This week on the wheelhouse.

You bring access to abortion care and IVF, and if you know how, might reproductive rights change in Trump's second term?

For Connecticut public, I'm Frankie Graziano.

This is the wheelhouse, the show that connects politics of the people.

We got your weekly dose of politics in Connecticut and beyond right here.

During president elect Donald Trump's first term, abortion access took some ..

He appointed anti-abortion judges, posted about his role in ending Roe versus Wade.

Trump also pushed to limit the ability the availability of a medication abortion drug called with a pistol.

And while Donald Trump didn't mention abortion specifically during his acceptance spe.. advocates are preparing for another four years of increasingly limited access to reproductive health care.

What happens to people already struggling to receive adequate care in a post-roe America?

Are reproductive rights in Connecticut at risk?

And how might Trump's presidency see impact access to care and reproductive technology like IVF?

That's what we're diving into this hour with me now, Connecticut Attorney General William Tong, so great to have you on with us today.

Hey, Frankie, great to be with you.

Very great to have you on the show today.

I appreciate you stopping by with us here.

I really want to get into this, the safe harbor state for abortion that Connecticut is.

Can you explain to us exactly what that means?

What that means is that, Connecticut is the sover.. We're independent of other states.

And that means we get to decide for ourselves how Connecticut wants to live, and we get to pass our own laws, respecting, honoring and protecting women patients, doctors, nurses, reproductive health care and the right to an abortion.

It means that other states like Texas and Mississippi and Missouri and Alabama, can't come into Connecticut and enforce their laws against people here in Connecticut.

They can't issue subpoenas.

They can't get courts and lawyers here in Connecticut to take action against people here in Connecticut seeking reproductive health care.

And if they do, we can sue them and take action against them.

And you didn't wait long after the results were determined in this year's election to take action.

Your office announced a new resource and abortion rights and access hotline.

Can you help us understand what this hotline provides?

Yeah.

You know, I was at a rally r.. And somebody said to me, William, are you ready for the front line?

And I said, I've been on the front line since I became attorney general.

So, what's all this new again?

My first two years as attorney general, Donald Trump was president.

And and now we're back to where we started.

We were in Dobbs.

Unfortunately, that did not go the way that we wanted to go, but but we've been fighting all along, fighting to protect access to abortion, to make sure that it's safe, legal and accessible here in Connecticut to protect access to Mitha stone.

Which which is the medication that you use as part of a two part medication regimen?

For a, for a medication abortion, which is half of all abortions in this country.

So we've been extraordinarily active in protecting access to abortion or reproductive health care here in Connecticut and across the country with my fellow attorneys ge.. And the idea is, if you don't have access to them, if a stone the abortion or your reproductive care there in that case would not be as safe or effective.

I want to understand more about this hotline.

Can people call at any time?

Yeah.

So so on.. there's a lot of misinformation and disinformation out there about abortion, about abortion rights, about what other states can do, about what what people's rights are here in Connecticut.

And I just want to reiterate again that abortion is safe, legal and accessible.

Here in Connecticut, not just for patients, but for providers and doctors and nurses and health care institutions.

And that's the law of the state.

That's the policy of this state.

But still, even though we've made that absolutely clear and we've enshrined Roe versus Wade in our laws, there's still a lot of questions.

So we set up a hotline with reproductive equity now, which is a multi-state organization.

They're based in Boston.

And what was, near pro-choice America is now part of reproductive equity now.

And they put together this hotline, where pro bono lawyers, with our assistance will provide, we'll provide information to people over the phone.

And if they have more complex legal needs, we can refer them, to legal counsel to get the legal help that they need.

And so this is essentially one stop shopping.

So you're not scouring the internet or or getting second hand, you know, legal advice from somebody, you know, that you are casually talking to, socially.

You know, we don't we don't want people to get casual guidance or legal advice.

We want them to get the help they need.

And so this is an effort by, reproductive equity now and the attorney General's office and the attorney General's office in Massachusetts to provide that support to people.

So, yes, people can call any time, and if they don't get someone right away on, on the phone, it's after hours, they can leave a message and someone will call them back.

Important information from reproductive equity.

Now, can you call this hotline if you are from out of state, you can.

And if you need help, and we'r.. because, you know, we're here in Connecticut or in Massachusetts, we can try to refer you to the right people to help you.

But yes, please do call.

