024 to reverse that ruling, but it’s not clear yet if they would take that path. Minnesota governors can’t block constitutional amendments with vetoes. But amendments are hard to enact because they require the backing of most of the citizens voting in that election, not just those voting on the amendment. Leaving the ballot blank counts as a “no.”

What’s next: Providers are preparing for a surge in women coming from other states to get abortions if Roe v. Wade is overturned. Sarah Stoesz, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood North Central States, said her organization has been “fortifying” its delivery systems, including telemedicine. Dr. Sarah Traxler, the group’s medical director, has said demand in Minnesota is expected to rise by up to 25%.

___

MISSISSIPPI

Political control: Republican Gov. Tate Reeves and leaders of the Republican-controlled Mississippi Legislature have been working for years to chip away at abortion access.

Background: Mississippi law bans most abortions at 20 weeks. The state tried to enact a law in 2018 to ban most abortions after 15 weeks. This law is the basis for the case now at the Supreme Court, which could reshape abortion rights nationwide. A federal district judge blocked Mississippi’s 15-week law from taking effect, and an appeals court agreed. The Supreme Court heard arguments in December, and the Mississippi attorney general’s office argued justices should overturn Roe v. Wade, the court’s 1973 ruling that legalized abortion nationwide. Mississippi has one abortion clinic, and it stops offering abortions at 16 weeks. Reeves was lieutenant governor in 2018, when Mississippi tried to enact the 15-week ban, and in 2019, when the state tried to enact a six-week ban. Mississippi law does not allow providers to dispense abortion medications through telemedicine consultations.

Effect of Supreme Court ruling: Mississippi’s only abortion clinic, Jackson Women’s Health Organization, would close within weeks if the Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade. Mississippi enacted a law in 2007 that would prohibit most abortions if Roe v. Wade is overturned. Abortions would still be allowed if the woman’s life is endangered by the pregnancy or if the pregnancy was caused by a rape that was reported to law enforcement. Any person who knowingly performs or attempts to induce an abortion, except the pregnant woman, could be punished by up to 10 years in prison.

What’s next: If the Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade, the 2007 Mississippi law says the state attorney general must publish a notice in a state administrative bulletin. The state’s ban on most abortions would take effect 10 days after that publication.

___

MISSOURI

Political control: Both GOP Gov. Mike Parson and the Republican-led Legislature support laws against abortion.

Background: Missouri law allows abortions up until 22 weeks of pregnancy. But the GOP-led Legislature passed an abortion ban in 2019, hoping that the 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling would later be tossed out. Under the 2019 law, abortions would only be allowed to save the life of the mother and would not be allowed in cases of rape or incest. Performing an illegal abortion would be a felony punishable by 5 to 15 years in prison.

Effect of Supreme Court ruling: The 2019 abortion ban would kick in if the U.S. Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade. The attorney general, the governor or the Legislature would need to issue an official notice if Roe is overturned for the 2019 law to take effect. The GOP-led Legislature is out of session for the year, but Parson and the attorney general have said they’ll take quick action if Roe falls.

What’s next: If the abortion ban takes effect, many Missouri patients seeking abortions likely will travel to neighboring states, including Illinois and Kansas. A new Illinois logistics center near St. Louis helps women from out of state find travel, lodging and childcare if they need help getting to the area for an abortion, and it connects them with funding sources. The Kansas Supreme Court in 2019 declared that access to abortion is a “fundamental” right under the state constitution, granting stronger protections to abortion rights than the U.S. Constitution does. Even without the ban in Missouri, the number of Missouri patients seeking abortions in Kansas has gone up in recent years, increasing about 8% from 2020 to 2021.

___

MONTANA

Political control: The Republicans who control the Montana Legislature and Republican Gov. Greg Gianforte want to limit access to abortion.

Background: Abortion used to be legal in Montana up until viability, or about 24 weeks of pregnancy, but the state Legislature passed a bill in 2020 to reduce that to 20 weeks, arguing that is when the fetus can feel pain. That law, along with one that requires chemical abortions to be done with in-person medical supervision, are being challenged in court. A state judge temporarily blocked enforcement in October 2021 while the challenges move through the courts. The state has asked the Montana Supreme Court to vacate that injunction and overturn a 1999 Montana Supreme Court opinion that found the state’s constitutional right to privacy guarantees a woman’s access to abortion care.

Effect of Supreme Court ruling: The effect of overturning Roe v. Wade is unclear in Montana because of the unresolved legal challenges to the 2021 legislation. Montana does not have an abortion ban that would be triggered if Roe v. Wade is overturned, but the Legislature could seek to further restrict access in the next session.

What’s next: The Montana Supreme Court will issue a decision on the preliminary injunction. The Montana Legislature also passed a referendum to ask voters this November whether they support a state law to require abortion providers to give lifesaving treatment to a fetus that is born alive after a botched abortion. Opponents argue federal law already offers those protections.

___

NEBRASKA

Political control: Nebraska has an officially nonpartisan legislature with a Republican majority, but not a super-majority that would let the party unilaterally pass an abortion ban. Democrats appear to have enough votes to block such a bill, but just one defector could swing the vote. Nebraska’s Republican governor vehemently opposes abortion.

Background: Nebraska allows most abortions until the 22nd week of pregnancy, although a few small towns have voted to outlaw the procedure within their borders. The state requires doctors to be physically present when patients take the first of two drugs that are used in medication abortions. Lawmakers have rejected attempts to allow abortion medications to be administered remotely, which would provide easier abortion access in rural areas.

Effect of Supreme Court ruling: A ruling that lets states set their own abortion laws would trigger an immediate push by Nebraska conservatives to ban the procedure, but it’s not clear whether they could do it this year. Unlike other conservative states, Nebraska doesn’t have a law that would automatically outlaw abortion if the court overturns Roe v. Wade. Gov. Pete Ricketts and other top Republicans have said they’ll seek a special legislative session, but it’s not clear whether they have enough votes to pass anything.

What’s next: If Ricketts calls a special session, attention will likely shift to state Sen. Justin Wayne, an Omaha Democrat who has declined to specify where he stands on abortion. Wayne was notably absent from a vote on the issue this year; his support would give Republicans the super-majority they need to enact a ban. He has struck deals with senators from both parties in the past. If a proposed abortion ban fails during a special session or if no special session is called, the issue will likely become a factor in the November election.

___

NEVADA

Political control: Nevada’s governor and state attorney general are Democrats who are up for reelection this year. Democrats control the state Senate and Assembly.

Background: Nevada voters enshrined the right to abortion in the state constitution in 1990. The law says a pregnancy can be terminated during the first 24 weeks, and after that to preserve the life or health of the pregnant person. It would take another statewide vote to change or repeal the law. Most Republican candidates for Congress, governor, state attorney general and other statewide posts say they oppose abortions.

Effect of Supreme Court ruling: “Here in Nevada, overturning Roe would not be felt immediately,” state Attorney General Aaron Ford said in a position paper released after the draft U.S. Supreme Court opinion became public. Ford noted that a federal ban on abortion would supersede state law and said it would be naive not to recognize that some people want to ban abortions or make them more difficult to obtain. But he said his office will fight “attacks on abortion rights, rights to birth control access and rights for LGTBQ people.” Gov. Steve Sisolak promised in a statement to “continue to protect reproductive freedom.”

What’s next: Anti-abortion advocates are not expected to focus on trying to repeal Nevada’s abortion law. But they will seek laws affecting waiting periods, mandatory counseling or requiring parental notification or consent. Melissa Clement, executive director of Nevada Right to Life, said she believes there is strong support for parental involvement.

___

NEW HAMPSHIRE

Political control: New Hampshire has a Republican governor and the GOP controls the 424-member Legislature. All face reelection this fall.

Background: Any abortion restrictions New Hampshire had on the books before Roe v. Wade were not enforced after the landmark 1973 ruling, and they were repealed altogether in 1997. The state had no restrictions until January, when a ban on abortion after 24 weeks of pregnancy was enacted. In June, an exemption was added for cases in which the fetus has been diagnosed with “abnormalities incompatible with life.” Anticipating the Supreme Court action, Democrats this year tried unsuccessfully to enshrine abortion rights into state law and the state constitution. Gov. Chris Sununu calls himself pro-choice and says he is committed to upholding Roe v. Wade, but he also has boasted “I’ve done more on the pro-life issue than anyone.”

