#dobbs v. jackson women’s health organization | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

rapeculturerealities · 13 hours

Text

Abortion bans and domestic violence: Homicide is a leading cause of death for pregnant people.

Are there any numbers that show how the Dobbs decision has impacted any of these things, either the homicide rate for pregnant women or reproductive coercion?

The National Domestic Violence Hotline said that there was a 98 percent increase in reports of reproductive coercion the year after Dobbs, compared to the year before—more than 2,400 callers, the year after, reporting experiencing some form of reproductive coercion, compared to about 1,200 callers the year before that decision.

Were people referencing the law?

Some of the callers were saying that their abusers were referencing the abortion ban in their state. And this is also, broadly, a tactic that experts expect to increase. Basically, when the state hands down these abortion restrictions, it can wind up enabling abusers because it suggests that the state has no interest in giving them access to abortion and supporting their reproductive autonomy. So, it’s something that an abuser can also restrict. And it does sound like, from the anecdotes that I heard, sometimes this is what people are reporting.

#Domestic violence #intimate partner violence #dobbs v. jackson women's health organization #reproductive rights #Reproductive coercion #Tw murder

35 notes · View notes

kp777 · 4 hours

Text

By Jessica Corbett

Common Dreams

April 24, 2024

"At its core, this Supreme Court decision will reflect who we are becoming as a society."

Less than a month after a key abortion pill hearing, the right-wing U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday heard arguments for another major reproductive rights case—one out of Idaho that could impact healthcare for pregnant women and people across the country.

Idaho is among the over 20 states that have tightened restrictions on abortion since the high court's right-wing majority reversed Roe v. Wade nearly two years ago with Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization. Since August 2022, abortions have been banned in the state except for reported cases of rape or incest or when "necessary to prevent the death" of the pregnant person.

"If the court does not uphold emergency abortion care protections, this ruling will have devastating consequences for pregnant people."

Before Idaho's near-total ban on abortion took effect, U.S. District Judge B. Lynn Winmill barred enforcement of it to the extent that it conflicts with the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA), a 1986 federal law requiring emergency departments that accept Medicare to provide "necessary stabilizing treatment" to any patient with an emergency medical condition.

The Biden administration argues that such care includes abortion; Idaho's Republican policymakers—backed by the far-right Christian Alliance Defending Freedom—disagree. The U.S. Supreme Court in January paused Winmill's order and agreed to hear arguments in Moyle v. United States and Idaho v. United States.

As The New York Times reported Wednesday:

In a lively argument, questions by the justices suggested a divide along ideological lines, as well as a possible split by gender on the court. Justice Amy Coney Barrett, a conservative, appeared skeptical that Idaho's law, which bars doctors from providing abortions unless a woman's life is in danger or in specific nonviable pregnancies, superseded the federal law. The argument also raised a broader question about whether some of the conservative justices, particularly Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., may be prepared to embrace language of fetal personhood, that is, the notion that a fetus would have the same rights as a pregnant woman.

Also noting Barrett's apparent alignment with the three liberal women on the court, Law Dork's Chris Geidner predicted "it comes down to" Chief Justice John Roberts and fellow right-winger Brett Kavanaugh.

"Already, we see women miscarrying and giving birth to stillborn infants in restrooms and in their cars after hospitals have turned them away, and medical professionals put in impossible positions by extremist lawmakers," said MomsRising executive director and CEO Kristin Rowe-Finkbeiner, citing Associated Pressreporting from last week.

"Of all the horrors SCOTUS unleashed with its appalling, dangerous, massively unpopular ruling overturning Roe v. Wade, the threat that pregnant people—most of whom are moms—will be denied emergency medical care is among the worst," she asserted. "An adverse ruling in this case will mean emergency rooms can deny urgently needed care to people experiencing serious pregnancy complications that can destroy their health, end their fertility, and take their lives."

Alexa Kolbi-Molinas, deputy director of the ACLU Reproductive Freedom Project, similarly stressed that under a decision that favors the Idaho GOP, "pregnant people will suffer severe, life-altering health consequences, and even death."

"We're already seeing the devastating impact of this case play out in Idaho, where medical evacuations to transport patients to other states for the care they need have dramatically spiked since the Supreme Court allowed state politicians to block emergency abortion care," she noted.

