How the States We Govern Have Stepped Up Since Dobbs
Three years ago, when the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization overturned nearly 50 years of constitutional protection for abortion, states became the last line of defense in the fight for reproductive freedom. As governors, we've stepped up to respond to this new national reality.
The Dobbs decision didn't end abortion in America. Instead, it's been rerouted to a few states now bearing the weight of a national need. States like ours—Illinois and New Mexico—have become what many call 'surge states,' where Americans facing extreme abortion restrictions in neighboring states turn for abortion care in record numbers.
According to the Guttmacher Institute, last year, more than 155,000 Americans traveled out of state to access an abortion. Illinois has become the nation's leading provider of out-of-state care, providing more than 35,000 abortions to patients. In New Mexico, more than 70% of all abortions were provided to out-of-state residents. This surge has major implications for both clinicians and patients, and we've done everything we can to rise to the challenge with urgency and purpose.
In 2024, the Chicago Abortion Fund received over 16,000 calls from people in 41 states — and didn't turn a single person away. To alleviate the pressure on clinics and organizations, Illinois launched the Complex Abortion Regional Line for Access (CARLA), a provider-to-provider scheduling and triage system to coordinate care and reduce hospital strain, facilitating 898 patient referrals from individuals across 23 states. New Mexico is also investing millions to build brick-and-mortar reproductive health clinics along the Texas border—where nearly 8,000 patients traveled for abortion care in the past year—and bolster its health care provider workforce.
These are only a handful of the measures governors, clinics, and non-profit organizations have taken to ensure our states truly uphold reproductive freedom in a post-Dobbs America. But still, our systems are stretched. Even with public-private partnerships, clinics are full, providers increasingly fear for their safety, and care coordination grows more complex by the day.
Read More: Abortions Keep Increasing in the U.S., Data Show
In the meantime, anti-abortion forces are shifting their tactics to erode the infrastructure we're building to keep legal abortion accessible through federal rollbacks that compound the strain on states trying to hold the line.
Just this month, the Trump administration rescinded Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA) guidelines that reaffirm federal protections for emergency abortion care when a patient's health or life is at risk. This guidance helped hospitals understand how to treat pregnant patients facing life-threatening complications, even in states with bans. Despite the fact that access to this care continues to be guaranteed in the law, revoking these guidelines creates dangerous confusion about how to treat medical emergencies, prompting hospitals to either wrongfully deny care or send pregnant patients across state lines, even in critical condition. That burden falls not just on our health systems, but on patients who may not survive the delay.
Simultaneously, mifepristone—one of two medications used in medication abortion—is being politicized by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which is currently conducting a renewed review of its safety. This review follows years of coordinated attacks by anti-abortion activists who use junk science and political pressure to undermine public trust, despite mifepristone's decades-long safety record, as documented in more than 100 peer-reviewed studies.
Medication abortion is a cornerstone of care, accounting for nearly two-thirds of all abortions in states without total bans. Losing access would require patients to rely on procedural abortions, necessitating more time, resources, and specialized care—further taxing our overburdened healthcare workforce and increasing wait times for patients who don't have the time to spare.
We must recognize these attacks for what they are—a long-term strategy to chip away at reproductive rights across the U.S. If anti-abortion efforts targeting mifepristone and EMTALA succeed, the result won't just be increased suffering in states with bans— it will also undermine access in states where abortion is protected, stressing systems that are already struggling to meet overwhelming need.
As 'surge states,' we know our role in this moment. The future of reproductive freedom in America will continue to be determined by state leaders who are prepared to do everything in their power to defend it. That means prioritizing reproductive health care in our policy agendas, defending it in our budgets, and building resilient legal and clinical infrastructure that can withstand the threats ahead.