Effect of Supreme Court ruling: If the U.S. Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade, nothing will change immediately in New Hampshire. The Legislature won’t return until fall, when there will be a one-day session to take up vetoed bills, and it would take a two-thirds majority vote to introduce new legislation then.

What’s next: The majority leader of the New Hampshire House has said the public should not expect Republicans in the Legislature to further tighten state abortion laws. But anti-abortion lawmakers who have filed bills in the past are expected to try again.

___

NEW JERSEY

Political control: Democrats control both houses of the state Legislature and the governorship. Gov. Phil Murphy started his second consecutive term this year.

Background: To pre-empt a possible Supreme Court ruling striking down Roe v. Wade, Murphy ran for reelection on the promise that he would sign legislation to enshrine abortion rights into state law, and he fulfilled that promise in January. The measure also guaranteed the right to contraception and the right to carry a pregnancy to term. It stopped short of requiring insurance coverage for abortions, something advocates had sought. Instead, it authorizes the state Banking and Insurance Department to study the issue and possibly adopt regulations if a need is discovered. Under Murphy’s predecessor, Republican Chris Christie, state funds to women’s clinics, including Planned Parenthood, were slashed. Murphy restored those and has been a strong supporter of abortion rights. New Jersey doesn’t have any significant restrictions on abortion, such as parental consent or a mandatory waiting period.

Effect of Supreme Court ruling: Officials, including the governor, have said the end of Roe would not lead to any rollback of abortion services in the state. “Instead of hoping for the best, we prepared ourselves for the worst,” Murphy said in May, addressing reports of a leaked draft of a Supreme Court ruling

What’s next: Murphy has proposed a host of new abortion-related measures, but the Legislature has not taken them up yet. One aims to let a wider range of medical providers perform the most common type of abortion. Another would create a fund so advanced practice registered nurses, physician’s assistants and certified nurse midwives can provide abortion services. The source and amount of funding wasn’t defined. Another proposed measure would mandate that insurance providers cover abortions without cost-sharing or out-of-pocket expenses.

___

NEW MEXICO

Political control: The Democrats who control the New Mexico Legislature support access to abortion, as does the state’s Democratic governor. Several conservative Democratic state senators who voted against the repeal of the abortion ban in 2019 were ousted from office in 2020 by more socially progressive primary challengers.

Background: Abortion has been legal in New Mexico since the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1973 ruling in Roe v. Wade. In 2021, state lawmakers repealed a dormant 1969 statute that outlawed most abortion procedures as felonies, thus ensuring access to abortion if the federal court rolls back guarantees. Albuquerque is home to one of only a few independent clinics in the country that perform abortions in the third trimester without conditions. An abortion clinic in Santa Teresa, New Mexico, is just a mile from the state line with Texas and caters to patients from El Paso, western Texas and Arizona.

Effect of Supreme Court ruling: There will be no immediate change in New Mexico if the high court overturns Roe v. Wade. It is unclear if Democratic lawmakers will pursue additional guarantees to abortion access when the Legislature meets again in January. Possible avenues of legislative reform include enshrining abortion rights in the state constitution, which requires approval by statewide referendum. Abortion rights activists say the state’s equal rights amendment could be harnessed to guide more public funding for abortion-related programs.

What’s next: The state can expect to continue to see a steady influx of people seeking abortions from neighboring states with more restrictive abortion laws. It already hosts patients from Texas and Oklahoma where among the strictest abortion bans in the country were introduced this year.

___

NEW YORK

Political control: The Democrats who control the New York Legislature support access to abortion, as does the state’s Democratic governor.

Background: Abortion has been legal in New York state since a 1970 law was passed by the Republican-controlled Legislature and signed by Republican Gov. Nelson A. Rockefeller. The law allows abortions within the first 24 weeks of pregnancy or to preserve the mother’s life. The 2019 Reproductive Health Act removed abortion from the state’s criminal code, codified Roe v. Wade and allowed abortions after 24 weeks if a fetus isn’t viable or to protect the mother’s life or health. Lawmakers have passed laws extending legal protections for people seeking and providing abortions in New York.

Effect of Supreme Court ruling: Roe V. Wade protections are enshrined in state law. New York is planning to give abortion providers $35 million this year to expand services and boost security in anticipation of an influx of out-of-state people seeking abortions once any ruling comes down. It’s unclear how many more people from neighboring states could travel to New York to receive abortion care. New York had 252 facilities providing abortions as of 2017, according to the Guttmacher Institute, a research organization that supports abortion rights.

What’s next: Planned Parenthood and civil liberty groups are urging lawmakers to start the process of passing a constitutional amendment protecting access to abortion care in case a future Legislature repeals the state law.

___

NORTH CAROLINA

Political control: Republicans hold majorities in the state House and Senate, but the party lacks the margins to defeat a veto by Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper, a strong abortion-rights supporter. Since 2017, Cooper has vetoed a “born-alive” abortion measure and a bill prohibiting abortion based on race or a Down syndrome diagnosis. He can’t seek reelection in 2024 due to term limits.

Background: A 1973 North Carolina law that banned most abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy is currently unenforceable after federal judges struck it down as unconstitutional in 2019 and 2021. Instead, abortions can be performed until fetal viability. A state law approved in 2015 provides for post-viability abortions only in a “medical emergency,” which means the woman would die or face a “serious risk” of substantial and irreversible physical impairment without the procedure.

Effect of Supreme Court ruling: If the U.S. Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade, the 20-week ban could be restored. Legal experts say formal action would have to be taken to dismiss the earlier court rulings striking it down. State Attorney General Josh Stein is a Democrat and abortion rights supporter. Republican lawmakers could try to force action themselves.

What’s next: Republican General Assembly leaders have low expectations of additional abortion restrictions coming during the soon-to-end legislative session, meaning a likely intensification of electoral efforts to gain the five additional seats the GOP needs to reach veto-proof margins come 2023. Cooper and other Democrats already are making abortion rights a key campaign pitch. Abortion politics are also expected to figure in two state Supreme Court seat elections in November. Republicans would gain a majority on the court if they win at least one of them.

___

NORTH DAKOTA

Political control: North Dakota has a legislature dominated by Republicans who want to ban abortion, and the GOP governor wants to see Roe v. Wade wiped off the books in favor of state’s rights.

Background: The state has passed some of the nation’s strictest abortion laws, including one that would have banned abortions once a fetal heartbeat can be detected, which can happen before a woman knows she is pregnant. The law never took effect because the state’s lone abortion clinic successfully challenged it in court. One failed Republican proposal would have charged abortion providers with murder with a maximum sentence of life in prison.

Effect of Supreme Court ruling: If the U.S. Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade, North Dakota has a trigger law that would shut down the state’s sole abortion clinic in Fargo after 30 days. That 2007 state law makes it a felony to perform an abortion unless necessary to prevent the pregnant woman’s death or in cases of rape or incest. Violators could be punished with a five-year prison sentence and a $10,000 fine.

What’s next: The owner and operator of the Red River Women’s Clinic in Fargo said she would explore all legal options to ensure abortion services are available in North Dakota. Should that fail, clinic leader Tammi Kromenaker plans to move across the river to Moorhead, Minnesota, where abortion has not been outlawed. Planned Parenthood says it can provide abortions in Moorhead until Kromenaker gets up and running.

___

OHIO

Political control: The Ohio Legislature is controlled by Republicans who support restricting or banning abortions, and the Republican governor backs those efforts. He is up for reelection this year against a former mayor who supports abortion rights.

Background: Under current law, Ohio does not ban most abortions until the 22nd week of pregnancy; after that they’re allowed only to save a patient’s life or when their health is seriously compromised. But the state imposes a host of other restrictions, including parental consent for minors, a required ultrasound, and in-person counseling followed by a 24-hour waiting period. Abortions are prohibited for the reason of a fetal Down syndrome diagnosis. Ohio also limits the public funding of abortions to cases of rape, incest or endangerment of the patient’s life. It limits public employees’ abortion-related insurance coverage and coverage through health plans offered in the Affordable Care Act health exchange to those same scenarios. Clinics providing abortions must comply with a host of regulations.

