Home LATEST NEWS California wants to become a “safe haven” for women who want an...

California wants to become a “safe haven” for women who want an abortion


In a 15-page report released Wednesday, around 40 abortion service providers are pleading for California to live up to Gov. Gavin Newsom’s proclamation that made California theState of reproductive freedom in 2019.

The California Future of Abortion Council’s proposal, articulated around 45 recommendations, was presented with the support of the governor and the leaders of the legislative assembly and the Senate.

The group advocates in particular creating a fund to reimburse clinics that provide abortion to low-income women, including those from other states.

This could be reimbursed for the surgery at abortion clinics, and patients from other states might not have to pay for costs like accommodation and transportation.

California Legislative Assembly Speaker Toni Atkins, whose office was involved in developing the document, told the New York Times that the details of this measure would be negotiated next year, but that funding could come from public and private funds.

Mrs Atkins mentioned an incredibly critical moment in the history of women’s rights.

We want to let people know that we are going to be part of the solution, that we are a beacon.

A quote from Toni Atkins, Speaker of the California Legislature

Gov. Newsom said in an interview with The Associated Press last week that his budget proposal for next January would already include some of the suggested measures.

Desiring to extend protections to the right to abortion, he said his state could become a refuge not only for Californians, but also for women and girls across the country.

We will be a sanctuaryhe argued, acknowledging that progressive state policies on this issue would also benefit women in other states, particularly in the national legal context in which they would be established.

Other recommended actions include increasing funding for abortion clinics, creating a dedicated grant program for training in underserved areas, and putting in place legal protections for clinicians who provide abortions to abortions. patients, including those from states restricting the right to abortion.

Opponents of abortion in California have criticized in the strongest terms the idea put forward by the California Future of Abortion Council and its political allies.

It is more a slaughterhouse than a sanctuary, wrote Lila Rose, of the group Live Action, on Twitter, deeming the initiative of the coalition ofhorrifying.

California is already one of the most progressive states when it comes to abortion. For example, it is among the small group of six states that require insurers to reimburse interventions.

The future of abortion rights before the Supreme Court

In front of immense red curtains, the four judges placed behind, standing, and the five placed in front, seated, take an official photograph.

From left to right starting with the top row, Justices of the United States Supreme Court, Brett Kavanaugh, Elena Kagan, Neil Gorsuch, Amy Coney Barrett, Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, John Roberts (Chief Justice), Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor.

Photo: Getty Images / AFP / ERIN SCHAFF

The future of abortion rights in the United States is being played out in front of a Supreme Court profoundly overhauled by Donald Trump.

Last week, when reviewing a Mississippi law that significantly limits pregnancy terminations, the conservative majority in the nation’s highest court appeared, at a minimum, inclined to want to open a major breach in a case. linked to the law that it itself recognized almost half a century ago.

In his judgment Roe vs. Wade, delivered in 1973, the highest court in the country had ruled that states could not ban abortion before the threshold of viability of the fetus. The judgment has since established a precedent in a country where the federal government does not offer a legislative framework on pregnancy terminations.

The Supreme Court then upheld the right to abortion almost 20 years later in the case Planned Parenthood vs. Casey, judging that States could not impose a undue burden to a pregnant woman desiring an abortion before the fetal viability period, then established at 23 or 24 weeks gestation.

However, Mississippi law, one of the most restrictive in the country, prohibits the majority of abortions if the probable age of theunborn human is greater than 15 weeks.

The Supreme Court could go back on the deadline it had set or, even worse for the pro-choice, go as far as overturning its decision which had recognized the constitutional right to abortion.

It should make its decision next June or July.

Huge potential financial pressure on California

The Guttmacher Institute, a research group that advocates for the right to abortion, estimates that the proportion of women from another state who terminate their pregnancies in California could increase by 13% if abortions are banned after 15 weeks. .

A rate that would skyrocket if the Supreme Court instead axed Roe vs. Wade, as the Mississippi urges, by relegating the stake to the court of the States: California could then, according to her, see the number of abortions performed on women from other States explode, from 46,000 to 1.4 million – an increase of 2,923%.

The Guttmacher Institute estimates that 26 states are likely to ban abortion if the Supreme Court reconsiders Roe vs. Wade.

According to Washington post, at least a dozen states already have laws that would automatically end most, if not all, abortions as soon as a decision is rendered, if the highest court in the United States rules in favor. of Mississippi.

Cited by the Los Angeles Times, a leader of the California Family Council opposed to the right to abortion, estimates that the state has 160 centers whose mandate is to change hearts and minds women who do not want to carry their pregnancy to term.

Often located near clinics, several are already planning to recruit additional staff if California sees an increase in patients.

Previous articleThese foreign powers that rule Haiti
Next articleHow to counter the “emerging threat” of pathogenic fungi?