The has also been an exodus of healthcare providers. Pointing out that those who violate Idaho's ban face five years in prison, The Guardian reported Wednesday that "between 2022, when Roe was overturned, and 2023, about 50 OB-GYNs moved out of the state."

As Republican lawmakers in various states have ramped up attacks on reproductive freedom since Dobbs, states that still allow abortions have seen an influx of "healthcare refugees." A Planned Parenthood spokesperson confirmed in January that about 30% of its abortion patients in Nevada—which borders Idaho—are from other states.

"With several of Nevada's bordering states enforcing abortion bans, pushing many people seeking care to our state, we've seen firsthand the devastation that anti-abortion policies are already wreaking," Reproductive Freedom for All director of Nevada campaigns Denise Lopez said Tuesday. "The Supreme Court must not allow us to spiral further into this healthcare crisis."

If the high court rules in favor of Idaho's Republican lawmakers, she warned, "all states will be impacted, even in places like Nevada with more than 4 in 5 voters supporting reproductive freedom."

Destiny Lopez, acting co-CEO of the Guttmacher Institute, declared that "at its core, this Supreme Court decision will reflect who we are becoming as a society: Are we okay with requiring pregnant individuals who face severe complications to suffer life-threatening health consequences rather than granting them access to abortion? Are we okay with forcing doctors to choose between violating federal law by not providing emergency abortion care or violating state law if they do?"

"If the court does not uphold emergency abortion care protections, this ruling will have devastating consequences for pregnant people—particularly Black and Brown folks, immigrants, people with lower incomes, those without health insurance, and LGBTQ+ communities—while further emboldening extremists," she emphasized.

Arguments in the case have sparked multiple demonstrations, from a weekend rally in Boise, Idaho to a Wednesday gathering outside the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington, D.C., where Women's March organized a die-in to highlight the potential consequences of the forthcoming ruling.

"It's a horrifying time to be someone who needs critical abortion care in America right now," said Women's March executive director Rachel O'Leary Carmona. "The GOP is chipping away at women's bodily autonomy and livelihoods one illegitimate court case at a time—from fast-tracking a case on the authorization of a medication that's been safely administered for decades last month, to now bringing the fate of emergency abortion care to a Supreme Court captured by their radical, anti-choice agenda."

"We know what these cases really are: They're part of a series of efforts by Christian nationalist politicians to do anything they can to control women's bodies and cut back women's decisions about their healthcare, their family planning, and their lives," she added.

Similar warnings about far-right Christian nationalist attacks on a range of rights have dominated political contests this cycle—including the race for the White House. In November, Democratic President Joe Biden, who supports access to abortion care, is set to face former Republican President Donald Trump, who brags about appointing three of the six justices who reversed Roe.

The case has renewed arguments for considering changes to the country's top court, which over the past few years has not only seen plummeting levels of public trust but also been rocked by repeated ethics scandals.

"Idaho's abortion ban is a direct consequence of the court's radical decision to overturn Roe v. Wade and allow partisan state legislatures to determine Americans' access to abortion care," said Stand Up America managing director of policy and political affairs Brett Edkins. "If the Supreme Court once again sides with anti-abortion extremists, it will be further proof that this court is radically out of touch with the American people and must be reformed."

#u.s. supreme court #abortion rights #maternal health #idaho #roe vs. wade

17 notes · View notes

curioussubjects · 2 years

Text

Abortion Access Resources

Abortion is still legal in some US states, despite the Dobbs decision.

Hey, everyone, it’s a horrible day here in the United States with Roe and Casey being overturned. But rather than lose hope, let’s keep the fight going because there’s a lot of incredible work being done on the ground.

Here are some places you can donate to, and some further info:

Independent Clinics: Abortion Care Network Abortion Funds: National Network of Abortion Funds, funds by State, Midwest Access Coalition

Information on Medication Abortions (abortion pills)

State by State trigger laws map with Roe being overturned

RewireNews (legislative tracker) and the excellent Boom! Lawyered podcast for repro rights news and analysis

New Handbook for a Post-Roe America: The Complete Guide to Abortion Legality, Access, and Practical Support by Robin Marty. Also! Consider requesting your local public library for this book if they don’t have it in their catalogue yet.