Effect of Supreme Court ruling: If the Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade, nothing will change immediately in Ohio. Two trigger bills are on hold in the Legislature, but a key legislative leader has said he anticipates needing to write new legislation after the decision is reversed that more carefully reflects the actual ruling. That all but certainly would not happen until lawmakers return to the capital after the November election. Quicker action could take place in the courts, where several Ohio laws restricting abortions have been temporarily blocked. That includes a ban on most abortions at the first detectable fetal heartbeat, as early as six weeks into pregnancy, which is likely to be unblocked and become effective if Roe is reversed.

What’s next: It is not clear what will happen next in Ohio. Activists are considering how to help Ohioans get abortions elsewhere. They may also mount a statewide ballot initiative that would embed the right to an abortion in the state constitution, though that could not happen before next year. Abortion opponents are weighing strategies for imposing a statewide abortion ban if Roe is overturned.

___

OKLAHOMA

Political control: Republicans in Oklahoma have a supermajority in both chambers of the Legislature and a Republican governor up for reelection this year who has vowed to sign “every pro-life legislation that came across my desk.”

Background: Abortion services were halted in Oklahoma in May after Gov. Kevin Stitt signed a bill that prohibits all abortions with few exceptions. The ban is enforced by civil lawsuits rather than criminal prosecution. Republican lawmakers have been pushing to restrict abortion in the state for decades, passing 81 different restrictions since Roe v. Wade was decided in 1973, according to the Guttmacher Institute.

Effect of Supreme Court ruling: A ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court would have little practical effect given that abortions are no longer being provided in Oklahoma. However, because several Oklahoma abortion laws still are facing legal challenges in lower courts, it’s possible that the abortion bans in place could be temporarily lifted. Oklahoma also has a “trigger law” that would outlaw abortion immediately if Roe or Planned Parenthood v. Casey were overturned.

What’s next: Given the fierce opposition to abortion from the governor and Legislature, Oklahoma will continue to prohibit the practice if states are given the option to do so. Meanwhile, abortion providers who had been operating in the state are taking steps to help patients seek abortions out of state, including coordinating funding for these women and developing a referral network of therapists to help address complications before or after a woman receives an abortion.

___

OREGON

Political control: The Democrats who control the Oregon Legislature support access to abortion, as does the state’s Democratic governor.

Background: The Oregon Legislature passed a bill legalizing abortion in 1969. In 2017, Gov. Kate Brown signed into law a bill expanding health care coverage for reproductive services, including abortions, to thousands of Oregonians, regardless of income, citizenship status or gender identity. Oregon does not have any major abortion restrictions and it is legal at all stages of pregnancy.

Effect of Supreme Court ruling: The Guttmacher Institute has estimated that Oregon would experience a 234% increase in women coming from out of state, especially from Idaho, if the high court overturns Roe v. Wade. In March, Oregon lawmakers approved $15 million to expand abortion availability and pay for abortions and support services such as travel and lodgings for residents and out-of-state patients.

What’s next: Brown said after the draft Supreme Court decision was leaked that access to abortion is a fundamental right and that she will fight to ensure access to abortion continues to be protected by state law in Oregon. Democratic state lawmakers recently formed the Reproductive Health and Access to Care Work Group of providers, clinics, community organizations and legislators that will make recommendations for the 2023 legislative session and beyond. Recommendations may include proposals to protect, strengthen, and expand equitable access to all forms of reproductive care.

___

PENNSYLVANIA

Political control: Republicans who control the Pennsylvania Legislature are hostile to abortion rights, but the state’s Democratic governor is a strong supporter and has vetoed three GOP-penned bills in five years that would have added restrictions beyond the state’s 24-week limit. The race for governor this year could tilt that balance.

Background: Abortion is legal in Pennsylvania under decades of state law, including a 1989 law that was challenged all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. That produced the landmark Planned Parenthood v. Casey ruling that affirmed the high court’s 1973 decision in Roe v. Wade that legalized abortion nationwide, but also allowed states to put certain limits on abortion access.

Effect of Supreme Court ruling: Gov. Tom Wolf has vowed to protect access to abortion for the remainder of his time in office, through January. Running to replace him is the state’s Democratic attorney general, Josh Shapiro, who supports abortion rights, and Republican state Sen. Doug Mastriano, who has said he supports banning abortion altogether, with no exceptions. The Legislature is expected to remain in Republican hands next year.

What’s next: Legislation to outlaw abortion after the detection of a fetal heartbeat — which can happen at six weeks, before many women even know they are pregnant — has passed a House committee and is awaiting a floor vote. The state Supreme Court is considering a lawsuit filed by Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers aiming to overturn a 1982 law that bans the use of state dollars for abortion, except in cases of rape, incest or to save the life of the mother. In response, Republican lawmakers are advancing a proposed amendment that would declare there is no constitutional right to an abortion in Pennsylvania or to public funding for an abortion.

___

RHODE ISLAND

Political control: The Democrats who control Rhode Island’s General Assembly support access to abortion, as does the Democratic governor.

Background: Rhode Island’s governor signed legislation in 2019 to enshrine abortion protections in case the U.S. Supreme Court overturned its 1973 decision in Roe v. Wade. The law says the state will not restrict the right to an abortion prior to fetal viability or after if necessary to protect the health or life of the pregnant woman. It repealed older laws deemed unconstitutional by the courts. The Rhode Island Supreme Court upheld the 2019 law in May, just two days after the Supreme Court draft opinion was leaked suggesting that a majority of the justices were prepared to overturn Roe. Abortion opponents had argued the law violates the state constitution. In 2020, there were 2,611 abortions in Rhode Island, according to the state health department.

Effect of Supreme Court ruling: Rhode Island’s attorney general believes the 2019 Reproductive Privacy Act will continue to protect access to abortion if Roe is overturned. Planned Parenthood Votes! Rhode Island also said abortion will remain legal regardless of the decision because the right was codified in state law.

What’s next: It’s possible Rhode Island may need to act to protect abortion access for non-resident patients, but that cannot be debated in the legislature until next year’s legislative session. Lawmakers may consider requests for abortion coverage to be added to Rhode Island’s Medicaid program and insurance coverage for state employees.

___

SOUTH CAROLINA

Political control: South Carolina has a Republican governor, and its General Assembly is dominated by the GOP. However, the party doesn’t quite have the two-thirds majority in either chamber needed to overcome procedural hurdles or a veto if a Democrat wins the 2022 gubernatorial election.

Background: In 2021, South Carolina passed the “Fetal Heartbeat and Protection from Abortion Act” that requires doctors to use an ultrasound to try to detect a fetal heartbeat if they think a pregnant woman is at least eight weeks along. If they find a heartbeat, they can only perform an abortion if the woman’s life is in danger, or if the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest. The law is currently tied up in a federal lawsuit.

Effect of Supreme Court ruling: If the U.S. Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade, the 2021 law likely will go into effect. If the court’s ruling is less expansive, then the state’s current ban on abortion after the 20th week of pregnancy will remain while the 2021 law continues through the federal court system.

What’s next: The South Carolina General Assembly’s regular session ended in May, but Republican leaders agreed they could return for a special session to take up more restrictive abortion bills if the U.S. Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade. Some Republicans in the Legislature have opposed a complete abortion ban, especially without exceptions for victims of rape and incest.

___

SOUTH DAKOTA

Political control: Republicans hold super-majorities in both Statehouse chambers. Republican Gov. Kristi Noem is up for reelection this year and has been an ardent opponent of abortion rights.

Background: Under current law, South Dakota bans abortions after the 22nd week of pregnancy. The state has only one clinic that regularly provides abortions, a Planned Parenthood facility in Sioux Falls. The legislature has worked over the years to make it more difficult for women to get abortions, passing mandatory waiting periods and requiring them to review and sign paperwork that discourages them from ending their pregnancies.

Effect of Supreme Court ruling: If the U.S. Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade, South Dakota has a trigger law that would immediately ban abortions except if the life of the pregnant woman is at risk.

What’s next: Noem has said she plans to call a special session to craft laws for the new legal landscape if Roe v. Wade is overturned. She hasn’t commented on specific legislation, but lawmakers have floated proposals that would make it more difficult for women to seek an abortion out of state. However, South Dakota voters rejected outright bans in 2006 and 2008, and abortion rights advocates are preparing for a similar referendum on abortion access. An outright ban on abortions could eventually be challenged through a citizen-initiated ballot measure.