We're here to be a resource, for anybody that needs assistance accessing reproductive health care and if they need access to an abortion.

I've been to Texas, by the way.

Frankie, I've seen what, very restrictive or basically bans on abortion.

Looks like, I've been in a women's health care clinic that, you know, just over two years ago was buzzing with patients and doctors and providing not just reproductive health care and abortion, but, you know, every day health care, mammography, ob gyn, you know, everyday.. And now this place is closed, it's shuttered, it's boarded up, it's abandoned.

And that's what the health car.. And that's what it looks like in Donald Trump's war on American women.

If you're listening to this program on the radio or you're joining us live on youtube.com/connecticut public takes, action right now, give us a call 887209677 and take a chance to talk to somebody who's on the frontlines of this, effort to try to, maybe restore reproductive rights nationally and at least protect them here in Connecticut.

88872096778887209677 attorney general, we mentioned you moving quickly.

Your office, very quickly after the election results were announced.

Is there a back story behind this effort and what spurred it on?

As I said before, we've been fighting this fight now for the full six years that I've been attorney general in.

And frankly, we've been preparing for this moment, for more than a year.

My fellow attorneys general who support, reproductive health care and abortion rights, all of us are Democrats.

We're very closely coordinated.

Our teams are very closely coordinated.

This is a huge priority for us.

But really, it's about access to people here in Connecticut, the people that we know, who, need access not just to reproductive health care and abortion, but to health care broadly.

We know that there are attacks on them all the time.

Even here in Connecticut, for example, what are known as crisis pregnancy centers that here in Connecticut, essentially trick people and draw them into these centers.

Where do you think you're going?

In for reproductive health care.

And and you think you're going to talk to somebody about gettin.. but in fact, you're going into a place where where they trick you into thinking you're getting health care.

They try to talk you out of health care and, and potentially put you at risk because, you're waste you're wasting precious time, when you might otherwise be talking to a qualified doctor or nurse or health care provider.

And there's this billboard that might trick you into into, a billboard into one 800 number.

Right.

And, and there's a lot of misinformation and disinformation out there.

And so, these very real threats to people here in Connecticut have spurred me into action.

And it's not like you're the only attorney working on this in your offi..

If people are unaware exactly of the work that you do, you have a bunch of attorneys working with you.

Can you tell us about, the depth of the people working on this?

And, just really the effort we want to know, particularly if you're interested in this and you want to know if the state of Connecticut has your back, if Attorney General William Tong has your back.

Kind of the scale of this effort.

Well, I hope it's absolutely clear that William Tong has your back.

And and, you know, the state's largest law firm, which I'm privileged to lead, which is the office the attorney general.

And so as soon as Dobbs fell, as soon as row fell in Dobbs, I hope that Dobbs will fall someday.

Someday as well.

And we will restore Roe versus Wade to everyone in this country, not just here in Connecticut, but as soon as the Dobbs decision was handed down, I appointed two special counsel for reproductive rights, Emily Gate and Elmer Nunley.

They're they're excellent.

They're great lawyers.

They're.

There are two of the top lawyers in my office who handle some of .. sophisticated and complex litigation anywhere, and I know that those were that they were the two exactly the right people to handle this, really important task, not just, not just to women and patients, but, to everyone here in Connecticut and Connecticut families.

These are fundamental questions and issues relating to our, our our personal independence, our bodily autonomy, our right to decide for ourselves what happens with our bodies and our families.

Diane from Mansfield is going to .. Attorney General William Tong.

Go ahead.

Diane.

Yes.

Good morning.

I like good morning to you.

I more effort hasn't been made to con.. nationwide and have human development reproductive courses in high schools.

It might eliminate the need for quite so much of the debate on this topic.

Thank you.

Diane, I thi.. is just not necessarily the effort that your office is doing, but more of a wide scale effort in the state.

Do you understand other efforts that, lawmakers may be taking this legislative session besides the work that you all are doing?

Yeah.

Look, she makes a very good point in.

And I think what it underscores is that the action is in the States.

You know, for a long time, we look to the federal government, to pass laws to protect people, and to protect our fundamental freedoms.

And frankly, now, we lean on the states, the original building blocks of this country, each of us, has an obligation not just to protect reproductive freedom and health care and the right to an abortion, but to educate people.

Right, and to help them understand why this is important.

So I think she makes a really good point.

And, what I, what I'm proud of is that Connecticut leads the way on a lot of this work.