Let’s be kind to ourselves and each other today, but let’s not lose hope. The fight continues.

#abortion #abortion access #abortion resources #roe v wade #dobbs v. jackson women’s health organization #politics #resources #ABORTION IS HEALTHCARE AND A HUMAN RIGHT

4K notes · View notes

strawberrydragon · 2 years

Text

I said this on a reblog, but it's important so I'm making a separate post:

If you WANT to be pregnant and you succeed in getting pregnant: do not tell anyone about it for the first three and a half months. The abortion bans have already led to people being imprisoned for miscarriages. And miscarriages are more common than we like to admit, especially in the first trimester.

#women's rights #womens rights #women's health #roe vs wade #roe v wade #dobbs v. jackson women’s health organization #pregnancy

2K notes · View notes

theonethinginlife · 2 years

Text

Not to be political on main but I really fucking hate living in this christofascist political system cosplaying as a democracy where 6 people—5 that were appointed by people who didn’t even win the support of a majority of the voters in this country and 2 sexual abusers—can just decide that people with uteruses have less rights than an AK-47 and the opposition party won’t pass any meaningful legislation because a handful of senators are more concerned about preserving an arcane rule segregationists used and being besties with Republicans than actually using their power to help people

#if I say anything else I’m gonna end up on an FBI watchlist #us politics #abortion #pro choice #roe v wade #dobbs v. jackson women’s health organization #supreme court

3K notes · View notes

dontmean2bepoliticalbut · 1 year

Text

356 notes · View notes

dontmeantobepoliticalbut · 1 year

Text

The June 24, 2022 Dobbs v. Jackson landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court held that the Constitution of the United States does not confer the right to abortion. This decision returned to individual states the power to regulate any aspect of abortion not protected by federal law. Since this ruling, multiple states have limited or completely banned abortion care for people who are pregnant. In at least nine states, abortion is blocked with no exceptions for rape or incest.

Multiple states have banned abortion after 18, 15, or even 6 weeks gestation. These time restrictions make it impossible for patients to use medical information from ultrasounds and/or genetic testing, available later in pregnancy, to determine if a fetus has an anomaly and/or a life-threatening or lethal condition.

These abortion restrictions and laws permitting any citizen to sue anyone “aiding or abetting” an illegal abortion for up to $10,000 has created uncertainty and fear among health care providers trying to provide medical care to pregnant patients experiencing miscarriage, tubal or ectopic pregnancy (when the embryo implants in the fallopian tube, where it cannot become a full term pregnancy; can be lethal to the mother if not treated promptly and correctly), or those who need prenatal genetic counseling. Clinicians are unclear where the lines stand between providing care and committing a felony that could equal jail time, and this means that pregnant people aren’t getting the appropriate and timely care they need, even outside of a healthy, viable pregnancy.

But did you know that the Dobbs decision has also prevented non-pregnant women from receiving the medications they need to treat lupus, rheumatoid arthritis, and other conditions treated with medications like methotrexate?

Chris Stallman, MLS, MS, is a certified genetic counselor, an expert in medication impact during pregnancy, and a Clinical Instructor of Pharmacy Practice-Science at the University of Arizona R. Ken Coit College of Pharmacy. “Methotrexate is a medication used to treat many conditions, including lupus, rheumatoid arthritis, Crohn’s disease, and other autoimmune diseases. If a person who is pregnant uses methotrexate, it could increase the chance of miscarriage, birth defects, and other issues in pregnancy or after birth.”

For this reason, girls and women of child-bearing age who are taking methotrexate as treatment for their autoimmune or other diseases are not able to take methotrexate – even if they are not pregnant.

This critical problem is not hypothetical – treatment with methotrexate has already been withheld from female, non-pregnant patients with serious medical conditions in multiple states.

A 48-year-old woman in Tellico Plains, TN received an automated call from her CVS Pharmacy in July 2022 indicating that her prescription for methotrexate wouldn’t be refilled. This patient, who has inflammatory arthritis and a neuromuscular disease called myasthenia gravis, stated that methotrexate allowed her to resume simple, yet previously painful tasks like putting on her pants and rolling over in bed.

In June 2022, not 24-hours after the Dobbs ruling, a patient in Maryland who has Crohn’s disease received a call from her insurance company indicating that methotrexate, used to treat the chronic inflammation and pain associated with this condition, would no longer be available to her.