___

TENNESSEE

Political control: Tennessee has a Republican governor who is consistently vocal about his opposition to abortion. The GOP holds a supermajority in the state legislature and has steadily chipped away at abortion access.

Background: In 2020, Tennessee passed a law banning most abortions when the fetal heartbeat can be detected at about six weeks, before many women know they’re pregnant. The measure has never been enforced because it was promptly blocked by a federal court. Tennessee voters approved an amendment in 2014 declaring that the state’s constitution doesn’t protect or secure the right to abortion or require the funding of an abortion, and empowering state lawmakers to “enact, amend, or repeal statutes regarding abortion.” State law also doesn’t allow providers to dispense abortion medications through telemedicine consultations. There are six abortion providers in Tennessee.

Effect of Supreme Court ruling: If the U.S. Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade, a so-called trigger law will go into effect that bans all abortions in Tennessee except when necessary to prevent death or “serious risk of substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function.” Doctors could be charged with a felony for providing an abortion under this law, which would take effect 30 days after the Supreme Court’s decision is announced.

What’s next: It’s unclear if the trigger law conflicts with the 2020 law banning most abortions at about six weeks. The state’s attorney general, a Republican, has not publicly weighed in. Meanwhile, Republicans are expected to continue to have supermajority control after this year’s midterm elections. Reproductive rights activists say they will direct patients seeking abortion to clinics in Illinois if Roe v. Wade is overturned, or to Florida, which would ban abortions at 15 weeks. North Carolina and Virginia could also be options for women in eastern Tennessee.

___

TEXAS

Political control: The GOP has commanding majorities in the Texas Legislature and has controlled every statewide office for nearly 30 years. Republican Gov. Greg Abbott is up for reelection in November and is favored to win a third term.

Background: Texas has given the nation a preview of the landscape of abortion access if Roe v. Wade is overturned. A new Texas law banning most abortions after about six weeks — before many women know they are pregnant — took effect in September and makes no exceptions in cases of rape or incest. Because of how Republicans wrote the law, which is enforceable only through lawsuits filed by private citizens against doctors or anyone who helps a woman obtain an abortion, Texas has essentially outmaneuvered decades of Supreme Court precedent governing a women’s constitutional right to an abortion. State data shows the number of abortions performed in Texas’ roughly two dozen clinics fell by half in the five months after the law came into effect compared to the same period a year earlier.

Effect of the Supreme Court ruling: Texas had more than 40 abortion clinics in 2012 before a decade of Republicans chipping away at abortion access began forcing providers to close. If Roe v. Wade is overturned, Texas would ban virtually all abortions 30 days after the ruling. Abortions would only be allowed when the patient’s life is in danger or if they are at risk of “substantial impairment of a major bodily function.”

What’s next: Many Texas women have already traveled out of state for abortions since the law took effect, but they would likely have to travel much farther if Roe v. Wade is overturned as more states outlaw abortion. Some Republican lawmakers also want to punish companies that help their Texas-based employees get abortions elsewhere, although it’s unclear how much support that idea will have when the Legislature returns in 2023.

___

UTAH

Political control: Utah is deeply conservative and the Legislature is controlled by a Republican supermajority.

Background: The state has been restricting abortion for years, including a ban after 18 weeks passed in 2019 that’s now blocked in court. The following year, lawmakers passed a “trigger law” that would outlaw nearly all abortions if Roe v. Wade was overturned.

Effect of Supreme Court ruling: Utah has a law designed to go into effect if Roe v. Wade is overturned that would ban nearly all abortions. It would be enforceable after the legislative general counsel certifies the ruling to lawmakers. It does have narrow exceptions for rape and incest if those crimes are reported to law enforcement, and for serious risk to the life or health of the mother, as well as confirmed lethal birth defects. If the U.S. Supreme Court decides to uphold the Mississippi law banning abortions after 15 weeks, Utah’s 18-week ban could go into effect.

What’s next: If the Supreme Court tosses out Roe, Utah law makes performing an abortion a felony punishable by up to 15 years in prison and a $10,000 fine. While it’s aimed primarily at providers, lawmakers have acknowledged that a woman who self-administers an abortion, including through medication, could potentially face charges.

___

VERMONT

Political control: The Vermont Legislature is controlled by Democrats, but Republican Gov. Phil Scott is a firm supporter of abortion rights.

Background: Vermont has a 2019 law guaranteeing the right to an abortion and voters will consider a proposal in November to amend the state constitution to protect abortion rights. Also in 2019, the Vermont Legislature began the process of amending the constitution to protect abortion rights, known as the Reproductive Liberty Amendment or Proposition 5. Vermont’s proposed amendment does not contain the word “abortion.” Proponents say that’s because it’s not meant to authorize only abortion but also would guarantee other reproductive rights such as the right to get pregnant or access birth control. Opponents say vague wording could have unintended consequences that could play out for years. Lawmakers approved the proposed amendment in February, leading the way for a statewide vote.

Effect of Supreme Court ruling: If the U.S. Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade, nothing will change immediately in Vermont.

What’s next: Vermont voters will cast ballots in November to decide if the state will amend its constitution to protect abortion rights.

___

VIRGINIA

Political control: Virginia has a Republican governor who says he would support new state-level restrictions on abortion and a divided General Assembly. Republicans control the state House and Democrats lead the state Senate.

Background: In recent years, when Democrats were in full control of state government, lawmakers rolled back abortion restrictions. They ended strict building code requirements on facilities where abortions are performed and did away with requirements that a patient seeking an abortion undergo a 24-hour waiting period and ultrasound. Advocates said the changes would make Virginia a haven for abortion access in the South. Republican victories in the November elections shook up the state’s political landscape, but Senate Democrats defeated several measures that would have limited abortion access during the 2022 legislative session.

Effect of Supreme Court ruling: There will be no immediate change to abortion laws in Virginia if Roe v. Wade is overturned. Some abortion providers expect to see an uptick in patients seeking care in Virginia from neighboring states with “trigger laws” that would ban abortion.

What’s next: The future of abortion access is Virginia is murky. Gov. Glenn Youngkin has indicated he would support an abortion ban around 20 weeks of a pregnancy, though he generally supports exceptions in cases of rape, incest or to save a mother’s life. He has not specified how he would proceed if Roe v. Wade is overturned. Senate Democrats say they intend to continue blocking attempts to roll back abortion access, though they control the chamber by the narrowest possible margin and have one caucus member who personally opposes abortion and says he is open to new restrictions. Republicans also have a narrow hold on the House, with several moderate members. Every seat in the General Assembly will be on the ballot in 2023.

___

WASHINGTON

Political control: The Democrats who control the Washington Legislature support access to abortion, as does the state’s Democratic governor.

Background: Abortion has been legal in Washington state since a 1970 statewide ballot referendum. Another ballot measure approved by voters in 1991 declared a woman’s right to choose physician-performed abortion prior to fetal viability and further expanded and protected access to abortion in the state if Roe v. Wade was overturned. And in 2018, the Legislature passed a measure that would require Washington insurers offering maternity care to also cover elective abortions and contraception. Earlier this year, Gov. Jay Inslee signed a measure that grants specific statutory authorization for physician assistants, advanced registered nurse practitioners and other providers acting within their scope of practice to perform abortions. Supporters say the move is designed to help meet the demand from the potential influx of out-of-state patients. That same measure also prohibits legal action by Washington state against people seeking an abortion and those who aid them.

Effect of Supreme Court ruling: The state “will use every available tool to protect and preserve Washingtonians’ fundamental right to choose, and protect the rights of anyone who wants to come here to access reproductive health care,” said Attorney General Bob Ferguson, a Democrat. Data from the Washington state Department of Health from 2020 shows that of the 16,909 abortions performed in the state that year, 852 involved non-residents. The majority of those people came from neighboring states such as Idaho and Oregon.

What’s next: It’s impossible to predict how many more non-resident patients will potentially seek care in Washington if Roe v. Wade is overturned, but the increase will likely be in the thousands, said Jennifer Allen, CEO of Planned Parenthood Alliance Advocates.The state has more than 30 in-person abortion clinics, though the vast majority are in western Washington along the Interstate 5 corridor.

