/cloudfront-us-east-2.images.arcpublishing.com/reuters/CZ6FTACTSRMRFNXQSN7F7EKA24.jpg)
The Facts
The US Dept. of Health and Human Services (HHS) has proposed new privacy protections to prevent women's health information from being used to take legal action or investigate individuals who have had or have helped the occurrence of an abortion.
The proposal was issued Wednesday with the intent to be added to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). The same day, VP Kamala Harris met with the White House Task Force on Reproductive Health Care Access to discuss the potential new rule.
The Spin
Democratic narrative
While Idaho's interstate abortion travel ban is as extreme as it sounds, the law doesn't go nearly as far as many abortion opponents want. If a national ban doesn't work, pro-lifers will ban any such travel within the US. As evinced by the overturning of Roe v. Wade, progressive shield laws are becoming evermore important as sentiments against interstate abortion continue to grow.
Republican narrative
Critics of abortion interstate travel bans are leaving out a key detail: So far, laws such as Idaho's only apply to unemancipated minors, a factor that has been noticeably absent from media reactions. Such laws still sit on the right side of the Constitution and are being spun wildly out of proportion by the opposition.
Cynical narrative
Regardless of one's opinion on the matter of abortion, the divisions between state laws are growing and becoming increasingly unsustainable. Major issues such as abortions, gun rights, and public schools are by nature divisive; however, considering the can of worms that the Supreme Court opened last summer, the need for Congress to codify a national policy regarding abortion rights is essential. Only this way can a middle ground be carved out in which many can find comfort.