Within a week of the Dobbs ruling, a woman in Virginia who has Lupus received a letter from her doctor’s office indicating that it was pausing all prescriptions and refills of methotrexate because of the Supreme Court decision on abortion. Before taking methotrexate she experienced flares of Lupus so severe that she had trouble walking and needed to use a shower chair to wash.

Another woman from Missouri had been taking methotrexate to treat rheumatoid arthritis. When she went to the pharmacy to pick up her refill she learned from the pharmacist that they needed a specific direction from her doctor that the medication would not be used for an abortion. The pharmacy, Walgreens, confirmed with this customer that they do not require the same procedure from their male clients.

A 14-year old girl in Arizona was denied a refill of methotrexate to treat her debilitating rheumatoid arthritis and osteoporosis. Her angry physician tweeted that her patient was denied this critical medication because she was female. The withholding of life-saving or -altering medications from the women who need them has forced some of them to consider surgical sterilization.

Could denying women of childbearing age (who may or may not be sexually active, fertile, heterosexual, or pregnant) methotrexate be just the beginning of problems for women who need prescription or over-the-counter medications? Stallman says, “This certainly could lead to more medication denials – and not just for people who can get pregnant. If my husband or children need medication that could increase risks to a pregnancy, would they be denied the medication simply because they live with a person who could get pregnant? Will health care providers have to stop handling or dispensing such medications if they or their partner could get pregnant? And before saying ‘that will never happen’, remember that is what people said about the overturning of Dobbs. We don’t know how far this will go.”

Let’s take this thought experiment a step further. Is it possible that young girls will have to present a letter from their pediatricians indicating whether they’ve started having periods before they can receive the medications they need? Will adult women have to present written proof of tubal ligation, menopause, or infertility from their physicians before filling their life-saving medications? Will other medications that can affect the health of a fetus, even the highly regulated acne medication Accutane, require such additional proof? Could pharmacies use the data they have on prior purchases, like tampons and lubricant, to determine if a woman may be of child-bearing age and/or is sexually active?

The Dobbs decision is just the beginning of our government interfering with womens’ bodies, their personal choices, and their medical care. This decision is already impacting health care outside of pregnancy and could force women and their family members to disclose personal information about their fertility, sexuality, sexual and medical history with pharmacists, medical systems, the government, and the databases that all of them use. Our federal government must act swiftly to ensure that this decision doesn’t lead to further government overreach, discrimination, interference in proper medical care, and tragedy.

59 notes · View notes

shinobicyrus · 2 years

Text

It cannot be overstated just how earth-shattering Alito’s leaked Supreme Court opinion is - not simply for its dismantling of womens’ bodily autonomy (though that in itself is egregious enough) but also for how it goes about overturning the foundational precedent Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey are built on: the right to privacy and the due process clauses as outlined in the 14th Amendment.

Roe and Casey work on the precedent that the “privacy” of the 14th Amendment can be applied to a woman’s personal medical decisions. This is what’s called an “unenumerated right,” or a right that is implied to exist based off of what other laws say. For instance, the right to a public defender isn’t stated in the constitution at all, but was implied to exist because of a Supreme Court decision in 1963. Alito’s opinion however, asserts that a right must “must be deeply rooted in this Nation's history and tradition.”

The fuck does that mean?

Y’see, as an Originalist (like Amy Coney Barrett), Alito is concerned with the original public meaning of a law at the time it was written.

To an Originalist, since the 14th Amendment was drafted in 1868 - a time when most states criminalized abortion - to apply a “modern” interpretation of privacy to abortion like Roe did twists the 14th Amendment beyond what the drafters would have ever intended or even considered, which to Alito and other Originalists like him is Constitutional anathema.

So why is this legalese important?

Simple: while Alito insists that Roe v. Wade is a special case because abortion is a unique issue, that doesn’t change the fact that his Originalist interpretation of the 14 Amendment will topple that privacy precedent, setting a brand new legal precedent that can be applied to a huge number cases that were also decided on the 14th’s Privacy and Due Process clauses. Rights that may also lack the “history and tradition” that Alito so treasures.

