As the U.S. Supreme Court deliberates the latest challenge to Roe v. Wade, new abortion laws are already in the works ahead of Florida's upcoming legislative session.

Encouraged by possible federal changes, conservatives are moving full speed ahead in the Statehouse with proposals like House Bill 167, which would require doctors to conduct a test and inform a pregnant person of a heartbeat.

Lillian Tamayo, who recently announced her retirement as president and CEO of Planned Parenthood of South, East and North Florida after 22 years, said on the Sunrise podcast, she is going into her final legislative session ready to fight.

"Doubling down on all the effort of assuring that we continue to provide healthcare to our patients, to keep our doors open," Tamayo stated.

The Texas-style "heartbeat bill," sponsored by Rep. Webster Barnaby, R-Deltona, would also allow people to sue physicians, clinics and anyone who helps someone else obtain an abortion. Florida's 60-day legislative session begins Tuesday.

Tamayo described her departure from Planned Parenthood as bittersweet. She noted despite increased efforts to overturn Roe v. Wade, the battle has always been constant in her eyes, although she calls this a "red alert moment" for pro-choice advocates.

"To stand in solidarity and to fight for justice, that is the work ahead and the work that I will imagine I will continue to do in a different way, following my departure," Tamayo emphasized.

So far, Florida's GOP leaders have not signaled much support for the Texas-style abortion bill. But Democrats have countered by filing legislation, including House Bill 709 and Senate Bill 1036, to bar any individual, state or local government from interfering with a person's right to seek an abortion, including legal penalties for doing so.

This story was produced by Ms. Magazine
Broadcast version by Lily Böhlke for Florida News Connection/Public News Service

The leaked draft opinion signaling the Supreme Court's majority decision to overturn Roe v. Wade has sent shock waves across the U.S. When a final decision is issued before the end of the Supreme Court's term (likely in June), it will represent the biggest blow to women's constitutional rights in history.

In 1972, when abortion was still illegal throughout most of the country, 53 well-known U.S. women courageously declared "We Have Had Abortions" in the pages of the preview issue of Ms. magazine.

The Washington Post credited the petition with the "start of a powerful strategy in the U.S. abortion rights movement: ending the secrecy that had kept many women out of the fight." Executive editor Kathy Spillar told the Washington Post in a recent interview, "It made it acceptable to speak about it."

The next year, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that abortion was a fundamental right protected by the U.S. Constitution. This year, the Supreme Court appears poised to reverse this position. In this perilous time, Ms. is relaunching the petition-with the encouragement and support of some of the original 1972 signers. This year alone, the petition has garnered almost 7,000 signatories.

Below is an excerpt from recent Washington Post coverage of the 1972 petition, as well as the 2022 relaunch. It shows the power of activism and journalism, and how they can shape a movement.

    'We have had abortions': 1972 petition changed abortion rights movement

    The first Ms. petition marked the start of a powerful strategy in the U.S. abortion rights movement: ending the secrecy that had kept many women out of the fight.

    The effort has been replicated in recent years for the digital age, including the #ShoutYour Abortion Twitter challenge. Congresswomen have shared their own abortion stories on the House floor.

    But that first Ms. petition circulated when abortion was illegal in most of the country.

    Included in the Ms. issue were coupons for readers to fill out and mail in to add their names to the petition. Hundreds of the coupons poured in. Later that year, in its September issue, Ms. ran the petition again, this time with about 1,425 signatures.

    "It liberated and mobilized an army of women who had been keeping a secret," said [Suzanne Braun Levine], who joined Ms. as editor soon after the petition ran.

Read the full article here.

This story was produced by Ms. Magazine.


get more stories like this via email

Vice President Kamala Harris met with abortion providers from Missouri and other restrictive states Thursday to consider ways the Biden administration can protect and expand access to the full scope of reproductive health care.

Even before the leaked draft opinion indicating the Supreme Court intends to overturn Roe v. Wade, Missouri has had among the most barriers to accessing abortions. For instance, there is only one abortion clinic because of state regulations.

Harris said overturning Roe will be a major step backward for the U.S., and would open the door to further restricting fundamental rights.

"The right to privacy that forms the basis of Roe is the same right to privacy that protects the right to use contraception, and the right to marry the person you love, including a person of the same sex," Harris contended.

Last week Harris presided over the vote in the U.S. Senate on the Women's Reproductive Health Act, which would codify Roe v. Wade, but Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., and all the Republicans in the Chamber voted against it.

Michele Landau, board president of the Missouri Abortion Fund, said because states including Missouri already have been navigating barriers to care, there are some systems in place. She emphasized the National Network of Abortion Funds has more than 90 members across the country, already working to provide financial assistance, transportation, child care and logistical support.

"And we're all part of an ecosystem that we all work together," Landau pointed out. "I would just suggest that folks join their local abortion fund, lift up their local abortion funds and contact them to see how they can best assist in their work."

Landau added states which are more friendly to abortion rights have been making it clear, patients are welcome if they need to come and access care.

Illinois protects the right to abortions but is surrounded by states intending to restrict or ban abortion if and when Roe is overturned. She noted just last week, an abortion clinic in Tennessee, CHOICES, announced it would be opening a location in Carbondale, Illinois, not too far from the Missouri border.

As rhetoric grows about the future of federal abortion protections, new poll results show a majority of Minnesotans don't want the state to impose a ban.

Findings from the statewide poll of more than 800 voters, conducted by Hart Research Associates were issued by regional Planned Parenthood leaders.

Six in 10 registered voters said abortion should be fully legal or accessible in most situations. Another 65% said they would oppose new severe restrictions.

Hart Research analyst Kate Fridley said their outreach represents a range of Minnesotans.

"And this opinion on keeping abortion legal holds true across demographic backgrounds in Minnesota," said Fridley. "Majorities of voters - regardless of gender, age, race and region of the state - want to keep abortion legal, in all or most cases."

The results follow last week's leaked U.S. Supreme Court draft opinion, indicating the federal decision in the case 'Roe v. Wade' would be overturned. The court still has to cast a formal vote on the matter.

Minnesota is considered a safe-haven state. But if Republicans take full control of the Legislature this fall, some have said they would try to get proposed bans on future ballots.

President of Planned Parenthood Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota Action Fund Sarah Stoesz said banning abortion would not only run counter to the views of most Minnesotans - but would affect their candidate priorities when looking at this topic.

She noted majorities of voters polled said they're less likely to vote for a person who prioritizes tougher restrictions.

"We know that we need to act swiftly to elect leaders who will protect those rights," said Stoesz. "And that will also pass legislation that protects Minnesotans' rights and reproductive freedom for generations to come."

In addition to GOP candidates, anti-abortion groups like the Minnesota Family Council have embraced the court's draft opinion.

Should it become final, group leaders say it represents a path toward limiting abortions in the state, and suggest lawmakers who oppose such efforts won't be on the right side of history.