Protestors gathered to rally against the abortion ban in Texas. // Photo courtesy of Vanity Fair.

Legislation that protects access to abortion services and guards citizens against abortion restrictions was passed by the House of Representatives on Friday, Sept. 24. The vote came almost a month after the abortion ban in Texas went into effect. 

The Women’s Health Protection Act, originally proposed by House Democrats from California, Massachusetts, Florida and Texas in 2013, passed with 218 Democrats voting yes and 210 Republicans voting no. Two Democrats, Reps. Cuellar and Lawson from Texas and Florida voted no and abstained, respectively. The legislation now moves to the Senate for consideration.  

“I worry that if the Women’s Health Protection Act doesn’t pass through the Senate, there will be more laws like the one in Texas passed throughout the country,” said Dani Ruiz, a senior film studies and production major. “Legislation like this isn’t the way to stop abortions from happening, but it does make safer abortions harder to come by.” 

Ruiz isn’t the only one concerned about the implications of the ban. May McMullan, a junior philosophy and political science major, stated, “Should the Texas law stand, and the Supreme Court rebut Roe v. Wade in the process, I am extremely fearful about the future of the country and for the safety of both myself and those affected by these violations of rights.”  

A doctor defying the Texas abortion ban passed earlier this month is being sued by two former attorneys seeking to challenge the constitutionality of the new law, according to ABC News. Dr. Alan Braid published an op-ed in The Washington Post on Saturday, Sept. 18, admitting to providing an abortion for a woman in her first trimester, citing his duty to ensure her “fundamental right to receive this care.” 

The Texas legislation (S.B. 8) bans abortions after six weeks, essentially overturning the protective precedent established by Roe v. Wade almost fifty years ago. The ban, which went into effect on Wednesday, Sept. 1, makes no exceptions for pregnancies formed from rape, abuse or incest, according to the Washington Post. 

The U.S. Supreme Court failed to block the law earlier in the month, with Chief Justice Roberts dissenting with Justices Breyer, Kagan and Sotomayor. Sotomayor penned a scathing dissent of the conservative majority, saying, “Presented with an application to enjoin a flagrantly unconstitutional law engineered to prohibit women from exercising their constitutional rights and evade judicial scrutiny, a majority of Justices have opted to bury their heads in the sand.” 

The ban, passed in May earlier this year, seeks to bar abortions as soon as cardiac activity is detectable  —  around the six-week mark, before many people know they’re pregnant. For context, that is only two weeks after a missed period, according to Planned Parenthood. Doctors opposed to anti-abortion legislation have argued that the “heartbeat” present at this time cannot exist outside the womb, according to The Washington Post. 

The law also allows citizens to sue abortion providers and anyone providing transportation or financial assistance to those seeking abortions.  

According to the Texas Tribune, the state is prevented from enforcing the law, instead allowing private citizens to enforce it through suing practitioners and anyone else involved with an individual getting an abortion. Sources say that this is an attempt to circumvent constitutional precedent by “enlisting private citizens to do what the State could not,” wrote Sotomayor. 

On Thursday, Sept. 2, the Biden administration issued a press release criticizing the Supreme Court’s ruling. “For the majority to do this without a hearing, without the benefit of an opinion from a court below and without due consideration of the issues, insults the rule of law and the rights of all Americans to seek redress from our courts,” said the administration.  

President Biden tasked the Gender Policy Council, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the Department of Justice to launch an effort by the federal government to respond to those in need of reproductive care who “suffer while courts sift through procedural complexities.” 

“Youth turnout was at record highs in 2020 for the first time ever,” said Hofstra political science professor Dr. Rosanna Perotti when asked about the ban’s impact on electoral politics. “Because this issue is very important to [young voters], I think it’s going to mobilize more people to come out to vote in support of abortion rights.” 

“Gender equality, supporting victims of abuse and women's rights are extremely high on my priority list and I’ll cast my votes accordingly,” said Rebecca Blum, a junior finance major. “I hope we as women are brave and powerful enough to stand up to our own rights and autonomy over our own bodies.” 

Abortion clinics in surrounding states are reporting influxes of people seeking reproductive care outside of Texas, according to The Guardian. Those seeking out-of-state care must consider the logistics of accessing abortion providers, while also dealing with the immense cost of the procedure. 

“Texans deserve the freedom and power to control their own bodies, their own decisions and their own lives,” said CEO and President of Planned Parenthood, Alexis McGill Johnson. “Planned Parenthood will never abandon our patients, and we will do everything in our power to restore and protect access to abortion across Texas and the rest of the country.”