___

WEST VIRGINIA

Political control: West Virginia has a legislature controlled by Republicans who want to ban or restrict access to abortions. Gov. Jim Justice, a Republican, opposes abortion access and has signed two anti-abortion laws since taking office in 2017.

Background: West Virginia currently bans abortion after the 20th week of pregnancy unless a patient’s life is in danger, or they face “substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function.” Patients seeking abortions must wait 24 hours after undergoing legislatively mandated counseling designed to discourage abortions. A minor who wants an abortion must obtain parental permission. The use of telemedicine to administer a medication abortion is outlawed. The state also bars patients from getting abortions because they believe their child will be born with a disability. The House of Delegates this year passed a 15-week abortion ban like the Mississippi law under review by the U.S. Supreme Court, but it died in the Senate.

Effect of Supreme Court ruling: It’s unclear what the effect the overturning of Roe v. Wade would have on abortion access in West Virginia. The state has had a law banning abortion on the books since 1848; Under that law, providers who perform abortions can face felony charges and three to 10 years in prison, unless the abortion is conducted to save a patient’s life. In 2018, West Virginia voters approved a constitutional amendment to declare patients do not have the right to abortion and banning state funding for abortions.

What’s next: West Virginia lawmakers could introduce new legislation restricting abortion access when they return to the Capitol in January, but they could return sooner if called into a special session. West Virginia only has one clinic that performs abortions. Women’s Health Center of West Virginia Executive Director Katie Quinonez said if abortion access is outlawed, the clinic will continue to provide reproductive care, such as birth control and STI diagnosis and treatment. She said the clinic will help women travel to other states for abortions through its abortion fund.

___

WISCONSIN

Political control: Wisconsin has a legislature controlled by Republicans who want to ban or restrict access to abortions but a Democratic governor who supports access and is up for reelection this year.

Background: Wisconsin allows most abortions until the 22nd week of pregnancy to save the health or life of the mother. A woman seeking an abortion must meet with a counselor and doctor before obtaining an abortion and wait at least 24 hours before having it done. Anyone under age 18 must have an adult relative over age 25 with them to obtain an abortion.

Effect of Supreme Court ruling: If the U.S. Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade, it is presumed that a state law passed in 1849 making an abortion a felony offense would go into effect. However, Wisconsin’s Democratic attorney general argues that the law is so old that it’s unenforceable. The language allows a woman to legally destroy her own fetus or embryo and grants immunity if an abortion is needed to save a woman’s life and is performed at a hospital. Another state law, passed in 1985, prohibits abortions performed after a fetus reaches viability — when it could survive outside the womb — conflicting with the 1849 ban.

What’s next: Republican lawmakers are expected to attempt to clarify the 1849 law to ensure there is a ban in place if Roe v. Wade is overturned, even as that issue is fought in the courts. However, lawmakers’ efforts would be stymied if Democratic Gov. Tony Evers wins reelection. Wisconsin’s Republican Assembly Speaker Robin Vos has said he supports an exception in cases of rape and that a ruling on Roe could force lawmakers to consider other related reproductive issues such as contraception. Other Republicans will push for more restrictive abortion laws.

___

WYOMING

Political control: Wyoming has one of the most Republican legislatures in the U.S. and a long tradition of libertarian-type if not always social or religious conservatism. That may be changing. In March, Republican Gov. Mark Gordon signed into law a bill that would ban abortion in nearly all instances should the Supreme Court overturn Roe v. Wade.

Background: Current Wyoming law allows abortions up to when a fetus might be able to survive on its own outside its mother’s body. The law does not specify when that happens, but it is generally considered to be at around 23 weeks into pregnancy. Wyoming currently doesn’t allow abortions after then except to protect the mother from substantial risk to her life or health. Wyoming Republicans have traditionally taken a hands-off approach to abortion but have proven more willing to limit the practice lately. The number of Democrats in the Legislature has dwindled from 26 in 2010 to just nine out of 90 total seats now. A 2021 law requires physicians to provide lifesaving care to any aborted fetus born alive.

Effect of Supreme Court ruling: The new state law that would ban abortion if Roe were overturned only provides exceptions in cases of rape or incest or to protect the mother’s life or health, not including psychological conditions. Though Wyoming has no abortion clinics, abortions still occur. Ninety-eight took place in Wyoming in 2021, according to state officials.

What’s next: A planned women’s health clinic in Casper that would be the only one offering abortions in the state was on track to open in mid-June but an arson fire May 25 delayed those plans by around six months. Police continue to look for a suspect in the arson investigation, and have offered a $5,000 reward for information leading to an arrest.

___

Associated Press statehouse reporters from across the U.S. contributed.

source

By Andrew Chung and Lawrence Hurley

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday declared for the first time that the U.S. Constitution protects an individual’s right to carry a handgun in public for self-defense, handing a landmark victory to gun rights advocates in a nation deeply divided over how to address firearms violence.

The 6-3 ruling, with the court’s conservative justices in the majority and liberal justices in dissent, struck down New York state’s limits on carrying concealed handguns outside the home. The court found that the law, enacted in 1913, violated a person’s right to “keep and bear arms” under the U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment.

The ruling, authored by Justice Clarence Thomas, declared that the Constitution protects “an individual’s right to carry a handgun for self-defense outside the home.”

Thomas added: “We know of no other constitutional right that an individual may exercise only after demonstrating to government officers some special need.”

The ruling could undermine similar restrictions in other states and imperil other types of state and local firearms restrictions nationwide.

Gun rights, held dear by many Americans and promised by the country’s 18th century founders, are a contentious issue in a nation with high levels of firearms violence including numerous mass shootings. President Joe Biden, who has called gun violence a national embarrassment, condemned the decision.

“This ruling contradicts both common sense and the Constitution, and should deeply trouble us all,” Biden said. “In the wake of the horrific attacks in Buffalo and Uvalde, as well as the daily acts of gun violence that do not make national headlines, we must do more as a society – not less – to protect our fellow Americans.”

The United States has experienced hundreds of deaths from dozens of mass shootings in recent years. Just in recent weeks, 19 children and two teachers were killed on May 24 at an elementary school in Uvalde, Texas, and 10 people were slain on May 14 at a grocery store in Buffalo, New York.

The New York restriction is unconstitutional because it “prevents law-abiding citizens with ordinary self-defense needs from exercising their right to keep and bear arms,” Thomas added.

Liberal Justice Stephen Breyer wrote in dissent that the court had expanded gun rights without wrestling with the “nature or severity” of firearms violence in a country where there are more guns per person than any other nation.

“I fear that the court’s interpretation ignores these significant dangers and leaves states without the ability to address them,” Breyer wrote.

The justices overturned a lower court ruling throwing out a challenge to the law by two gun owners and the New York affiliate of the National Rifle Association (NRA), an influential gun rights group closely aligned with Republicans.

The decision represents the court’s most important statement on gun rights in more than a decade. The court in 2008 recognized for the first time an individual’s right to keep guns at home for self-defense in a case from the District of Columbia, and in 2010 applied that right to the states.

The new ruling underscored how the 6-3 conservative majority on the court is sympathetic to an expansive reading of Second Amendment rights.

‘ABSOLUTELY SHOCKING’

New York Governor Kathy Hochul, a Democrat, called the ruling “absolutely shocking.” New York City Mayor Eric Adams said officials will review licensing policies and how sensitive locations are defined, adding that “we cannot allow New York to become the Wild West.”

Under the New York law’s “proper cause” requirement, applicants seeking an unrestricted concealed carry permits must convince a state firearms licensing officer of an actual, rather than speculative, need for self-defense. Officials could also grant licenses restricted to certain activities, such as hunting or target practice.

The ruling said that New York’s concealed firearm regime is at odds with the text and history of the Second Amendment and how gun rights were protected throughout U.S. history.

Firearms safety groups and gun control activists feared the ruling could undermine gun measures such as “red flag” laws targeting the firearms of people deemed dangerous by the courts, expanded criminal background checks for gun buyers or restrictions on selling untraceable “ghost” guns assembled from components purchased online. They also feared it could jeopardize bans on guns in sensitive places such as airports, courthouses, hospitals and schools.

