
Reproductive rights activists hold placards and chant outside of the U.S. Supreme Court ahead of a ruling on abortion clinic restrictions on June 27, 2016 in Washington, D.C. (Photo: Mandel Ngan/AFP via Getty Images)
National Laws Needed, Say Defenders of Women, After SCOTUS Attack on Roe
"Democrats have the power right now to do something about the Texas abortion ban, and every other far-right power grab," said one observer. "They are not helpless bystanders."
Amid the fear and outrage caused by the U.S. Supreme Court's refusal to block Texas' extreme anti-choice law Tuesday night, legal experts and rights advocates urged lawmakers to focus on what can be done to protect reproductive rights across the country, particularly the passage of the Women's Health Protection Act.
"It is up to Congress to pass the Women's Health Protection Act to end this assault on reproductive freedom once and for all."
--Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.)
The legislation was reintroduced in June by Sens. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) in the Senate and Reps. Judy Chu (D-Calif.), Lois Frankel (D-Fla.), Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.), and Veronica Escobar (D-Texas) in the House, and would protect the right to abortion care at the federal level in the event that the Supreme Court fails to protect Roe vs. Wade.
\u201cTX abortion ban, #SB8, gives politicians, neighbors, & even strangers the right to sue those who provide \u2014 or just help patients get \u2014 abortion after 6 wks. They won\u2019t stop with TX. If we don\u2019t fight back, we could see similar restrictions across the country. #BansOffOurBodies\u201d— All* Above All (@All* Above All) 1630515615
\u201cLet\u2019s be clear about what just happened in Texas: The second-largest state in America has effectively banned abortions. We can\u2019t rely on the courts to protect our rights. It\u2019s time for national laws to ensure reproductive freedom.\u201d— Elizabeth Warren (@Elizabeth Warren) 1630505502
Democrats in Congress, Fetterman added, "should vote like Democrats and scrap the filibuster and pass the Women's Health Protection Act immediately."
According to the Brookings Institution, the Democratic-led Senate could ban the filibuster--which requires 60 votes for legislation to pass rather than a simple majority--by creating a new Senate precedent:
The chamber's precedents exist alongside its formal rules to provide additional insight into how and when its rules have been applied in particular ways. Importantly, this approach to curtailing the filibuster--colloquially known as the "nuclear option" and more formally as "reform by ruling"--can, in certain circumstances, be employed with support from only a simple majority of senators.
In a tweet on Wednesday, Harvard Law School professor Niko Bowie noted that Biden, during his 2020 campaign, vowed to work to make sure the protections of Roe would be codified through legislation:
The president released a statement Wednesday afternoon saying his administration "is deeply committed to the constitutional right established in Roe vs. Wade five decades ago and will protect and defend that right"--but advocates called on Democratic leaders to commit to specific steps they'll take to protect abortion rights, including filibuster reform and expanding the Supreme Court, and to take swift action.
\u201cIf you are not willing to reform the filibuster and expand the court, you are not willing to do what it takes to win this fight. If we keep playing beanbag while they play hardball, the results will be more of this. It's that simple.\u201d— Adam Jentleson (@Adam Jentleson) 1630525908
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets. That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done. Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good. Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support. That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. 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. The final deadline for our crucial Summer Campaign fundraising drive is just days away, and we’re falling short of our must-hit goal. Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams? Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most. - Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Amid the fear and outrage caused by the U.S. Supreme Court's refusal to block Texas' extreme anti-choice law Tuesday night, legal experts and rights advocates urged lawmakers to focus on what can be done to protect reproductive rights across the country, particularly the passage of the Women's Health Protection Act.
"It is up to Congress to pass the Women's Health Protection Act to end this assault on reproductive freedom once and for all."
--Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.)
The legislation was reintroduced in June by Sens. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) in the Senate and Reps. Judy Chu (D-Calif.), Lois Frankel (D-Fla.), Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.), and Veronica Escobar (D-Texas) in the House, and would protect the right to abortion care at the federal level in the event that the Supreme Court fails to protect Roe vs. Wade.