Dobbs didn't end the war on reproductive freedom; it just redrew the battle lines.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
3 hours ago
- Boston Globe
Iowa's civil rights protections no longer include gender identity as new law takes effect
Advertisement When Republican Gov. Kim Reynolds signed Iowa's new law, she said the state's previous civil rights code 'blurred the biological line between the sexes.' Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up 'It's common sense to acknowledge the obvious biological differences between men and women. In fact, it's necessary to secure genuine equal protection for women and girls,' she said in a video statement. Also taking effect Tuesday are provisions in the state's health and human services budget that say Medicaid recipients are no longer covered for gender-affirming surgery or hormone therapy. A national movement Iowa's state Capitol filled with protesters as the law went through the Republican-controlled Legislature and to Reynolds' desk in just one week in February. Iowa Republicans said laws passed in recent years to restrict transgender students' use of bathrooms and locker rooms, and their participation on sports teams, could not coexist with a civil rights code that includes gender identity protections. Advertisement About two dozen other states and the Trump administration have advanced restrictions on transgender people. Republicans say such laws and executive actions protect spaces for women, rejecting the idea that people can transition to another gender. Many face court challenges. About two-thirds of U.S. adults believe that whether a person is a man or woman is determined by biological characteristics at birth, an Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll conducted in May found. But there's less consensus on policies that target transgender and nonbinary people. Transgender people say those kinds of policies deny their existence and capitalize on prejudice for political gain. In a major setback for transgender rights nationwide, the U.S. Supreme Court last month upheld Tennessee's ban on puberty blockers and hormone treatments for transgender minors. The court's conservative majority said it doesn't violate the Constitution's equal protection clause, which requires the government to treat similarly situated people the same. Not every state includes gender identity in their civil rights code, but Iowa was the first to remove nondiscrimination protections based on gender identity, according to the Movement Advancement Project, an LGBTQ+ rights think tank. Incidents of discrimination in Iowa, before and after July 1 Iowans will still have time to file a complaint with the state Office of Civil Rights about discrimination based on gender identity that occurred before the law took effect. State law requires a complaint to be submitted within 300 days after the most recent incident of alleged discrimination. That means people have until April 27 to file a complaint about discrimination based on gender identity, according to Kristen Stiffler, the office's executive director. Advertisement Sixty-five such complaints were filed and accepted for investigation from July 2023 through the end of June 2024, according to Stiffler. Forty-three were filed and accepted from July 1, 2024, through June 19 of this year. Iowa state Rep. Aime Wichtendahl, a Democrat and the state's first openly transgender lawmaker, fears the law will lead to an increase in discrimination for transgender Iowans. 'Anytime someone has to check your ID and they see that the gender marker doesn't match the appearance, then that opens up hostility, discrimination as possibilities,' Wichtendahl said, naming examples such as applying for a job, going through the airport, buying beer or getting pulled over in a traffic stop. 'That instantly outs you. That instantly puts you on the spot.' About half of U.S. states include gender identity in their civil rights code to protect against discrimination in housing and public places, such as stores or restaurants, according to the Movement Advancement Project. Some additional states do not explicitly protect against such discrimination, but it is included in legal interpretations of statutes. Five years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled LGBTQ people are protected by a landmark federal civil rights law that prohibits sex discrimination in the workplace. But Iowa's Supreme Court has expressly rejected the argument that discrimination based on sex includes discrimination based on gender identity. Changing Iowa birth certificates before the law took effect The months between when the bill was signed into law and when it took effect gave transgender Iowans time to pursue amended birth certificates before that option was eliminated. Keenan Crow, with LGBTQ+ advocacy group One Iowa, said the group has long cosponsored legal clinics to assist with that process. 'The last one that we had was by far the biggest,' Crow said. Advertisement Iowa's Department of Transportation still has a process by which people can change the gender designation on their license or identification card but has proposed administrative rules to eliminate that option. Wichtendahl also said she has talked to some families who are looking to move out of state as a result of the new law. 'It's heartbreaking because this is people's lives we're talking about,' Wichtendahl added. 'These are families that have trans loved ones and it's keeping their loved ones away, it's putting their loved ones into uncertain future, putting their health and safety at risk.'
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
6 Vegetables That Are Healthier Raw Than Cooked, According to Dietitians
