Connect with us

Politics

Inside an Arizona abortion clinic: Uncertainty looms and optimism reigns

Published

on

Inside an Arizona abortion clinic: Uncertainty looms and optimism reigns

When Anna first read about the Arizona Supreme Court reinstating an 1864 law banning all abortions except when a mother’s life is at risk, she sent the article to her partner with an angry text.

“I was like, ‘God, this makes me so mad,’” she said.

She also decided to take a pregnancy test, just in case. Her period was a few days late, which she figured was because of her new birth control pills.

“I just want to make sure before anything goes into effect,” said Anna, 24, who declined to give her last name. “Thank God I did.”

Advertisement

Days later, she found herself at Camelback Family Planning, discussing her options for an abortion.

The April 9 ruling set off a political hurricane, with both President Biden and former President Trump weighing in and Arizona’s Legislature devolving into chaos over whether to repeal the ban before it goes into effect June 8. But at a Phoenix abortion clinic, in the eye of the debate, it has been business as usual.

On Wednesday, Dr. Barbara Zipkin breezed into an examination room carrying Scooter, her emotional support dog. Although she lives in Sherman Oaks, Zipkin flies to Arizona most weeks, staying at her sister’s house while working three to five days at the Camelback clinic.

With her support dog Scooter staying in his bed, Dr. Barbara Zipkin rushes to an exam room at Camelback Family Planning on April 18, 2024, in Phoenix. The clinic will have to cease performing abortions on June 8 if the 1864 law banning abortions isn’t delayed of overturned.

Advertisement

The doctor, who said she is “somewhere between 40 and death,” recalls the moment in 1973 when Roe vs. Wade took effect: She was on a plane returning to medical school, and she thought, “This is what I’m going to do.” She worked for years as an OB-GYN in Los Angeles, specializing in genetics and performing a lot of second trimester abortions.

“But there are enough providers in L.A.,” she said. “Arizona is unique.”

In the exam room, Zipkin walked Anna through her options — a medication abortion, which the patient had previously experienced with a difficult recovery, or a surgical procedure. Then Zipkin recited a state-mandated “silly consent” form, adding her own caveats to each point.

“Consent says the state of Arizona wants you to believe that there are alternatives to abortion. Well, that’s all well and good, but it’s not really true, because when you’re in this position, you really only have two options. One is carry it and the other is don’t carry it,” Zipkin said. “Adoption and all that — that comes after. You’re either carrying this or you’re not, and it still affects you.”

Anna said she’d always paid attention to the national conversation around abortion, as a woman and especially as an Arizonan. Anna said she had started taking birth control pills within a week of getting pregnant. As a 24-year-old who lives with roommates, she doesn’t consider herself financially able to care for a child.

Advertisement
Zipkin performs an ultrasound on a patient.

Dr. Barbara Zipkin performs an ultrasound on a 25-year-old patient who didn’t want her name or face shown at Camelback Family Planning on April 18. The patient thought the Arizona 1864 law banning abortion had already taken effect and was planning on going to California for an abortion but she learned that the clinic in Phoenix was still open and performing abortions. “It makes me sad to think that women in the future may not be to have the choice to come here if that law goes into effect,” she said.

“It’s just not the situation I want for myself, or my children in the future. I want a two-parent household in a stable home, or a stable situation,” Anna said. “I just don’t know that I’m in that right now.”

After her 10-minute consultation with Zipkin, Anna scheduled an appointment for the following week, when she would decide whether to have a medication or surgical abortion.

After answering Anna’s questions, Zipkin offered her last bit of guidance: “Before I forget, because I have the attention span of a gnat — vote!”

Abortion is likely to top voters’ concerns in Arizona, where state legislators have yet to vote on a proposed bill repealing the ban.

Advertisement

In the sunny plaza between the two state Capitol chambers, protesters on both sides of the debate milled about Wednesday, some wearing bright orange T-shirts in support of Arizona for Abortion Access, and others in shirts depicting baby’s feet and proclaiming “Choose life.”

Uncertainty at the clinic

Back at the Camelback clinic, staff members gathered in the break room, decorated with posters and handmade thank you cards, including one with a uterus drawn in place of a “Y.” They discussed what could happen after June 8, and the clinic’s founder, Dr. Gabrielle Goodrick, sought to provide clarity.