And when I talked to my colleagues and other states, including Democratic states, they ask about our shield, law.

They ask about what it means to be a safe harbor.

They asked me how we exercise our state's rights.

You know, remember, that's what the Dobbs decision stands for.

As much as I abhor the Dobbs decision and don't agree with it, it stands for the fundamental proposition that states are sovereign, that we're independent of each other, that we have the right to decide for ourselves how we're going to handle abortion and abortion rights, and that nobody else can tell us what to do.

And, and, and it's Connecticut's prerogative.

It's our right to decide how we're going to handle and protect women patients.

Doctors and nurses talked so much about the hotline, but I haven't asked you to give me the number yet.

Can you go ahead and give us the number?

Oh, I don't have it on me.

I'm sorry.

I'll have to ask you to to pull it up.

Well, I'll pull it up from there.

I'll pull it up for you in a moment.

And I'm also going to invite folks that are listening to this, because I know lawmakers do, listen to this show.

Give us a call if you'd like.

If you'd like to help us answer Diane's question as well as because we always want to know what's happening in the state level, I would imagine that, folks are going to be very as much as, the attorney general just said that the state laws are sovereign.

So I would imagine that there may be more efforts as things go to the states, more we're talking about education, maybe, ship shifting here as we get away from, Miguel Cardona and we go to, Linda McMahon.

So there may be efforts to protect some of our state laws and some.. Attorney general says he's getting a call as well, from other, lawmakers in other states.

So I would imagine, that it is an important time right now for lawmakers to try to make these state laws, the abortion hotline number that we're going to give you here in Connecticut.

It's, 24/7 call line.

You could call.

People are always going to be there.

If not, they will give you a call back.

I understand reproductive equity now is helping out Attorney General William Tong staff.

The number is 1833309630118333096301.

Just want to, talk about this a little, bit further here, this effort that went to the Supreme Court to overturn Roe versus Wade, impacting a right protected by the United States Constitution for five decades.

How did you and other state officials react to the case known as Dobbs v Jackson?

We were in that.

We were in that fight every st.. We were in the predecessor fights.

There was another case called Little Sisters that came before Dobbs, which really told us that this was heading in the wrong direction.

And so we fought tooth and nail and Dobbs and, and frankly, we, we held out hope that something might change even after the decision was leaked.

But unfortunately, it landed where it landed.

What what happened after that, though, is we saw and we knew that an attack on misoprostol was coming because we we knew and understand that anti-abortion activists, both in Washington, DC and across the country, what they ultimately want is a national ban on abortion in and as I've said that as I've said, that there's now a, a war on American women an.. And as I've tried to, tell people that they're trying to get a nationwide ban on abortion, some of my colleagues on the other side of this debate say that's ridiculous.

You're being hysterical, but that's not going to happen.

And and so and so they have right.

An attack on mifepristone is nothing if not an attempt to enforce and impose a nationwide ban on abortion.

Because mifepristone, is used in half of all abortions in this country.

So we've gone, on offense, my fellow Democratic attorneys general and I, we've gone into federal court in Washington state.

We filed our own lawsuit to make sure that if a stone is available and that abortion medication, abortion included is safe, ..

But I have to stop you right there, because if I take officials at face value nationally, they say that it's all about state rights, as you mentioned earlier.

So they would never make a national ban or anything like that.

They would never have the federal government do something like that.

That would impact women's rights.

Right?

Attorney general, that would never happen.

Yeah.

They would never contradict themselves.

Right.

Or or be inconsistent or a hypocrite call that would never happen.

You know, of course, that's what we're seeing all over this debate.

And.

And I think, I think we lost your connection there.

But I ask that question.

We do have you back, Attorney General, but I asked acid, almost tongue in cheek, like that because now you're going to be firmly on the defensive to make sure that they don't touch safe harbor status.

So I kind of want to go back to that question one with that, which I would imagine that all roads lead to potentially the federal government under Donald Trump attacking state rights.

So we're not just on defense, we're on offense.

And I think that's that's really important in the Mr.. Don't fight.

We're on offense.

On this question about the safe harbor and other states coming in to try to gain access to information or to serve subpoenas against people here in Connecticut.

We're on offense.

My my colleague, the attorney general of Texas,.. he's filed a lawsuit trying to pierce HIPAA, trying to pierce federal law, trying to get at, that that health care and medical information about patients in Texas and beyond so we can figure out who's looking for reproductive health care, who's trying to get an abortion.