The ruling will affect at least six states including New York, as well as the District of Columbia, that empower officials to decide whether people can carry concealed handguns in public even if they pass criteria such as criminal background checks. Three other states, Connecticut, Delaware and Rhode Island, also give officials some discretion, according to the ruling.

The ruling acknowledged that states can prohibit guns in “sensitive places” and that such prohibitions can likely go beyond what was historically considered a sensitive place, such as courthouses and legislative buildings.

Thomas wrote that courts “can use analogies to those historical regulations” of sensitive places.

But Breyer asked: “So where does that leave the many locations in a modern city with no obvious 18th- or 19th-century analogue? What about subways, nightclubs, movie theaters, and sports stadiums? The court does not say.”

Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president of the NRA, called the ruling “a watershed win” that resulted from a decades-long fight led by his organization.

Conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh in a concurring opinion said states can still impose requirements on people seeking licenses to carry firearms including fingerprinting, background checks, mental health checks and firearms training classes.

In another concurring opinion, conservative Justice Samuel Alito wrote that the court has said “nothing about who may lawfully possess a firearm or the requirements that must be met to buy a gun. Nor does it decide anything about the kinds of weapons that people may possess.”

Alito disputed that gun regulations like the one in New York would deter mass shootings, mentioning the recent Buffalo massacre.

“The New York law at issue in this case obviously did not stop that perpetrator,” Alito wrote.

(Reporting by Andrew Chung and Lawrence Hurley; Additional reporting by Jonathan Allen; Editing by Will Dunham)

source

SANTA FE, New Mexico (AP) — A rural New Mexico county’s initial refusal to certify its primary election results sent ripples across the country last week, a symbol of how even the most elemental functions of democracy have become politicized pressure points amid the swirl of lies stemming from the 2020 presidential outcome.

As the Otero County Commission finally relented, one question persisted: Why New Mexico, a state that has not been a political battleground and where Joe Biden beat Donald Trump handily two years ago?

The seeds of the short-lived election crisis, which ended amid a showdown with the secretary of state and an order from the New Mexico Supreme Court, had been planted months before, when David Clements, a lawyer who has gained prominence in conservative circles, began raising conspiracy theories and false claims about the last presidential election that came to dominate political discussion in the heavily Republican county.

But it’s not just Otero County where local election administration is in the crosshairs of conspiracy theorists, and it’s not just Clements involved in the effort.

Across the country, supporters and allies of former President Donald Trump have been meeting with local officials — sowing doubts about the 2020 election, seeking access to voting equipment and pressing for changes that would upend election administration in their counties. The effort has led to security breaches of voting equipment and, in New Mexico, chaos surrounding what has historically been a routine task.

“You have seen a whole bunch of people — some sincere, some perhaps less sincere — who have rushed to fill the demand to provide evidence of the fraud that Trump created,” said David Levine, a former election official who is now a fellow with the Alliance for Securing Democracy.

There was no widespread fraud in the 2020 presidential election that could have changed the outcome.

Even before the Nov. 3, 2020, election, Trump was telling his supporters that fraud was the only way he could lose re-election, pointing mostly — and without evidence — to the expansion of mail-in voting during the pandemic.

In the months since, there has been no evidence to support the claims. They have been dismissed by dozens of judges, by Trump’s attorney general at the time, and by a coalition of federal and state election and cybersecurity officials who called the 2020 vote the “most secure” in U.S. history.

That hasn’t stopped the false claims from proliferating, driven by a group of Trump supporters who appear at many of the same events and engage with each other regularly.

Clements, a former assistant district attorney in southern New Mexico and former business professor at New Mexico State University, has traveled the country speaking with local government boards, at conservative conventions and to church groups. He was at the “cybersymposium” last year held by MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell, a key Trump ally who has sought to prove voting machines were somehow manipulated to favor Biden.

Clements’ popular social media feed on Telegram frequently weaves pronouncements about democracy with scripture and prayer. It also includes video chats with the like-minded.

In one video from March, Clements chatted with Jim Marchant, a Trump loyalist from Nevada who claims elections have long been rigged. Marchant recently won the Republican primary for secretary of state, Nevada’s top elections position. He has been a key organizer of a group of “America First” candidates this year who either deny the outcome of the 2020 presidential election or promote the idea that elections in the U.S. are corrupt.

In the video, Clements and Marchant discuss a “county commission strategy” that involves pressuring local officials to get rid of the “cheat” machines so that all ballots are not only cast by hand but also counted by hand. Election experts say hand-counting of ballots is not only less accurate but extremely labor-intensive, potentially delaying results by weeks if not months. They also say it’s unnecessary because voting equipment is tested before and after elections to ensure ballots are read and tallied correctly.

A day earlier, county officials in Nye County, Nevada, had voted to request that the county clerk not use ballot tabulators in the upcoming November election. The clerk is opposed to the move and has decided to retire after the primary. Marchant was among those urging commissioners to make the move.

“It was the first domino to fall to allow us to get back to fair and transparent elections here in the country,” Marchant told Clements. “And we’re going to do it with many more counties right here in Nevada, and hopefully this will encourage others in other states to do the same thing.”

Clements was excited about the development and promised to push counties to do the same in his home state of New Mexico, where he once sought the Republican nomination for U.S. Senate.

“Shouldn’t the commissioners care about whether I trust the system or not?” Clements told Marchant. “I love how you just cut through all the noise.”

This week, Clements is scheduled to appear at an event in Louisiana with Douglas Frank, another Lindell associate who has been traveling the country meeting with state and local officials. In May 2021, Frank met with members of the Ohio Secretary of State’s Office offering to scrutinize their voting procedures, boasting he’s been working with county officials in 22 states.

“You either come onto our team and we can audit it together and show that there was no malfeasance, or you can oppose us,” Frank told agency staff, according to an audio recording. The office did not accept the offer.

For months now, Clements has been pushing Republican-leaning counties in New Mexico to launch partisan reviews of the 2020 election, similar to the much-maligned effort in Arizona coordinated by Republicans in one chamber of the state’s legislature. In Otero County, which Trump won by a wide margin, Clements and his wife, Erin, have been conducting an informal and unpaid review of the county’s 2020 election procedures.

The result has been a series of hourslong presentations to the county commission about unproven vulnerabilities in vote-tallying machines and patterns in voter registration activity. The Clements, who list Las Cruces as their residence, did not respond to requests for an interview.

Earlier this month, when Otero County commissioners were considering whether to discontinue the use of ballot tabulators, the couple again made a presentation. It prompted a rebuttal from Otero County Clerk Robyn Holmes.

“There is a lot of things they have found, that they are saying, that are not true,” Holmes said.

Nonetheless, the commissioners voted to stop using the ballot tabulators before the November election.

Clements was among those urging Otero County commissioners against certification of the June 7 primary results, repeating conspiracy theories about voting equipment that trace back to the days immediately following the 2020 election. Holmes, the clerk, said the primary was conducted without problems.

Clements also went to Torrance County, another conservative stronghold in New Mexico, to urge commissioners to defy authorities and refuse to certify their primary results. During the meeting last Friday, the crowd hurled insults of “traitors” and “cowards” at commissioners before they voted — unanimously — to certify the results.

Election officials and experts have expressed concern that local certification boards in other states that are receptive to conspiracy theories surrounding voting machines might be inspired to follow Otero County’s example, wreaking havoc with election results.

Counties in Nevada have until Friday to sign off on the results of the state’s June 14 primary. Nye County commissioners, who want to stop using ballot tabulators, are scheduled to meet to consider certification on Friday. They have not said publicly what they plan to do.

___

Cassidy reported from Atlanta. Associated Press writers Ken Ritter in Las Vegas; Julie Carr Smyth in Columbus, Ohio; and Scott Sonner in Reno, Nevada, contributed to this report.

source

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The U.S. Senate is poised on Thursday for a vote to advance a bipartisan gun control bill that supporters hope will help curb the mass shootings that have rocked the country, in what could be Congress’s first new limits on guns in decades.

The 80-page Bipartisan Safer Communities Act would encourage states to keep guns out of the hands of those deemed to be dangerous and tighten background checks for would-be gun purchasers convicted of domestic violence or significant crimes as juveniles.