1 A Thank You card hangs on the refrigerator in the beak room at Camelback Family Planning on April 17, 2024

2 A Thank You cards hang on a cupboard at Camelback Family Planning on April 18, 2024 in Phoenix, Arizona.

3 Information on a no-cost abortion clinic in San Francisco hangs on the glass at the

1. A Thank You card hangs on the refrigerator in the beak room at Camelback Family Planning on April 17, 2024 in Phoenix, Arizona. The clinic will have to cease performing abortions on June 8 if the 1864 law banning abortions isn’t delayed or overturned. 2. A Thank You cards hang on a cupboard at Camelback Family Planning on April 18, 2024 in Phoenix, Arizona. The clinic will have to cease performing abortions on June 8 if the 1864 law banning abortions isn’t delayed or overturned. 3. Information on a no-cost abortion clinic in San Francisco hangs on the glass at the reception area at Camelback Family Planning on April 18, 2024 in Phoenix, Arizona. The clinic will have to cease performing abortions on June 8 if the 1864 law banning abortions isn’t delayed or overturned.

Advertisement

She’s hopeful that a constitutional amendment guaranteeing abortion access will be on the November ballot — activists with Arizona for Abortion Access say they have gathered enough signatures.

“People were pretty nervous and stressed that they’re not going to have a job until November,” Goodrick said.

For a clinic rocked by Supreme Court decisions, it has become adept at weathering changes, Goodrick said. A ruling comes down, the staff adjusts its routines and schedules and continues to provide abortions with new limitations, which sometimes includes referring patients to clinics in California or Nevada.

The constant fluctuations have had their toll, though. The clinic, which Goodrick opened in 1999, usually averages about 350 patients a month. That total dropped in 2022 amid patient confusion over what would happen in the wake of Roe vs. Wade being overturned. Her small staff of 12 shrank to six, Goodrick said, as workers grew tired “from the stress of just not knowing.”

The doctor and her staff had just gotten into the swing of their new routine when the state Supreme Court ruling came down.

Advertisement
 Dr. Barbara Zipkin, right, consults with a co-worker over ultrasound results at Camelback Family

Dr. Barbara Zipkin, right, consults with a co-worker over ultrasound results at Camelback Family Planning . The clinic will have to cease performing abortions on June 8 if enforcement of the 1864 law banning abortions isn’t delayed or overturned.

“The patients are more anxious,” Goodrick said. “It causes what the Republicans want, which is mayhem.”

But this time, she hopes, will be different.

“We just have to get to Nov. 25,” Goodrick said, referring to the date that a constitutional amendment, if approved, would take effect.

Confident that the political fight will turn in her favor, Goodrick has opened the clinic’s doors to media from around the globe, who’ve descended on Arizona to chronicle the latest front in a nationwide battle over abortion.

Advertisement

Nurses wearing “abortion is healthcare” T-shirts moved deftly around the journalists, whom they’ve grown accustomed to filling their workplace recently. On their lunch break, the staff crowded into the break room, bickering over Supreme Court justices.

“Which one’s worse — [Clarence] Thomas or [Samuel] Alito?” one asked.

Sitting at a folding table laden with snacks, Dr. Jessica Holmes peered at the clinic’s schedule on her laptop.

Nurses carry charts to exam rooms past thank you cards tacked to cupboards and artwork of a uterus hanging on a clothesline.

Nurses carry charts to exam rooms past thank you cards tacked to cupboards and artwork of a uterus hanging on a clothesline at Camelback Family Planning.

“Are you doing through June, or only the first eight days?” Holmes asked.

Advertisement

“No, we’ll go through June,” Goodrick answered briskly.

Opposing forces of optimism

Standing on the sidewalk a few yards from the clinic door, antiabortion activists were similarly optimistic about the future of Arizona’s abortion law.

“We accept it as a victory and we’re very excited,” said Matt Engelthaler, 49, who has protested abortions since he was a teenager, when he first joined his parents to pray outside clinics. “But we also realize that changing laws isn’t what’s gonna do anything, it’s just changing hearts. That’s what we pray for.”

Engelthaler fingered rosary beads as he held a sign that said, “Choose life.” A Catholic, he said he prayed the rosary “for the moms, dads and the babies,” and another prayer for the abortion clinic workers, “that they can understand the travesty of what they’re doing and turn away from it.”