And, and we've, engaged in that by intervening in that lawsuit to try to stop him.

So we're not just playing defense.

We're an offense.

Me, Tish James, Rob bond, some of my fellow attorneys .. Again, we're we've we've stood up, and have been standing up a firewall to protect women patients, reproductive health care across the country.

We had a comment from, from a listener named Rich who heard something about a target .. where there might have been accounts linked to people that were buying tampons and pads, and there might have been a situation then to get ads or some kind of algorithm to unlock pregnancy tests.

Is that something you think about local, whether that happened or not?

Is that something you think about locally and you're trying to protect, people here in Connecticut from it?

Yeah.

As lawye.. You know, every contingency you can think of.

We have to anticipate all of that.

And so we talk about those issues, we try to anticipate them.

We try to address them for sure.

I don't think anybody, should take anything for granted in this moment.

And I hate to be, so dark about it and gloomy about it, but I don't think we should underestimate or overestimate, the capacity, of of people out of state who want to come here and do us harm.

We should not underestimate them.

And, and, you know, but people like Ken Paxton and others, the lengths that they're willing to go to, not just to not just to impose their world view, but to do harm to people here in, in Connecticut and in their states as well.

Attorney General William Tong, we're so grateful for you to join us this morning and talk about this hotline.

The number again, if you're looking to access this for reproductive rights or you want to learn about what's happening in other states as well.

83330963018333096301.

Thank you for joining us, Attorney General.

Thanks, Frankie.

You take care and have a nice day.

You've been listening to Connecticut Attorney General William.. We are talking about how reproductive rights are likely to be vi..

But coming up, what could the Biden administration do now to shore up reproductive rights before Trump takes office?

That's after the break.

You're listening to the wheelhouse.

Support for Arts in th..

I'm Frankie Graziano.

It's hard to pin down president elect Donald Trump on his stance on abortion.

While he has said that he would veto a federal abortion ban.

He and his administration set the stage for abortion access restriction during his first term.

So what could the next four years mean for a person's right to choose an abortion?

And are there steps President Joe Biden could take now to secure access to reproductive rights?

Before he exits the white House?

Important conversation.

Joining me now for it, Shefali Luthra, reproductive health reporter with the 19th independent nonprofit newsroom, reporting at the intersection of gender politics and policy.

She's also the author of a book called Undue Burden.

Good morning, Shefali.

Thank you so much for joining us.

Thank you so much for coming on.

Rachel Bouchet, professor of law and dean of the law school ..

Thank you for joining us so much, Rachel.

Thanks for having me on.

Join the conversation if you'd like.

If you have any questions that may be, Shefali or Rachel coul.. You could join the conversation.

88872096778887209677.

Hey, before we die, and we want to know if either of you would like to respond to anything you just heard from Attorney General William Tong, or maybe something that sounded interesting, that you wanted to follow up on based on your own experiences or reporting?

Go ahead.

Shefali.

You know, I do think that attention that that you spoke to that is so interesting is the the real divide.

We have already begun to see among states like Connecticut and among states like Texas, and especially in the world where there is so little we can see from the federal government, at least under the Biden administration, that's really been the area where we have seen changes.

States with anti-abortion leadership growing more conservative in states like Connecticut, growing more protective.

And one thing that a lot of folks I have spoken to have really alluded to is that there will be, at some point, a clash.

And it feels like that point where we'll see these different laws come into conflict.

And I think that will be really revealing for how we think about what abortion rights look like on the state level, but also as an entire country.

During president elect Donald Trump's election night victory speech, statements about his plans for abortion access were notably absent.

But that doesn't mean that we don't know anything about his stance on abortion.

It seems like the appearances are starting.

I understand that, the the president elect just went on a trip as well.

So walk us through.

Maybe anything you're hearing now is, as we're a.. away from Inauguration Day, one thing that we do understand is that abortion opponents, they're not thrilled with how Donald Trump spoke about abortion toward the end of his campaign.

They wish he had been more forceful in calling for national policy that would be restrictive.

But they do believe that they have a much better in with this incoming white House than they did with President Joe Biden.

And so they're doing what they can.

They are trying to get the att..