\u201cTX abortion ban, #SB8, gives politicians, neighbors, & even strangers the right to sue those who provide \u2014 or just help patients get \u2014 abortion after 6 wks. They won\u2019t stop with TX. If we don\u2019t fight back, we could see similar restrictions across the country. #BansOffOurBodies\u201d— All* Above All (@All* Above All) 1630515615
\u201cLet\u2019s be clear about what just happened in Texas: The second-largest state in America has effectively banned abortions. We can\u2019t rely on the courts to protect our rights. It\u2019s time for national laws to ensure reproductive freedom.\u201d— Elizabeth Warren (@Elizabeth Warren) 1630505502
Democrats in Congress, Fetterman added, "should vote like Democrats and scrap the filibuster and pass the Women's Health Protection Act immediately."
According to the Brookings Institution, the Democratic-led Senate could ban the filibuster--which requires 60 votes for legislation to pass rather than a simple majority--by creating a new Senate precedent:
The chamber's precedents exist alongside its formal rules to provide additional insight into how and when its rules have been applied in particular ways. Importantly, this approach to curtailing the filibuster--colloquially known as the "nuclear option" and more formally as "reform by ruling"--can, in certain circumstances, be employed with support from only a simple majority of senators.
In a tweet on Wednesday, Harvard Law School professor Niko Bowie noted that Biden, during his 2020 campaign, vowed to work to make sure the protections of Roe would be codified through legislation:
The president released a statement Wednesday afternoon saying his administration "is deeply committed to the constitutional right established in Roe vs. Wade five decades ago and will protect and defend that right"--but advocates called on Democratic leaders to commit to specific steps they'll take to protect abortion rights, including filibuster reform and expanding the Supreme Court, and to take swift action.
\u201cIf you are not willing to reform the filibuster and expand the court, you are not willing to do what it takes to win this fight. If we keep playing beanbag while they play hardball, the results will be more of this. It's that simple.\u201d— Adam Jentleson (@Adam Jentleson) 1630525908
Amid the fear and outrage caused by the U.S. Supreme Court's refusal to block Texas' extreme anti-choice law Tuesday night, legal experts and rights advocates urged lawmakers to focus on what can be done to protect reproductive rights across the country, particularly the passage of the Women's Health Protection Act.
"It is up to Congress to pass the Women's Health Protection Act to end this assault on reproductive freedom once and for all."
--Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.)
The legislation was reintroduced in June by Sens. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) in the Senate and Reps. Judy Chu (D-Calif.), Lois Frankel (D-Fla.), Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.), and Veronica Escobar (D-Texas) in the House, and would protect the right to abortion care at the federal level in the event that the Supreme Court fails to protect Roe vs. Wade.
\u201cTX abortion ban, #SB8, gives politicians, neighbors, & even strangers the right to sue those who provide \u2014 or just help patients get \u2014 abortion after 6 wks. They won\u2019t stop with TX. If we don\u2019t fight back, we could see similar restrictions across the country. #BansOffOurBodies\u201d— All* Above All (@All* Above All) 1630515615
\u201cLet\u2019s be clear about what just happened in Texas: The second-largest state in America has effectively banned abortions. We can\u2019t rely on the courts to protect our rights. It\u2019s time for national laws to ensure reproductive freedom.\u201d— Elizabeth Warren (@Elizabeth Warren) 1630505502
Democrats in Congress, Fetterman added, "should vote like Democrats and scrap the filibuster and pass the Women's Health Protection Act immediately."
According to the Brookings Institution, the Democratic-led Senate could ban the filibuster--which requires 60 votes for legislation to pass rather than a simple majority--by creating a new Senate precedent:
The chamber's precedents exist alongside its formal rules to provide additional insight into how and when its rules have been applied in particular ways. Importantly, this approach to curtailing the filibuster--colloquially known as the "nuclear option" and more formally as "reform by ruling"--can, in certain circumstances, be employed with support from only a simple majority of senators.
In a tweet on Wednesday, Harvard Law School professor Niko Bowie noted that Biden, during his 2020 campaign, vowed to work to make sure the protections of Roe would be codified through legislation:
The president released a statement Wednesday afternoon saying his administration "is deeply committed to the constitutional right established in Roe vs. Wade five decades ago and will protect and defend that right"--but advocates called on Democratic leaders to commit to specific steps they'll take to protect abortion rights, including filibuster reform and expanding the Supreme Court, and to take swift action.
\u201cIf you are not willing to reform the filibuster and expand the court, you are not willing to do what it takes to win this fight. If we keep playing beanbag while they play hardball, the results will be more of this. It's that simple.\u201d— Adam Jentleson (@Adam Jentleson) 1630525908