A passing car honked, and the driver stuck his middle finger in the air at the protesters.

Advertisement

“People just don’t know how to do the peace sign correctly,” Engelthaler said with a laugh.

A few minutes later, another car honked and the driver gave a thumbs up.

By the clinic door, three volunteers wearing bright, rainbow-colored vests escorted patients from their cars into the clinic, blocking their view of the sidewalk protesters with large, rainbow umbrellas. Michael Buble played on a nearby speaker, ready to drown out any protester’s megaphone.

“When they go loud, we go louder,” said one escort, who declined to give her name. She said her group of volunteers would continue serving at the clinic until they’re told to stop.

One of the patients, a 26-year-old from Phoenix, said the escorts’ music lifted her spirits on an otherwise bleak day. She took Scooter into her arms and, stroking the dog’s back, told the doctor that she found out she was pregnant two days after the state Supreme Court decision.

Advertisement
A patient strokes support dog Scooter in an exam room

A 26-year-old patient from Phoenix strokes support dog Scooter in an exam room as Dr. Barbara Zipkin discusses her options for an abortion. The patient found out she was pregnant two days after the Arizona Supreme Court reinstated an 1864 law banning abortion.

“It has just been draining, in that sense of like, wow — this would happen this week,” the patient said.

She said that as Christians, her family vehemently opposes abortion and would support her if she decided to have a baby. The woman said she and her partner decided to keep the abortion private.

“It’s definitely confusing and emotional, considering, like, my upbringing,” she said. But referring to the escorts outside who welcomed her, she added, “it’s also encouraging, in a sense, because you do feel this community.”

Advertisement

Politics

Democratic Candidates Scramble in Virginia After Court Tosses Map

Published

on

Democratic Candidates Scramble in Virginia After Court Tosses Map

On Thursday night, Dan Helmer received a shipment of boxes with 1,000 yard signs that read: “Dan Helmer for Congress.”

By late Friday morning, Mr. Helmer no longer had a seat to run for.

The whiplash for the Virginia Democrats running for Congress was swift and intense after the state Supreme Court struck down the new congressional map proposed in February to flip four Republican-held seats.

With the stroke of a pen in Richmond, some campaigns effectively went poof, other candidates suddenly were in far tougher districts and one went from on the verge of dropping out to gearing up for a long-shot battle in a deep-red part of the state.

Rarely have so many fully formed campaigns gone off the rails at once. The court’s shock decision on Friday dashed Democratic hopes of providing some balance to Republican-run states that have been eliminating Democratic seats since Texas kicked off a nationwide fight last year.

Advertisement

Mr. Helmer, a senior member of the House of Delegates, was an architect of Virginia’s redistricting gambit that began in October. His colleagues subsequently split up Northern Virginia and created a new lobster-shaped Democratic seat ideally suited for him. Barring a miracle from the Supreme Court, Mr. Helmer said his congressional campaign is most likely over.

“There’s no seat for me,” he said. His new yard signs “are probably not as useful as they were yesterday.”

Tom Perriello, a former congressman who later served as a diplomat in Africa during Barack Obama’s presidency, began his campaign in December with the expectation that new maps were coming.

He woke up Friday morning in his home near Charlottesville in a district that Vice President Kamala Harris carried by three percentage points in 2024. Once the court ruling came a few hours later, he lived in a district Mr. Trump won by 12 points.

Mr. Perriello said he would now run against Representative John McGuire, a first-term Republican whose district covers conservative Southside Virginia. He had planned to run in a district that stitched together small Democratic-leaning cities and college towns in the Shenandoah and Blue Ridge Mountains.

Advertisement

The situation is even more jarring for some Democratic voters, Mr. Perriello said.

“I just walked into a food pantry in the Shenandoah Valley and the African-American woman who runs it broke down in tears and said for the first time in her life she thought she was going to have representation,” Mr. Perriello recalled Friday. “This is what the last two months have been about, about hope for the first time for people.”

Some hope Democrats will gain seats even without the new maps.

Virginia Democrats now hold six of the state’s 11 House districts. President Trump won two of the other five by five points or less, making the Republican incumbents who represent them, Representatives Jen Kiggans and Rob Wittman, endangered given the headwinds the G.O.P. faces. Their Democratic opponents, former Representative Elaine Luria and Shannon Taylor, a local prosecutor, entered the race well before the redistricting push and remain top-tier challengers.