They are making sure that they can influence departments like Health and Human Services a.. and Drug Administration to see what can they do to make sure that we have an administration that even if we don't end up going in the direction of a statutory federal ban, which would always have been pretty uphill to get past, we can get federal policies that are, at the very least, undoing the efforts that Joe Biden did to protect access where he could.

And that's something that we'll probably see more of.

I think it's worth noting that Donald Trump was very friendly to abortion opponents in his previous tenure, and it's likely we'll see some of those alliances and relationships pick up again in the new year.

Interesting time where, folks are canvasing, some of these potential appointees.

There's been a sense in the news cycle, Rachel, particularly when the media was focused on project 2025 that the GOP had softened its stance on abortion.

But some people say that's misleading because of the GOP's focus on the 14th amendment.

Can you kind of give us a mini civics lesson here?

What is the 14th amendment and how might it impact reproductive rights?

So the 14th amendment is, the minimum constitution that guarantees that states can't pass laws without due process.

It has a number of components, but the one that that has been at issue for the issue of abortion and fetal personhood is the Due Process Clause.

And over time, courts have interpreted that clause as having a substantive meaning, not just process.

In terms of you can't throw someone in jail without, without, a trial or some kind of legal process, but also that the government, federal and state can't deprive you of certain fundamental liberties privacy, the right to marry, the right to have children, and the right to raise those children as you see fit.

And until Dobbs, that right included a right to privacy that extended to abortion, at least abortion before viability.

That's what Roland Casey stood for.

Dobbs overturn that?

Dobbs said that the 14th amendment does not have a cons.. to abortion, does not include, abortion protections.

And that's the background, where abortion law is concerned when anti-abortion advocates talk about the 14th amendment, they think about due process as including a right to life for the fetus.

That the concept tution should prohibit abortion in a sense, because it should protect life from conception, life before viability, conferring rights on the unborn.

And so when the Republican, national platform at the convention, or when you hear people talk about the right to life of the unborn as a constitutional right, they're talking about the 14th amendment, and they're talking about an argument that our Constitution should confer rights on, on the fetus, chiefly since access to abortion is no longer protected by the 14th Amendment, as we just, understood from talking to Rachel, how might that impact how the new administration approaches abortion during these next four years?

They are much more liberated to try and take actions that would be pretty extreme and that would have national consequences.

And you mentioned project 2025.

What we did hear a lot about from that document and from the folks who are behind it and who are allies, to the vice President elect, JD Vance, is that they support using the federal government to limit access to abortion even without passing a new law.

That means, for instance, trying to bring back this 1800s anti obscenity law called the Comstock Act, which was never repealed but isn't enforced anymore.

And using that to try and ban the distribution of the medication used for abortion.

They've also talked about could they use the FDA to rest.. to those same pills, whether by prohibiting the mailing of those pills or even taking it off the market entirely, which would have very significant consequences, because most abortions done in this country are through medication.

And most people in states with abortion bans who've been able to get around those bands have done so with medication abortion.

That said, I think we should be really aware that taking these kinds of national steps to restrict abortion access would be very unpopular.

Voters do not like this.

And we saw in the election that people who voted for Donald Trump also vot.. And I think it's worth paying attention to see whether they remain attuned to those political dynamics and whether they continue to try and take a step back from those more restrictive policies because they are nervous about the backlash.

But I think that is a real open question still.

But the point that many will make regarding, reproductive rights and efforts to support abortion access and access to move a person is that it's not a safe if you don't have Mr. President on board as part of that two drug regimen, absolutely.

It's not as safe and it's not as effective.

And I've spoken to medical providers, for instance, who when posed with the question, would you keep providing medication, abortion and through telehealth if Mr. President weren't available, they've said no, they wouldn't want to provide the alternative regimen.

Misoprostol only which is safe is effective.

Is it slightly less safe, slightly less effective because they don't want to provide what they view as less good medicine.

So the Commerce Act act is what we're getting there.

That might be the modus operandi to try to, remove a person from the equation here.

Can you guys help us get deeper into the Comstock Act and how it would be used to kind of undo mifepristone access?

I can jump in, and then I'd love to hear what Rachel has to say also.

But the Comstock Act, it has language in there that essentially bans.

Or it could be interpreted as a better way of phrasing it, to ban the mailing of items that could be used to induce an abortion.

The Justice Department, under President Biden, has said it does not believe the Comstock Act prohibits mailing of abortion related medications, and as such it has not b..