90% of Americans don't eat enough fruit and vegetables each day. Eating them raw can make prep easier, and in some cases, even boost the nutritional benefits. Some vegetables are healthier raw because heat can break down key compounds like vitamin C, allicin, and antioxidants. Raw veggies don't have to be boring—from dips and slaws to smoothies and salads, raw vegetables can be delicious, satisfying, and easy to people know the benefits of adding more plants to their diet, but according to The Foundation for Fresh Produce, 90% of Americans still don't eat enough fruits and vegetables each day. While the cost of fresh produce is often cited as the primary barrier to consumption, recent research points to other culprits: limited time, lack of motivation, and uncertainty about how to prepare veggies in a simple, tasty way. If that sounds familiar, you're in luck—raw vegetables may actually be better for you! In addition to saving time in the kitchen, eating vegetables raw may provide even greater physical and mental health benefits than their cooked versions. Registered Dietitian Maria Lucey points to a 2018 study showing that raw fruit and vegetable intake was more strongly associated with reduced depressive symptoms and higher life satisfaction than cooked versions—even after accounting for factors like sleep and exercise. Below, we've rounded up the best vegetables to enjoy raw—no cooking, minimal effort, and maximum health benefits. Bell peppers are one of the richest sources of vitamin C, a powerful antioxidant essential for immune function, collagen production, hormone activation, and protein metabolism. While vitamin C deficiency is rare these days, it can occur—especially in people with low fruit and vegetable intake. On top of limited intake, studies show that because vitamin C is water-soluble and heat-sensitive, it breaks down easily during cooking, particularly at high temperatures or for prolonged periods. That's why registered dietitian Avery Zenker recommends enjoying bell peppers raw. Just 1/2 cup of raw red bell peppers delivers more than 100% of your recommended daily intake of vitamin C. For easy ways to eat more, Zenker suggests pairing raw bell pepper strips with hummus, stuffing halved peppers with tuna or chickpea salad, or adding diced peppers to grain bowls, wraps, or sandwiches for crunch and color. Like bell peppers, broccoli is a good source of vitamin C—but that's not the only reason to eat it raw. Broccoli contains the enzyme myrosinase, which plays a crucial role in converting glucosinolates into sulforaphane, a compound that may help destroy precancerous cells and reduce inflammation. According to Toby Amidor, MS, RD, and author of Health Shots, myrosinase is heat-sensitive and breaks down during cooking, especially boiling or steaming for long durations. Eating broccoli raw preserves more of this enzyme, allowing your body to maximize sulforaphane production. Enjoy raw broccoli florets with dips, chopped into salad, or grate the stems into a crunchy slaw. Though often thought of as an herb or spice, garlic is a vegetable—and one with powerful health benefits when eaten raw. Its distinctive smell and flavor come from sulfur compounds, especially allicin, which is formed when garlic is crushed or chopped. Allicin is linked to garlic's heart-healthy and anti-inflammatory benefits, but it's highly sensitive to heat. 'Heating garlic above 140-degrees Fahrenheit can reduce its allicin content and therefore its health-promoting effects,' explains Amidor. If raw garlic is too pungent for your palate (or stomach), Amidor suggests adding crushed or chopped garlic at the very end of cooking or incorporating it into salad dressings, dips, or spreads. Another easy trick: grate a raw clove into olive oil and lemon juice for a simple vinaigrette or rub it on toast before topping with avocado or sliced tomato. Beets owe their vibrant red color to betalains, which are antioxidant and anti-inflammatory compounds that are highly sensitive to heat. Zenker notes that raw beets also retain more vitamin C and naturally occurring nitrates, which have been shown to support cardiovascular health and boost athletic performance by increasing nitric oxide availability in the blood. 'Beets are well known for their nitrate content, which has been widely studied to enhance vascular function,' she says. Cooking can significantly reduce these benefits, especially when beets are boiled or roasted at high temperatures. To enjoy them raw, try grating beets into salads, combining with carrots and apples to make a crunchy slaw, blending into smoothies or dips, or slicing thinly for a beet 'carpaccio' with lemon, olive oil, and a sprinkle of goat cheese. Crunchy, sweet, and super convenient, carrots are a raw veggie staple—and for good reason. They retain more of their natural fiber when eaten raw, which can support healthy digestion and help regulate blood sugar and cholesterol levels. However, they're also high in beta-carotene, a compound your body converts to vitamin A and which becomes more bioavailable when carrots are cooked. To get the best of both worlds, eat a combination of raw and cooked carrots in your diet. If you're boiling carrots, consider using the leftover water in soups or sauces to reclaim lost nutrients. Enjoy raw carrots sliced into sticks for dipping, shredded into slaws, or blended into a gingery carrot dressing with oil, vinegar, and a drizzle of honey. Technically a fruit, but commonly treated as a vegetable, cucumbers are a cool, crisp addition to your raw veggie lineup. Made up of 95% water, they're naturally hydrating and contain small amounts of potassium, vitamin K, and antioxidants like cucurbitacins, which may have anti-inflammatory and anti-cancer properties. Lucey recommends using raw cucumbers in homemade tzatziki and notes that cucumbers were among the vegetables linked to better mental health in recent research on raw produce intake. Other easy ways to enjoy cucumbers raw include slicing them into salads and sandwiches, blending them into chilled soups, or top cucumber slices with hummus, cheese, or smoked salmon for a quick and healthy snack or mini appetizer. Wash well, even if peeling: Raw veggies can carry dirt and bacteria, so always wash them first, even if you're planning to peel them. Add a little fat: Nutrients in raw vegetables that are rich in fat-soluble nutrients like beta-carotene and vitamin K, are better absorbed when paired with a bit of healthy fat. Next time you have a raw salad with carrots or kale, be sure to add a drizzle of olive oil, a sprinkle of nuts, or a dollop of hummus to boost absorption and flavor. Prep ahead: Use weekend time to chop some raw veggies to have on hand for the week. Store in airtight containers with a damp paper towel to keep them crisp and ready to go. Mix it up: To get the most nutrients in your diet, have a mix of raw and cooked veggies. There are health benefits in both! Read the original article on Real Simple
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Yahoo
The true cost of the GOP's megabill will be measured in lives. Tens of thousands of lives.
