SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Reproductive rights advocates held a protest on July 10, 2018 in New York City to denounce President Donald Trump's nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to the U.S. Supreme Court. (Photo: Spencer Platt/Getty Images)
Amid Mounting Concerns About Kavanaugh's Threat to Reproductive Rights, Massachusetts Repeals 173-Year-Old Abortion Ban
"The changing dynamics of the Supreme Court is a real and legitimate concern," warned one Democratic state lawmaker
Jul 24, 2018
Massachusetts lawmakers on Monday passed legislation repealing an unenforced 173-year-old abortion ban--which Republican Gov. Charlie Baker said he will sign--highlighting concerns among reproductive rights advocates about the record of President Donald Trump's latest nominee for the U.S. Supreme Court, Brett Kavanaugh, and what his confirmation could mean for women's rights.
"The changing dynamics of the Supreme Court is a real and legitimate concern. We have both a president and a vice president who have expressed an intent to overturn Roe v. Wade and we take them at their word."
--Massachusetts state Rep. Claire Cronin
While right-wing state legislators in Republican-controlled states have steadily worked to curtail abortion rights with the ultimate goal of forcing the nation's highest court to re-examine its landmark Roe v. Wade ruling, advocacy groups are raising alarm about Kavanaugh to pressure senators to reject his nomination, and states such as Massachusetts are working to protect a woman's right to choose.
"The changing dynamics of the Supreme Court is a real and legitimate concern," said Massachusetts state Rep. Claire Cronin, a Democrat. "We have both a president and a vice president who have expressed an intent to overturn Roe v. Wade and we take them at their word."
Massachusetts' Negating Archaic Statutes Targeting Young (NASTY) Women Act , as WBUR noted, will also repeal "a ban on unmarried people having access to contraception and a ban on distributing information about how to access contraception or abortions." While the measure was welcomed by reproductive rights advocates, NARAL Pro-Choice Massachusetts president Rebecca Hart Holder encouraged state lawmakers to go even further.
"Repealing antiquated laws is the first, critical step to ensuring that even if Roe v. Wade were overturned tomorrow, the reproductive freedom of the people of Massachusetts would be unequivocally protected," Hart Holder responded, while also urging elected officials to "enshrine protections for abortion access in state law and become a safe haven state for reproductive healthcare."
Although Massachusetts also had a 1981 state Supreme Judicial Court ruling that confirmed a woman's right to choose, the state isn't alone in taking additional actions to safeguard reproductive rights amid mounting concerns about Kavanaugh. As TIME reported, "Lawmakers in New Mexico said that they would make repealing the state's abortion ban a priority in their next legislative session."
Just ahead of Trump's official nomination of Kavanaugh, New York's Democratic Gov. Andrew Cuomo issued an executive order to enhance reproductive rights and called on state lawmakers to reconvene to codify abortion rights into state law.
"In the face of this federal assault, New York is going to protect itself because this state has always been the progressive capital of the nation," Cuomo declared. "This is the time to fight back."
WBEN reported Monday that New York state lawmakers are pushing to reconvene in Albany for a vote:
A Supreme Court reversal on Roe could have an immediate impact across the nation. According to the Guttmacher Institute, a research and policy group that supports reproductive rights:
- four states have laws that automatically ban abortion if Roe were to be overturned;
- ten states retain their unenforced, pre-Roe abortion bans; and
- seven states have laws that express their intent to restrict the right to legal abortion to the maximum extent permitted by the U.S. Supreme Court in the absence of Roe.
Massachusetts' move to protect reproductive rights comes as public support for Roe v. Wade is at an all-time high. According to an NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll published Monday, a full 71 percent of Americans believe the decision should not be overturned. Even more Democrats, 88 percent, believe the 1973 ruling should remain in effect.
Responding to the results, NARAL tweeted:
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Massachusetts lawmakers on Monday passed legislation repealing an unenforced 173-year-old abortion ban--which Republican Gov. Charlie Baker said he will sign--highlighting concerns among reproductive rights advocates about the record of President Donald Trump's latest nominee for the U.S. Supreme Court, Brett Kavanaugh, and what his confirmation could mean for women's rights.
"The changing dynamics of the Supreme Court is a real and legitimate concern. We have both a president and a vice president who have expressed an intent to overturn Roe v. Wade and we take them at their word."
--Massachusetts state Rep. Claire Cronin
While right-wing state legislators in Republican-controlled states have steadily worked to curtail abortion rights with the ultimate goal of forcing the nation's highest court to re-examine its landmark Roe v. Wade ruling, advocacy groups are raising alarm about Kavanaugh to pressure senators to reject his nomination, and states such as Massachusetts are working to protect a woman's right to choose.
"The changing dynamics of the Supreme Court is a real and legitimate concern," said Massachusetts state Rep. Claire Cronin, a Democrat. "We have both a president and a vice president who have expressed an intent to overturn Roe v. Wade and we take them at their word."
Massachusetts' Negating Archaic Statutes Targeting Young (NASTY) Women Act , as WBUR noted, will also repeal "a ban on unmarried people having access to contraception and a ban on distributing information about how to access contraception or abortions." While the measure was welcomed by reproductive rights advocates, NARAL Pro-Choice Massachusetts president Rebecca Hart Holder encouraged state lawmakers to go even further.