But a white House with a different interpretation of that language could try and resuscitate it to prohibit people distributing abortion pills or even abortion related devices through the mail, which could have very sweeping implications.

But I do think it's worth noting that we could see them take steps to restrict access to medication abortion without the Comstock Act as well.

Simply trying to use the FDA, which is the agency that or excuse me, that the administration that approves drugs for use and allows them to be distributed as they are in this country.

The FDA is the institution that approved and for Preston, approved its use for telemedicine to begin with.

And it could very simply try and reverse those steps without us even going to Comstock.

And that's the thing, Rachel, that we want to get to.

That's one interpretation of the Comstock Act, this one that opponents, of abortion might have.

Are there other interpretations, or at least what might somebody who wants to defend mifepristone in this kind of a federal situation say about this interpretation of the Comstock Act?

Well, so the Comstock Act was enacted in ..

It was written by Anthony Comstock, who was an anti vice crusader, and the law really focused on criminalizing any lewd or lascivious behavior.

It was really, targeting, anything that had to do with extramarital sex and abortion and, birth control got swept up, in the, in that enforcement.

But it hasn't been enforced in over 100 years, and it was never enforced as an abortion ban.

In fact, there was always legal abortion in this country.

And that was before quickening.

So before viability, and the Comstock Act was not applied to people who were seeking legal services from their health care providers.

It was used to target people like Margaret Sanger and others who were distributing information about contraceptives, about, intimacy, about sex outside of marriage.

And so it never it it was never a de facto abortion ban.

It was never used as an abortion ban.

And it hasn't been enforced in almost a century.

So really, the idea that you could, you know, bring this law to life and, apply a law that was, popular in 1873, in 2024, as in 2025, it just it doesn't make a lot of sense.

IVF is another, area the here that the anti-abortion activists movement is targeting here, trying to abolish these fertility treatments.

Do we know of so-called abortion abolitionists, have the ear of the president elect or any of the picks of his potential cabinet picks?

Regarding IVF, I've seen also Donald Trump, in a in a very public way in one of these, one of these rallies, say, hey, you know, everybody's trying to say, I'm paraphrasing here, and I'm not doing the impression, but saying everybody takes the thinks that we're going to take down IVF, but we love IVF or something like that, I believe he said.

So help me understand, where the administration is going.

There.

The phrasing that I think about a lot that he used, which was, you know, a li.. even though he had not known what IVF was until quite recently.

But there is a real tension here because abortion bans are unpopular, but banning IVF is even more unpopular, and the people who deeply oppose abortion, many of them, do oppose IVF because of the way it is practiced in this country, because of the creation of multiple embryos, seeing which ones are actually going to become healthy pregnancies and using those ones.

And you don't use all the embryos that are created in IVF because you don't need the.. And it is actually not good medical practice to do so.

But there are extra ones that can be frozen or that are ultimately discarded.

And many people who oppose abortion view that as taking a life because they view embryos.

As Rachel pointed out, as people.

But banning IVF, as we saw in Alabama last.. or excuse me this year, actually, it's been a very long year, is very unpopular.

When Alabama Supreme Court interpreted the law to effectively shut down IVF in the state, the legislature moved to action very quickly.

This very conservative state passed laws that were meant to secure access to IVF.

They they didn't provide complete ironclad security, but they allowed the regimen to start being offered again in the state.

And what that tells us is that there would be very, very severe political costs to IVF restriction that Donald Trump is aware of.

And that would be something to consider if there are real efforts to try and restrict access to the treatment any time soon.

That doesn't mean it is not a long term goal of the anti-abortion movement to restrict IVF, but it is something with a much more complicated political dynamic than other areas that we have seen, such as trying to restrict abortion after a certain point in pregnancy, where some abortion opponents think they could make a more compelling argument.

Rachel, do you want to comment here on IVF and what the federal laws, but not necessarily the federal laws, but this effort that we saw, particularly in Alabama, to, try and ban IVF treatments, what's your takeaway and your analysis on on efforts at the state and federal level to try to ban IVF?

I agree with Charlie that it's going to be incredibly difficult to do that politically.

It's an industry that's over $1 billion.

It, there's a lot of powerful interest in the fertility industry, and a lot of a lot of Americans rely on it.

This is the result of kind of personhood creep.

Arguments that certain forms of contraceptives are, forms of abortion, arguments that, reason embryos and how they're stored, that embryos should be treated as persons.

