On September 30, 1976—forty years ago today—Republicans put a major barrier between low-income women and abortion. The Hyde Amendment prohibits federal funding for abortion in almost all cases, which means that women on Medicaid don’t have coverage. There’s momentum to repeal the Hyde Amendment, with Hillary Clinton coming out strongly against it and congressional Democrats offering counter-legislation. But, Mother Jones reports, a 1980 Supreme Court case upholding the Hyde Amendment would still be a problem:
But Harris v. McRae means getting rid of public funding bans won't be so easy; even if Hyde no longer exists, prohibitions on Medicaid coverage for abortion would still be constitutional, thanks to McRae. States would not be required to change the way they use public money to cover abortion. And given the conservative and often volatile politics around abortion at the state level, it's unlikely most would make an effort to do so.
"To end Hyde but to keep McRae in place is to allow public insurance for abortion to float on the political wind," says Jill E. Adams, a lawyer and the executive director of the Center for Reproductive Rights and Justice at the University of California-Berkeley. "My guess is it would remain the status quo."
Guess what? This is another reason to think of the Supreme Court in this November’s elections. A replacement for the late Justice Antonin Scalia nominated by President Hillary Clinton and confirmed by a Democratic Senate might take us a step closer to overturning Harris v. McRae and making abortion accessible for hundreds of thousands of women who need it.
Can you give just $1 to each Daily Kos-endorsed Senate candidate? The future of the Supreme Court is at stake.
Frustrated you don't live in a swing state? No matter where you live, MoveOn has a great way for you to help their on-the-ground efforts to defeat Donald Trump and take back the Senate. Click here to volunteer.