"Repealing antiquated laws is the first, critical step to ensuring that even if Roe v. Wade were overturned tomorrow, the reproductive freedom of the people of Massachusetts would be unequivocally protected," Hart Holder responded, while also urging elected officials to "enshrine protections for abortion access in state law and become a safe haven state for reproductive healthcare."
Although Massachusetts also had a 1981 state Supreme Judicial Court ruling that confirmed a woman's right to choose, the state isn't alone in taking additional actions to safeguard reproductive rights amid mounting concerns about Kavanaugh. As TIME reported, "Lawmakers in New Mexico said that they would make repealing the state's abortion ban a priority in their next legislative session."
Just ahead of Trump's official nomination of Kavanaugh, New York's Democratic Gov. Andrew Cuomo issued an executive order to enhance reproductive rights and called on state lawmakers to reconvene to codify abortion rights into state law.
"In the face of this federal assault, New York is going to protect itself because this state has always been the progressive capital of the nation," Cuomo declared. "This is the time to fight back."
WBEN reported Monday that New York state lawmakers are pushing to reconvene in Albany for a vote:
A Supreme Court reversal on Roe could have an immediate impact across the nation. According to the Guttmacher Institute, a research and policy group that supports reproductive rights:
- four states have laws that automatically ban abortion if Roe were to be overturned;
- ten states retain their unenforced, pre-Roe abortion bans; and
- seven states have laws that express their intent to restrict the right to legal abortion to the maximum extent permitted by the U.S. Supreme Court in the absence of Roe.
Massachusetts' move to protect reproductive rights comes as public support for Roe v. Wade is at an all-time high. According to an NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll published Monday, a full 71 percent of Americans believe the decision should not be overturned. Even more Democrats, 88 percent, believe the 1973 ruling should remain in effect.
Responding to the results, NARAL tweeted:
Massachusetts lawmakers on Monday passed legislation repealing an unenforced 173-year-old abortion ban--which Republican Gov. Charlie Baker said he will sign--highlighting concerns among reproductive rights advocates about the record of President Donald Trump's latest nominee for the U.S. Supreme Court, Brett Kavanaugh, and what his confirmation could mean for women's rights.
"The changing dynamics of the Supreme Court is a real and legitimate concern. We have both a president and a vice president who have expressed an intent to overturn Roe v. Wade and we take them at their word."
--Massachusetts state Rep. Claire Cronin
While right-wing state legislators in Republican-controlled states have steadily worked to curtail abortion rights with the ultimate goal of forcing the nation's highest court to re-examine its landmark Roe v. Wade ruling, advocacy groups are raising alarm about Kavanaugh to pressure senators to reject his nomination, and states such as Massachusetts are working to protect a woman's right to choose.
"The changing dynamics of the Supreme Court is a real and legitimate concern," said Massachusetts state Rep. Claire Cronin, a Democrat. "We have both a president and a vice president who have expressed an intent to overturn Roe v. Wade and we take them at their word."
Massachusetts' Negating Archaic Statutes Targeting Young (NASTY) Women Act , as WBUR noted, will also repeal "a ban on unmarried people having access to contraception and a ban on distributing information about how to access contraception or abortions." While the measure was welcomed by reproductive rights advocates, NARAL Pro-Choice Massachusetts president Rebecca Hart Holder encouraged state lawmakers to go even further.
"Repealing antiquated laws is the first, critical step to ensuring that even if Roe v. Wade were overturned tomorrow, the reproductive freedom of the people of Massachusetts would be unequivocally protected," Hart Holder responded, while also urging elected officials to "enshrine protections for abortion access in state law and become a safe haven state for reproductive healthcare."
Although Massachusetts also had a 1981 state Supreme Judicial Court ruling that confirmed a woman's right to choose, the state isn't alone in taking additional actions to safeguard reproductive rights amid mounting concerns about Kavanaugh. As TIME reported, "Lawmakers in New Mexico said that they would make repealing the state's abortion ban a priority in their next legislative session."
Just ahead of Trump's official nomination of Kavanaugh, New York's Democratic Gov. Andrew Cuomo issued an executive order to enhance reproductive rights and called on state lawmakers to reconvene to codify abortion rights into state law.
"In the face of this federal assault, New York is going to protect itself because this state has always been the progressive capital of the nation," Cuomo declared. "This is the time to fight back."
WBEN reported Monday that New York state lawmakers are pushing to reconvene in Albany for a vote:
A Supreme Court reversal on Roe could have an immediate impact across the nation. According to the Guttmacher Institute, a research and policy group that supports reproductive rights:
- four states have laws that automatically ban abortion if Roe were to be overturned;
- ten states retain their unenforced, pre-Roe abortion bans; and
- seven states have laws that express their intent to restrict the right to legal abortion to the maximum extent permitted by the U.S. Supreme Court in the absence of Roe.
Massachusetts' move to protect reproductive rights comes as public support for Roe v. Wade is at an all-time high. According to an NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll published Monday, a full 71 percent of Americans believe the decision should not be overturned. Even more Democrats, 88 percent, believe the 1973 ruling should remain in effect.
Responding to the results, NARAL tweeted:
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.