It does not include more sweeping gun control measure favored by Democrats including President Joe Biden such as a ban on assault-style rifles or high-capacity magazines. Biden renewed calls for action following a pair of high-profile shootings in Buffalo, New York, and Uvalde, Texas.

The legislation will need support from 60 of the Senate’s 100 lawmakers to overcome Thursday’s procedural hurdle. With the chamber split 50-50, it will need the support of at least 10 Republicans to advance. Democrats were optimistic after 14 Republicans supported an initial step forward on Tuesday.

“Sixty-four members came together … to move forward, an unmistakable sign of the broad support and momentum behind this bill,” Democratic Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said in a floor speech on Wednesday.

If Thursday’s vote succeeds, the bill would come up for a vote on passage that is expected no later than Friday.

Republicans who back the bill insist that it does not erode the rights of law-abiding gun owners, are among their most ardent constituents.

“It does not so much as touch the rights of the overwhelming majority of American gun owners, who are law-abiding citizens of sound mind,” said Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell, who backs the legislation.

But Republican supporters have faced criticism over the legislation, which is opposed by the National Rifle Association, the nation’s biggest gun lobby.

The bill provides funding to help states adopt “red flag” laws to keep firearms out of the hands of those deemed a danger to themselves or others. It would also fund alternative intervention measures in state where red flag laws are opposed and provide for enhanced school security.

It closes the “boyfriend loophole” by denying gun purchases to those convicted of abusing intimate partners in dating relationships, and allows states to add juvenile criminal and mental health records to national background check databases.

Senator John Cornyn, the lead Republican negotiator on the bill, was booed last week as he discussed its contents during a speech before a Republican Party convention in his home state of Texas.

Senator Richard Durbin, the chamber’s No. 2 Democrat, said the bill would provide $4.5 billion in funding to Justice Department, Department of Health and Human Services and the Department of Education. A Republican aide estimated the measure’s overall price tag at $15 billion.

 

(Reporting by David Morgan, additional reporting by Moira Warburton and Richard Cowan; Editing by Scott Malone and Alistair Bell)

source

By David Morgan

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -The U.S. Senate is poised on Thursday for a vote to advance a bipartisan gun control bill that supporters hope will help curb the mass shootings that have rocked the country, in what could be the first new federal gun legislation in decades.

The 80-page Bipartisan Safer Communities Act would encourage states to keep guns out of the hands of those deemed to be dangerous and tighten background checks for would-be gun purchasers convicted of domestic violence or significant crimes as juveniles.

It does not include more sweeping gun control measure favored by Democrats including President Joe Biden such as a ban on assault-style rifles or high-capacity magazines. Biden renewed calls for action following a pair of high-profile shootings in Buffalo, New York, and Uvalde, Texas.

The legislation will need support from 60 of the Senate’s 100 lawmakers in Thursday’s procedural vote, which is expected around midday. If the vote succeeds, lawmakers could vote on passage as early as Thursday afternoon but no later than Friday.

With the chamber split 50-50, it will need the support of at least 10 Republicans to advance. Democrats were optimistic after 14 Republicans supported an initial step forward on Tuesday.

Senator Chris Murphy, the lead Democratic negotiator on the bill, predicted that “close to 20 Republicans” would vote to move toward passage on Thursday, and described the legislation as a potential watershed for further action.

“Once Republicans start voting for gun safety bills, they will find out that there is enormous political benefit and there’s just not that much political downside,” Murphy told CNN. “I think you will see the opportunity for compromise in the future.”

But Republicans have tried to dissuade Democrats from making such predictions, saying the success of the current legislation would be unlikely to change their party’s attitude toward guns.

Republicans who back the bill insist that it does not erode the rights of law-abiding gun owners, are among their most ardent constituents.

“It does not so much as touch the rights of the overwhelming majority of American gun owners, who are law-abiding citizens of sound mind,” said Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell, who backs the legislation.

But Republican supporters have faced criticism over the legislation, which is opposed by the National Rifle Association, the nation’s biggest gun lobby.

The bill provides funding to help states adopt “red flag” laws to keep firearms out of the hands of those deemed a danger to themselves or others. It would also fund alternative intervention measures in state where red flag laws are opposed and provide for enhanced school security.

It closes the “boyfriend loophole” by denying gun purchases to those convicted of abusing intimate partners in dating relationships, and allows states to add juvenile criminal and mental health records to national background check databases.

Senator John Cornyn, the lead Republican negotiator on the bill, was booed last week as he discussed its contents during a speech before a Republican Party convention in his home state of Texas.

Senator Richard Durbin, the chamber’s No. 2 Democrat, said the bill would provide $4.5 billion in funding to the Justice Department, the Department of Health and Human Services, and the Department of Education. A Republican aide estimated the measure’s overall price tag at $13.3 billion, saying the cost was fully offset by funds from elsewhere in the federal budget.

(Reporting by David Morgan, additional reporting by Katharine Jackson, Moira Warburton and Richard Cowan; Editing by Scott Malone, Alistair Bell and Jonathan Oatis)

source

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court gave Republican legislative leaders in North Carolina a win Thursday in an ongoing fight over the state’s latest photo identification voting law.

The 8-1 decision doesn’t end the more than three-year dispute over the voter ID law, which is not currently in effect and has been challenged in both state and federal court. The decision just means that Republican legislative leaders can intervene in the federal lawsuit to defend the law. A lower court had ruled the lawmakers’ interests were already being adequately represented by the state’s attorney general, Democrat Josh Stein.

Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote that: “Through the General Assembly, the people of North Carolina have authorized the leaders of their legislature to defend duly enacted state statutes against constitutional challenge. Ordinarily, a federal court must respect that kind of sovereign choice, not assemble presumptions against it.”

Justice Sonia Sotomayor dissented.

North Carolina voters amended the state constitution in 2018 to include a voter ID mandate. Lawmakers then passed the law at issue in the case to implement the change. The law requires voters to show a photo ID to vote — whether it’s a driver’s license, a passport or certain student and local government identifications.

North Carolina Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper vetoed the measure, but lawmakers overrode his veto to pass the law. The state NAACP and several local chapters immediately sued in federal court to halt enforcement of the law, arguing that it discriminates against Black and Latino voters in violation of the Constitution and the federal Voting Rights Act.

House Speaker Tim Moore and Senate leader Phil Berger, both Republican, wanted to intervene in the federal court case to defend the law alongside lawyers for the state, saying Stein wouldn’t adequately fight for the law. But a federal judge said no, that lawmakers’ interests were being adequately defended by lawyers in Stein’s agency. A three-judge federal appeals court panel ruled for the lawmakers before the full federal appeals court reversed the decision, ruling 9-6 that lawmakers should not be allowed to intervene.

As for the law itself, it was initially blocked by the judge in the case, who said it was “impermissibly motivated, at least in part, by discriminatory intent.” But the three-judge appeals panel reversed her decision and sent it back to U.S. District Court, where a trial has yet to start.

In litigation in state court, judges struck down the law as tainted by racial bias. North Carolina’s Supreme Court has said it will take up the case, but no date has been set for oral arguments.

Separately, North Carolina’s highest court has also already heard arguments in a lawsuit over whether the constitutional amendment mandating voter ID should have been allowed on the November 2018 ballot in the first place. A state judge had ruled that the GOP-controlled legislature lacked authority to put the amendment and one other on the ballot because lawmakers had been elected from racially biased districts two years earlier. That decision was later overturned on appeal before going to the state’s highest court.

___

Associated Press reporter Gary D. Robertson contributed to this report from Raleigh, N.C.

source

By Jarrett Renshaw and Nandita Bose

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – U.S. President Joe Biden on Wednesday called on Congress to pass a three-month suspension of the federal gasoline tax to help combat record pump prices, but opposition from lawmakers within his own party suggests the request is unlikely to be met.

In announcing his support for the suspension, Biden also echoed some of the concerns about its effectiveness, but said American families paying much more for gasoline, caused in part by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, deserve some financial relief.

“I fully understand that a gas tax holiday alone is not going to fix the problem but it will provide families some immediate relief, just a little bit of breathing room, as we continue working on bringing down prices for the long haul,” Biden said.

The president also urged states to temporarily suspend state fuel taxes, which are often higher than federal rates. He is asking major oil companies to suggest ideas on how to bring back idled refining capacity when they meet with Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm on Thursday.