There are lots of implications for personhood that, make them make personhood laws and policies and credit and popular one is the potential to threaten IVF.

Others just kind of walking through.

What happens if a fetus is a person with rights?

Do they get tax credits?

Do they?

You know, what else attaches?

In that way?

And so I think that, you know, ..

I don't know what the priorities of the Trump administration will be, but I can't imagine that banning IVF is anywhere close to high on the list.

Fetus rights.

I guess it more coming up here .. trying to make light of of a very serious situation, but I can't imag.. where we're talking about the economy, anybody would want a fetus to be taxed.

Maybe that that'll be the breaking point for some of these folks you're listening to.

Professor of law .. at Temple University, Rachel Boucher, and of course, Shefali Luthra, reproductive health reporter at the 19th and author of Undue Burden Coming Up, a look at Dobbs impact on health care providers and patients.

We're also going to dig into some of those cabinet picks and see how that impacts, reproductive rights.

If you have a question about abortion access here in Connecticut or beyond, give us a call at 887209677.

One.

This is the wheelhouse from Connecticut Public Radio.

I'm Frankie Graziano.

This hour, we're talking about how a second Trump term might impact reproductive rights in Connecticut and beyond.

Still with us.

Shefali Luthra, reproductive health reporter with ..

It's also the author of Undue Burden.

And Rachel Boucher is a professor of law and dean of the law school at Temple University.

Thank you so much for both of you joining us here this morning.

And we're inviting folks to weigh in if they can.

Are you a person who will be impacted if reproductive rights become restricted here?

Maybe not so much in Connecticut, but elsewhere?

If you're listening to this, please do give us a call at 8872096778887209677 Rachel, we've been leaning in here into this conversation and exploring hypotheticals during this hour, but now I want to focus on the concrete.

What challenges our ob gyn is facing when it comes..

Since Ro was overturned in 2022, we'll always have, as part of their training, a mandate to receive training and abortion care.

The accrediting organization that oversees all training for OB GYNs across the country requires it.

But if you're in a state that bans abortion, you now have to travel out of state to receive that mandated training.

So if you are in a residency program in Texas or in Idaho, you're traveling to California and to other states to get those clinical hours.

It's intense.

It's a couple of weeks and it's not the way that medical education typically works.

Medical education typically leads in lives, experiences, and through the multi-year process of becoming a health care provider, becoming a doctor.

And so we're seeing a lot of strain on the process as people have to travel, have to make time in their lives.

We're seeing a lot of brain drain.

We're seeing people who are practicing in Texas or in Idaho, because they're they're not able to have the kind of practice security, extreme self.

It's medical education.

And medical practice is really changing pretty significantly.

Shefali, in your reporting, you've spoken with many people directly impacted by abortion bans.

One person you spoke to, this is, one of those very important national stories that we've been hearing since the campaign here.

On both sides, we've seen this person even speak on behalf of President Joe Biden and Kamala Harris, talked to us about Amanda Zaretsky.

Please.

She is arguably one of the most visible victims of an abortion ban in this country right now.

She had the experience of having a wanted pregnancy.

She went through fertility treatment to try and become pregnant and then her water broke prematurely.

This is not very common, but it is not unheard of.

But what happens is the treatment at that point is, is delivery is abortion because you cannot give birth to a baby that will live.

It is too early in the pregnancy, and you also can't stay pregnant because you will develop an infection.

She could not get care because the doctors weren't sure if it was legal.

If the exceptions in Texas medical ban abortion ban applied to her and instead they waited until she was septic.

And sepsis is quite dangerous.

It is an infection that if not treated, can kill you.

She was only able to get the care that she needed to have this pregnancy terminated.

Once you develop sepsis, she has suffered lifelong consequences as a result, potentially impaired fertility and what she has done since is traveled the country telling her story, talking about what this meant to her, how I remember the first time she and I met, she told me she opposed abortion bans, but she did not think they would affect her because she wanted to become pregnant.

And her story underscores that actually, if you can become pregnant, whether you want to or not, abortion bans will affect you.

The complications in pregnancy are simply too ubiquitous, and abortion is too embedded.

A part of our pregnancy related health care.

Since the election has ended, she is still thinking about what comes next for her.

But what she has said, and what I've heard from so many people who shared their abortion st.. they know that this is still a fight, that they will be in for the long haul.

They are not done talking about abortion.

