The Supreme Court Ducked Another Big Abortion Case. Clarence Thomas Is Livid.
For nearly three years, it has seemed inevitable that the Supreme Court would strike down the “buffer zones” that restrict protests near the entrances of reproductive health clinics. A majority of the court has already castigated these laws—and past precedent upholding them—as a subversion of anti-abortion protesters’ First Amendment rights.
10hon MSN
So what are shield laws exactly, and what does the future hold for them? TIME spoke to experts to find out.
The case against Dr. Margaret Carpenter appears to be the first instance of criminal charges against a doctor accused of ...
Stacker on MSN3d
These states already restrict abortion. Their legislatures could push it even further.Many of the bills filed in state legislatures across the country focus on abortion pills, abortion access for minors, and, in ...
In Australia, around one in four people who are able to get pregnant will have a medical or surgical abortion in their ...
ProPublica’s first-of-its-kind analysis is the most detailed look yet into a rise in life-threatening complications for women ...
The Court refuses a case on ‘sidewalk counseling,’ over a vigorous dissent.
Opinion
1hon MSNOpinion
Actress Natasha Lyonne posted on X that it was "Not my eloquent best" after saying 12-year-olds should be able to get abortions.
On Monday, the Supreme Court handed abortion rights advocates a rare win when they declined to take up a pair of cases ...
Some results have been hidden because they may be inaccessible to you
Show inaccessible results
Feedback