What other unenumerated rights does this endanger? To name a few:

Interracial marriage (Loving v. Virginia)

The right to a public defender (Gideon v. Wainwright)

“Miranda Rights,” or a person’s legal rights being read to them by police during arrest (Miranda v. Arizona)

The right to buy and use contraceptives (Griswold v. Connecticut)

The illegality of sodomy laws (Lawrence v. Texas)

Same-sex marriage (Obergefell v. Hodges)

Overruling Roe and Casey isn’t solely a horrible miscarriage of justice for women’s reproductive rights. If the legal logic of Alito’s draft carries into the Court’s final decision, then the legal precedence that toppled it will be legitimized and could theoretically be applied to...well. Pretty much all modern civil rights.

Now, Alito assures us that Roe is a special case and that other decisions such as interracial marriage (Loving) or contraception (Griswold) are in no danger of being overturned. They are decided law, so we have nothing to worry about.

Except...that’s exactly what a few recent Supreme Court nominees said about Roe, as well.

#alternative title: Samuel Alito is an Originalist Piece of Shit #Honestly the entire b.s. of Alito's ''history and tradition'' requirement for rights to be legally legitimate #is so enraging because it targets basically *all* unenumerated rights over the past half-century #not to mention Alito isn't a historian - he's a scholar of law #when he talks about history he is speaking as someone who has no credentials as a historian #so when he wields words like ''history'' and worse - ''tradition'' he is wielding them as ideological cudgels #because that's Originalism - it pretends to be unbiased but it chooses worship of the Law as a thing in and of itself #rather than a thing created by people trying to achieve fairness and justice #if this draft becomes precedent then it *WILL* be a domino #and will affect law and civil rights for generations #this is the culmination of a 50 year conservative project #this will be a generational fight Folks #so get ready #Supreme Court #Abortion #Originalism #Samuel Alito #Civil Rights #Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization #(also I am totally not a lawyer and I probably got a few details wrong - this is mostly broad strokes)

611 notes · View notes

hislittleflower-throughconcrete · 2 years

Text

To be unapologetically pro-life is one thing, but to make flippant posts about rubbing the potential overturning of Roe in people's faces isn't being pro-life. It's being prideful.

People who aren't pro-life have real concerns about this happening that are relevant and valid, and this is a great time to engage in friendly dialogue about how to support women facing unplanned pregnancies and provide nonviolent solutions to those issues - not to "own" pro-choice people in debates.

We are one human family, one broken human family. Act like it.

#pro life #pro choice #abortion #dobbs v. jackson women’s health organization

425 notes · View notes

youjustgotlawyered · 2 years

Text

Roe is not the end. Not even close. Clarence Thomas filed a concurring opinion calling to overturn the right to contraception, same-sex marriage, and privacy in the bedroom. This is their ultimate goal. If Republicans gain a majority, they are going to attempt to pass federal legislation on these issues, no longer making it a states’ rights issue either. Get every person you know to vote in this goddamn election—not because we can vote our way out of fascism, but because voting is the bare minimum. Get involved. Wake up and realize how unsafe you are. I know this is Tumblr, but I am a real lawyer telling you the Court has signaled that your entire lives can be upended. Do not be complacent.

#lawblr #the real lawblr #roe v wade #dobbs v. jackson women’s health organization #abortion #abortion rights #pride month #pride #scotus #human rights #please vote #voting rights #vote like your life depends on it #signal boost #boost #clarence thomas #roe versus wade

345 notes · View notes

contemplatingoutlander · 2 years

Photo

#women's reproductive rights #us politics #gop #us supreme court #scotus #gop keeps ignoring evidence that doesn't support their positions #dobbs v. jackson women’s health organization #gun laws #new york rifle & pistol association v. bruen #the new york times #quotes

217 notes · View notes

tomorrowusa · 2 years

Photo

Actually, Trump Republicans don’t exactly love the soldier.

Active duty military personnel now demographically mirror the US as a whole.

Trump, a notorious draft dodger, was into the superficialities of the military (parades, uniforms, service flags) and had little use for those who served. Trump famously called US war dead “losers” and “suckers”.

Don’t expect Trump Republicans to pursue policies which would help anybody other than their filthy rich donors and fundamentalist supporters.