Biden and his advisers have been discussing the issue for months amid increasing pressure to act as record-high gas prices weigh down the president’s opinion poll ratings and cast doubt on Democrats’ chances of retaining congressional power in November’s elections.

A suspension of the 18.4 cents per gallon federal gasoline tax and 24.4 cent diesel tax would require congressional approval, likely making Biden’s pitch largely symbolic.

LAWMAKERS OPPOSED

Lawmakers in both parties have expressed resistance to suspending the tax, with some Democrats, including House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi, worried the move could have limited effect on prices if oil companies and retailers pocket much of the savings.

Peter DeFazio, a Democrat and the chair of the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, said on Wednesday a federal gas tax holiday would provide “miniscule relief” while blowing a budget hole in a Highway Trust Fund needed to fix crumbling bridges and build a modern infrastructure system.”

Biden asked Congress to suspend the fuel tax through September, a move that will cost the Highway Trust Fund roughly $10 billion in forgone revenue but could be made up from other areas of a budget that is seeing revenue grow and deficits shrink as the United States emerges from the COVID-19 pandemic.

Some states, such as New York and Connecticut, have already paused state fuel taxes, while others have floated ideas such as consumer rebates and direct relief.

Refiners are struggling to meet global demand for diesel and gasoline, exacerbating high prices and aggravating shortages.

“Pausing the federal gas tax will certainly provide near-term relief for U.S. drivers, but it won’t solve the root of the issue – the imbalance in supply and demand for petroleum products,” a spokesperson for the American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers industry group said.

Longer-term policies are still needed to boost U.S. energy production, it said.

U.S. pump prices are averaging near $5 a gallon as soaring demand for motor fuels coincides with the loss of about 1 million barrels per day of processing capacity. In the last three years many plants were closed when fuel demand cratered at the height of the pandemic.

Biden said he understands the politics around Republicans seizing on high gas prices ahead of the elections, but he asked his rivals whether they instead would’ve chosen not to support Ukraine.

“So for all those Republicans in Congress criticizing me today for high gas prices in America: Are you now saying we were wrong to support Ukraine? Are you saying we were wrong to stand up to Putin? Are you saying that we would rather have lower gas prices in America and Putin’s iron fist in Europe? I don’t believe that,” Biden said.

(Reporting by Jarrett Renshaw; additional reporting by Katharine Jackson; Editing by Susan Heavey, Nick Zieminski and Grant McCool)

source

WASHINGTON (AP) — The House committee investigating the Capitol insurrection heard from election workers and state officials on Tuesday as they described President Donald Trump’s pressure to overturn his 2020 election defeat. On Thursday, the nine-member panel will hear from former Justice Department officials who refused Trump’s entreaties to declare the election “corrupt.”

The committee’s fourth and fifth hearings, held this week, are part of an effort to show how Trump’s pressure eventually shifted to Congress, where his false declarations of widespread election fraud led directly to the riot on Jan. 6, 2021, when hundreds of his supporters violently breached the Capitol and interrupted the certification of President Joe Biden’s election victory.

In July, the panel will hold at least two more hearings that are expected to focus on the far-right domestic extremists who attacked the Capitol and what Trump was doing inside the White House as the violence unfolded.

TRUMP’S PRESSURE ON STATES

State officials testified at Tuesday’s hearing about the extraordinary pressure they faced from Trump after the election to try and invalidate Biden’s win.

Arizona’s House speaker, Rusty Bowers, testified about phone calls from Trump and his allies asking him to decertify Arizona’s legitimate electors and replace them. Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger told of the now-infamous phone call when Trump asked officials there to “find 11,780” votes.

The officials did not give in.

“You are asking me to do something against my oath, and I will not break my oath,” Bowers said he told Trump and his allies. He recalled lawyer John Eastman, a chief architect of Trump’s plan to create slates of fake electors, telling him to “just do it and let the courts sort it out.”

Bowers said he repeatedly asked Trump’s team for evidence of the widespread fraud they were claiming, but they never provided it.

Raffensperger said his team investigated all of Trump’s claims and went down down every “rabbit hole,” finding nothing. But Trump wouldn’t accept it.

TRUMP’S PRESSURE ON PENCE

The committee’s third hearing last week featured testimony from former aides to Vice President Mike Pence. The aides described the then-president’s efforts to persuade Pence to veer from his ceremonial role and object as Congress counted the electoral votes on Jan. 6.

Pence concluded from the start, his former counsel Greg Jacob told the committee, that “there is no justifiable basis to conclude that the vice president has that kind of authority.”

Trump did not let up, even after his supporters were breaking into the Capitol and Pence was hiding in an undisclosed location – at one point just 40 feet from the rioters, the committee said. Trump sent a tweet that afternoon saying that Pence did not have the “courage” to do what was necessary.

The committee played video of the rioters outside the Capitol calling for Pence’s death.

“Donald Trump turned the mob on him,” said Mississippi Rep. Bennie Thompson, the chairman of the panel.

PUSHBACK FROM TRUMP’S AIDES

The hearings have repeatedly showed how Trump moved forward with his baseless claims of fraud even as his top advisors told them they weren’t true.

The committee played video testimony from several aides who said they disagreed with the plan or tried to talk Trump out of it — even though few of them spoke out publicly at the time. Even his daughter, Ivanka Trump, said she “accepted” the conclusion of former Attorney General Bill Barr, who resigned after telling the president there was no evidence of widespread fraud.

The efforts to persuade Trump started on election night, when the race was still too close to call. Lawyer Rudy Giuliani told Trump to just go ahead and declare victory. Trump campaign manager Bill Stepien said in one interview clip that he told Trump it was “way too early” for such a pronouncement. But Trump did it anyway.

“Frankly, we did win this election,” Trump said before the cameras.

The committee used video clips of testimony from Barr, who told Trump he had looked into the allegations and found no evidence that any of them were true. He said he tried convince Trump, but felt that the president was becoming “detached from reality” and had no “interest in what the actual facts were.”

THE VIOLENCE, AND REAL LIVES UPENDED

The committee has also used the hearings to tell the stories of the people who have been hurt, either in the violence of Jan. 6 or through harassment from those who believe the election was stolen.

Capitol Police officer Caroline Edwards testified about the traumatic brain injury she suffered after being pushed to he concrete when the first rioters breached the makeshift barriers around the Capitol. She described a “war scene” out of the movies and hours of hand-to-hand combat.

“They were throwing up — I saw friends with blood all over their faces,” said Edwards, who still has not returned to the unit where she worked. “It was carnage. It was chaos.”

On Tuesday, two election workers from Georgia who became the center of false conspiracy theories tearfully testified about how it has upended their lives.

The Justice Department has debunked claims that Wandrea “Shaye” Moss and her mother, Ruby Freeman, introduced suitcases of illegal ballots and committed other acts of election fraud to try to alter the outcome — a conspiracy theory pushed by Giuliani and Trump. But Moss says she no longer leaves her house and it has affected her life “in every way” after receiving violent and racist threats from Trump’s supporters.

In video testimony, Freeman said she no longer advertises her local business with her name on it: “Lady Ruby.”

“I’ve lost my name, and I’ve lost my reputation. I’ve lost my sense of security,” Freeman said.

WHAT’S NEXT

On Thursday, the hearing will move to another pressure campaign — Trump’s efforts to have Justice Department officials declare the election corrupt, and a scheme within the department to go after states to change the results. Former acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen, who took over after Barr resigned, and his deputy, Richard Donoghue, will testify about how they successfully resisted that pressure.

The two hearings after that, expected to cover domestic extremism and Trump’s actions inside the White House, will be held in July. And they may not be the last before the panel issues final reports later this year.

“We are picking up new evidence on a daily basis with enormous velocity,” said Maryland Rep. Jamie Raskin, a member of the committee. “And so we’re constantly incorporating and including the new information that’s coming out.”

Another panel member suggested they could still subpoena Pence — it’s “certainly a possibility,” said California Rep. Adam Schiff.

“We would still, I think, like to have several high-profile people come before our committee,” Schiff said.

__

Associated Press writers Lisa Mascaro, Farnoush Amiri and Kevin Freking contributed.

___

For full coverage of the Jan. 6 hearings, go to https://www.apnews.com/capitol-siege

source