More Than A Magazine, A Movement
In a landmark decision released Thursday morning, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in favor of South Carolina in Medina v. Planned Parenthood, granting states the authority to exclude reproductive health clinics from their Medicaid programs—even when those clinics provide essential care such as cancer screenings, birth control and STI testing. This decision could embolden Republican-led states to “defund” Planned Parenthood across the country.
After the Supreme Court paved the way for a dozen or more states to ban abortion for the first time in almost half a century, abortion access is thriving in ways no one predicted.
How did such a counterintuitive phenomenon happen? Our recent book, After Dobbs: How the Supreme Court Ended Roe but Not Abortion, helps explain what’s going on behind the numbers. In simplest terms, this increase came about through a combination of an extraordinary mobilization on the part of abortion providers and their allies, the grit and determination of people who decide to have an abortion, and the massive amount of money poured into pro-abortion groups after Dobbs.
Earlier this month, the Trump administration canceled a 2022 directive issued under the Biden administration that said hospitals had to provide abortion care if it was needed to save a patient’s life or prevent serious harm. The rule was based on a federal law called the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act, known as EMTALA, which requires emergency rooms to treat and stabilize all patients regardless of their ability to pay.
While North Carolina law allows abortions in cases where a patient’s life or health is in danger, the previous federal guidance offered clearer protections. Without it, doctors may be less sure about what’s allowed, and hesitate to act quickly in emergencies.
On Thursday nights, I walk a few blocks along my neighborhood’s cracked sidewalks to The People’s Market. SNAP is the glue that holds The People’s Market together, where most of the vendors are recipients selling at the market to supplement their incomes.
We’ve long known that the U.S. food system is upside-down. Instead of trying to fix this broken system, Congress is punishing the victims of its malfunctioning and is slashing SNAP to enact tax cuts for the rich.
The House-passed reconciliation bill would make the largest changes to healthcare since the Affordable Care Act—but in the opposite direction, with less input and worse projected outcomes.
Medication abortion has become the most popular form of abortion in the U.S. post-Dobbs, providing potentially lifesaving access to people residing in states with abortion bans in place. Because of this, the antiabortion right-wing machine’s dogged attacks on mifepristone should be seen for what they are: an attempt at a backdoor national abortion ban.
Revoking access to mifepristone is key in the antiabortion machine’s fight to maintain control over pregnant women’s bodies and lives.
We’re in the midst of an incredible surge in antiabortion extremism and clinic violence, with this weekend’s tragic shooting of pro-abortion Rep. Melissa Hortman and her husband providing a grim example of the threats facing abortion advocates. Meanwhile, in the wake of state-level attacks on abortion rights, it’s hard to ignore the mental health implications for abortion patients and providers alike. In January, the Trump administration announced that it no longer plans to enforce the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act, or FACE Act—the 1994 law that protects patients and staff at reproductive healthcare clinics from harassment and violent attacks from antiabortion demonstrators. Just this month, the House has been discussing repealing the FACE Act entirely, despite the rising rates of clinic attacks in the last three years since Dobbs.
Most news coverage of abortion rights in the United States focuses on the legal battles, and this coverage is extremely important. But the initiative Write and Rights—started last year by college student Iha Rastogi—is working to boost the mental health of abortion patients and providers in the midst of these attacks on their rights by organizing her fellow students to write and send supportive letters to clinics.
In a post-Roe America, where reproductive freedom depends not just on where you live but who your prosecutor is, New Orleans District Attorney represents a growing number of local officials refusing to criminalize care. His goal: to protect bodily autonomy and keep women out of prison.
As one of the few progressive prosecutors in the Deep South, Williams operates under intense pressure—from conservative lawmakers, a hostile state government and a legal landscape increasingly tilted against reproductive rights. But he’s doing so with clear priorities: decriminalize pregnancy outcomes, defend healthcare providers and prioritize the health and dignity of Black and low-income women in his parish.
On June 2, a new play, One Body: Dispatches from Idaho, brought the harrowing reality of Idaho’s abortion ban to the New York City stage. Performed at Theater 555 in midtown Manhattan, the one-woman show explores the devastating consequences of Idaho’s extreme abortion ban, drawing on over 30 interviews with women, doctors, lawmakers and activists.
“With One Body, we’re not just telling stories; we’re building infrastructure for change,” said Jen Jackson Quintano, an abortion activist and co-writer of the play. “By placing rural Idahoans’ experiences front and center—elevating stories too often silenced—we not only humanize the stakes of reproductive rights, we create a blueprint for community-centered activism that can travel anywhere.”
Organizers hope to spark momentum—and raise funds—for a nationwide tour and an off‑Broadway production of One Body in the future.
Mom Abby Blum tells why she was forced her to end her much-wanted pregnancy. She warns that an unexpected tragic event can happen to any woman—even if they think they’ll never need an abortion.
“It felt like an impossible choice, but I decided to go ahead and have the abortion to end my pregnancy so I could start the treatment I needed to save my life. … For me, the abortion was a medical necessity. And, in hindsight, I realize that in the post-Roe v. Wade era, I was lucky to be in a state where I had access to an abortion and to all the healthcare that I needed. ….
“If I had lived in a state like Texas, which bans abortion in nearly all cases, my story would have had a very different ending. I didn’t choose to get cancer and to have to make the decision to end my pregnancy, but that’s what can sometimes happen in life.”