#trump republicans #abortion #veterans #big business #the filthy rich #roe v.wade #dobbs v. jackson women’s health organization #gop supreme court #scotus #the sanctity of reproductive freedom #a woman's right to choose #election 2022 #midterm elections

61 notes · View notes

dailyhistoryposts · 2 years

Text

Abortions in America

The history of abortion rights in the United States now come down to three cases in the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS). A Supreme Court decision is not meant to make new laws, but rather to ensure that existing laws are compliant with the US Constitution.

The first decision were released on the same day as another abortion case. Doe v. Bolton (1973) and Roe v. Wade (1973) were both released on January 22nd. Doe v. Bolton overturned the abortion law in the state of Georgia. Roe v. Wade was the landmark decision (meaning a decision that substantially changes the interpretation of law) that allowed abortion based on the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, guaranteeing a right to privacy. The Court classified abortions as a fundamental right. The Fourteenth Amendment reads as follows; the Due Process Clause has been bolded.

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

The Fifth Amendment also has a Due Process Clause. The Fifth Amendment reads as follows; the Due Process Clause has been bolded.

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

The next decision was Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992), another landmark case, where the Court upheld the right to an abortion but refined some of the court ruling. Under Casey, states could not craft an 'undue burden' on someone seeking an abortion, including requiring spousal approval. Parental consent for minors and mandatory waiting periods were still allowed.

Since then, the abortion has been considered "legally settled", meaning that the Constitution, the supreme law of the land, allowed abortions.

On June 24th, 2022, the Supreme Court released another landmark decision, Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization (2022). This holds that the Constitution does not confer a right to abortion and that abortion decision can be the jurisdiction of states rather than individuals. Due to 'trigger laws' that went into effect immediately, abortion is now illegal in 5 states, soon to be illegal in 11 more, and under question in some others (mostly states that kept their pre-Roe abortion laws on the books but stopped enforcing them).

Since 1977, there have been 3 kidnappings, 11 murders, 13 wounded, 17 attempted murders, 41 bombings, 153 incidents of assault of battery, 373 physical invasions, and 383 death threats (note: statistics are from the National Abortion Federation and include the US and Canada, the majority are in the US).

The right to privacy from the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment is foundational in other Supreme Court cases that may be reviewed, including the right to contraception (Griswold v. Connecticut 1965), interracial marriage (Loving v. Virginia 1967), right to same-sex marriage (Obergefell v. Hodges 2015).

#history #roe v wade #scotus #dobbs v. jackson women’s health organization #abortion #prolife #prochoice #planned parenthood v. casey #us history

104 notes · View notes

positivexcellence · 2 years

Photo

genpadalecki: “After today, young women will come of age with fewer rights than their mothers and grandmothers had.” - Justices Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan in their dissent of the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization Supreme Court opinion released today. This is not just about abortion. It’s maternal health, mortality rates, and the well-being of women all over the country. It’s health care. It’s human rights. America, hold our leaders accountable. Show up and vote.

#Genevieve Padalecki #roe vs wade #dobbs v. jackson women’s health organization

73 notes · View notes

eelhound · 2 years

Text

"A growing number of liberals say that unless Democratic leaders show a willingness to adopt more creative ways of pushing through their agenda, their most loyal voters will have little reason to turn out in the midterm congressional elections.

'It’s really important right now that they show they’re fighting for people, so people have a reason to go vote for them in November. The goodwill of voters is not going to last that long — it’s lasted for years,' said Nelini Stamp, director of strategy and partnerships for the Working Families Party, a prominent left-leaning group. 'People don’t want to hear, ‘Vote for Democrats.’ They want to hear what folks are going to do. We want Biden to use the full power of his administration, even if he might get the court’s pushback. We want to see people fighting for us.'"

- Yasmeen Abutaleb, Cleve R. Wootson Jr. and Marianna Sotomayor, from "Frustration, anger rising among Democrats over caution on abortion." Washington Post, 27 June 2022.

#yasmeen abutaleb #cleve r. wootson jr.#marianna sotomayor #quote #quotations #women's rights #reproductive rights #bodily autonomy #abortion #roe v wade #american politics #democratic party #centrism #2022 midterm elections #dobbs v. jackson women’s health organization

58 notes · View notes

cyarskj1899 · 8 months

Text

4 notes · View notes