They are not done trying to change the conversation around this to make sure that people understand just how devastating abortion bans have been for them, and could be for others if they are not undone.

This is so reminiscent to me.

It evokes memories of folks that have been impacted by gun violence, survivors and, have seen, loved ones victimized by gun violence.

And then turning to, the law, turning to politics to try to get something to change.

We're seeing that potentially here with Amanda Rousey.

Let's touch though, on the president elect's cabinet picks.

We're talking about Robert F Kennedy Jr. We're talking about that being potentially involved because HHS or the office of, the federal Department of Health, Marco Rubio being involved in this Pam body, some of the folks that are being bandied about, we talked about project 2025 earlier, Russell Vought, one of the, the, people that we understand to be the architects behind project 2025, a document that talks about family a lot.

And I imagine, Shefali, it talks about family a lot for a reason.

It certainly does.

I mean, project 2025 articulates a very clear vision of what family would be, even if it's not always explicit.

Is very implicit.

Right.

Sex is to create babies.

There are very defined roles for how we think about parenthood, how we think about motherhood, how we think about gender that are just very clear through our project 2025.

When we think about the cabinet picks, I do think it's worth exploring a bit how much of a black box in some ways RFK Jr, Pam Bondi, even Doctor Oz seem to be on abortion specifically.

RFK Jr has said different things at different points about abortion and some abortion opponents have expressed concern that he is not sufficiently an ally to their cause, and they have been working really hard to try and get.. that he have subordinates, and that the agency is staffed with people who are more obviously and clearly, devotedly abortion opponents.

With Pam Bondi, she just doesn't have much of an abortion record either way, because she was no longer attorney general by the time Florida passed.

Many of its more, more restrictive abortion laws, there were some that passed under her time as AG, but not the ones that we often think about the 15 week ban, the six week ban.

But what I think we need to keep an eye on still is the appointments that are a tier or two below, or who are the people who had the title ten program?

Who are the people who are in charge of the Office of Refugee Resettlement?

Who are all of the the normal staffers who are there to carry out the day to day administrations and efforts of these departments because they are the ones who will really dictate what policy looks like and how our lives are affected.

We had a call earlier from an Elaine from Farmington.

I just want to clear this up from her to help her out.

Our great producer, Tess Terrible and Chloe Wynn are helping us out here, asking about a potential, stockpile of mifepristone because of potential restrictions on it.

As of March, it was a lieutenant.

Susan, lieutenant governor Susan vice Switz who said that Connecticut may opt against the stockpile because, FDA approval, without that FDA approvals, doctors would stop prescribing the drug.

So there won't necessarily be that here, at least for now, only about a minute or so left in the show.

And I want to give it to Rachel.

Just, to help us out here in understanding some of those cabinet picks, just just from the perspective we heard from William Tong earlier that said that maybe we could see the Trump team turn back, abortion and reproductive rights through the FDA or HHS.

And then secondly, what Joe Biden might be able to do before he leaves office.

So I think, you know, the people pick the head, you know, head, the FDA, HHS, those picks are incredibly important because they set the tone for not just pursuing anti-abortion agendas proactively, but they also, have two different lawsuits taken against the agency, taken against HHS.

And we've already seen those lawsuits lifted.

He's been sued.

HHS has been sued.

And, you know, the people appointed have to have the, will the appetite to defend policies that are think the to defend the FDA approval of the drug.

And so I think that's what we need to keep watch of is, what kind of leadership, what what tone will that new leadership set?

But, you know, there is there's a lot that Biden might be able to do.

There are vacancies that he can fill up, particularly in the federal bench.

So I think, you know, any any rule that has to be finalized, any vacancy that can be filled, I think that Biden should, you know, think about doing it.

Thank you so much.

We appreciate your help on this topic.

Thank you so much to Rachel Boucher, who is the dean of the law, program at the University of excuse me, at Temple University and Shefali Luthra from the 19th.

Thank you so much for joining us today.

Thank you so much for having us.

Very important conversation on reproductive rights.

We ..

Listen to the wheelhouse at CT public August the Wheelhouse.

Also want to direct your attention to CT public.org very quickly to buy tickets to a stupendous event, the Barney podcast, show that we are having in Bridgeport.

Coming up, go to CT public.org for more information on that.

Thank you to Chloe Wynn, Rob and Dorian Aiken and.. You are listening to The Wheelhouse.

We'll see you next.