The reconciliation bill making its way through Congress includes cuts to Medicaid that are so massive that even some Republicans have criticized them. In a remarkable address Sunday in the Senate, Sen. Thom Tillis asked his GOP colleagues what he should tell his fellow North Carolinians who lose health care coverage. 'What do I tell 663,000 people in two years, three years,' he asked, 'when President Trump breaks his promise by pushing them off of Medicaid because the funding's not there anymore?' But the toll is even worse than lost coverage. These cuts will cost more than 51,000 people their lives every year. That's not hyperbole. It's a predictable result when you cut off health insurance to people who are old, poor and sick. And it's based on analyses and projections from researchers at the University of Pennsylvania, Harvard and Yale. Medicaid insures 1 in 5 Americans, typically low-income and often disabled. The latest version of the bill in front of the Senate includes more than $1 trillion in proposed cuts to the Medicaid program over 10 years. If enacted, these cuts would be the largest in Medicaid's 58-year history and would harm the health of millions. Consider one deeply vulnerable group of 13 million Americans, known as dual-eligible individuals because they rely on both Medicare and Medicaid. These people automatically get subsidies that lower the cost of their medications. When they lose Medicaid, they lose access to low-cost drugs, increasing the likelihood that chronic conditions go untreated. Using Medicare data on dual-eligible individuals, we calculated the effects of losing drug subsidies on beneficiaries' mortality. Based on this research, we estimated that 18,200 dual-eligible individuals would die each year from the loss of Medicaid coverage. Among the hardest hit would be those with chronic conditions like HIV, heart disease and lung disease. The harms will not stop there. The bill proposes to add a work requirement for most nonelderly adults within Medicaid and would also end enhanced premium tax credits that lower the cost of individual plans on the Affordable Care Act (ACA) marketplace. Drawing on research about the effects of gaining Medicaid and marketplace coverage, our colleagues at Yale estimated that over 20,000 people would die annually due to projected coverage losses from these provisions of the bill. The budget bill also will delay for a decade the new rule for minimum staffing at nursing homes that would improve quality of care. Based on studies of the relationship between nurse staffing hours and resident mortality, our colleagues at Penn project another 13,000 deaths per year among residents. Medicaid funding cuts will force governors and state legislators to make politically unpalatable decisions, because states, unlike the federal government, must balance their budgets every year. States will likely be forced to curtail benefits or install policies that limit the amount of time individuals can receive Medicaid. Hospitals, clinics and other caregivers will suffer as well with rural and urban facilities bearing the brunt, forcing them to trim operations or close altogether. A full accounting of these impacts won't be known for several years as they depend on how states adjust over time to funding cuts. Therefore, the full effects of Medicaid cuts could be even more extensive than current forecasts of coverage loss and mortality suggest. What can be done to reduce unnecessary Medicaid loss? Halting the proposed cuts would be a start. There is evidence that Medicaid expansions are cost-effective by improving the long-term health of many people. While several Republican lawmakers who have criticized the Medicaid cuts still plan to vote for the legislation, there is still time for them to use their leverage to amend the bill. Another place to look is Medicaid's onerous application process. Many people cycle on and off Medicaid for bureaucratic reasons like lost or incorrect paperwork rather than improving finances. Analysts have identified ways states can reduce these burdens, including streamlining asset tests and making Medicaid enrollment automatic for individuals receiving income-based programs. Unfortunately, the tax bill will move policy in the opposite direction — adding or preserving administrative hurdles that prevent individuals who need Medicaid from getting coverage. For example, the proposal to introduce a Medicaid work requirement would add bureaucratic red tape and make it harder for people to remain on Medicaid — even for those who are working and meet eligibility criteria. In 2018, for instance, Arkansas instituted work requirements for its Medicaid program until a federal judge's ruling the following year put them on hold. Research found that the requirements did not increase employment but instead led to coverage losses because of difficulty reporting their employment status to the state. The tax bill also proposes to delay until at least 2035 a Biden-era Medicaid rule to streamline Medicaid eligibility and renewals for dual-eligible individuals. Currently, most dual-eligible individuals must fill out more than 15 pages of forms to document their income and assets. This complexity can make it especially hard to keep Medicaid for people with cognitive impairment. Delaying this rule would result in 1.3 million fewer low-income Medicare beneficiaries enrolled in Medicaid by 2034, the Congressional Budget Office estimated. Although policymakers say they don't intend to cut coverage for older adults and people with disabilities, what is clear is that the bill's funding reductions and its changes to Medicaid enrollment policies are unlikely to spare this vulnerable population. As the budget bill moves through Congress, policymakers must consider the repercussions that steep Medicaid cuts will have and whether Medicaid-eligible individuals keep the coverage they need. If they do not, the consequences won't just be financial; they'll be deadly. This article was originally published on