Representative Hakeem Jeffries of New York, the House minority leader, said in an interview Friday that “we’re going to pick up at least two seats” in Virginia under the existing maps.

Advertisement

Jeff Ryer, the chairman of the Republican Party of Virginia, said he had given the state Supreme Court case a 50-50 chance of succeeding. Democrats, he argued, have been overconfident in the state ever since Abigail Spanberger won last year’s governor’s election by more than 15 points.

Now, instead of a map designed to hand 10 of 11 seats to Democrats, Mr. Ryer said he expected multiple competitive campaigns this year. He allowed that it would not be easy defending the seats Mr. Trump narrowly won.

“These districts are designed to be compact and contiguous, and when you draw them that way you’re going to get some that are not competitive and some that are hotly contested,” Mr. Ryer said.

Some Democrats vowed to soldier on under difficult conditions.

Beth Macy, the best-selling author of books like “Dopesick,” about the struggles in Appalachia, started her campaign in November before the proposed Democratic maps drew her into a district with Mr. Perriello, who was far better known and had deeper connections in their shared region of Virginia.

Advertisement

Ms. Macy said on Friday that she had been considering conceding the primary and endorsing Mr. Perriello, but now would remain a candidate against Representative Ben Cline, a Republican whose district includes her hometown, Roanoke.

“I feel bad, but you know, we can’t just roll over,” Ms. Macy said. “Democrats have got to stop showing up to a knife fight with a spork.”

Ms. Macy, who is now running in a deep-red district Mr. Trump carried by 25 points, is not short on optimism. She predicted the backlash to Republican policies in Washington could lead to Virginia Democrats sweeping out G.O.P. incumbents across the state and perhaps reach the same end Democrats had hoped for with their maps.

“We have never been to where we are in this country,” she said. “It’s a national emergency.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Hegseth says Pentagon will review Mark Kelly’s public statements about classified briefing amid ongoing feud

Published

on

Hegseth says Pentagon will review Mark Kelly’s public statements about classified briefing amid ongoing feud

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Secretary of War Pete Hegseth on Sunday suggested Sen. Mark Kelly, D-Ariz., may have violated his oath with comments he made to a news outlet following a classified briefing.

Kelly told Margaret Brennan on Face the Nation that it is “shocking how deep we have gone into these magazines” when asked if the Pentagon has updated lawmakers on the Iran war’s impact on U.S. weapons stockpiles. 

The senator told Brennan the Tomahawks, Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS), RIM-161 Standard Missile 3 (SM-3), Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) rounds and Patriot rounds used to defend the U.S. have been hit hard, adding that it will take years to replenish those stockpiles, which could affect a hypothetical U.S. conflict with China.

In response, Hegseth questioned whether Kelly, a former Navy pilot, may have violated his oath and said the Pentagon’s legal counsel will review his comments.

Advertisement

FEDERAL JUDGE BLOCKS PENTAGON FROM DEMOTING MARK KELLY OVER CONTROVERSIAL MILITARY VIDEO

Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth suggested Sen. Mark Kelly may have violated his oath with comments he made following a classified briefing. (Aaron Schwartz/CNP/Bloomberg via Getty Images Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)

“‘Captain’ Mark Kelly strikes again,” Hegseth wrote on X.

“Now he’s blabbing on TV (falsely & dumbly) about a *CLASSIFIED* Pentagon briefing he received,” he continued. “Did he violate his oath… again? @DeptofWar legal counsel will review.”

The senator clapped back, saying Hegseth had revealed similar information at a recent hearing and that it was not classified.

Advertisement

“We had this conversation in a public hearing a week ago and you said it would take ‘years’ to replenish some of these stockpiles,” Kelly responded on X. “That’s not classified, it’s a quote from you. This war is coming at a serious cost and you and the president still haven’t explained to the American people what the goal is.”

This comes amid a months-long dispute between Hegseth and Kelly over the senator’s participation in a video with some of his Democratic colleagues in Congress urging U.S. military members to ignore “illegal” orders.

The DOJ has opened an investigation into the video posted online featuring six Democratic lawmakers calling on troops and members of the intelligence community to defy illegal orders from the federal government. The lawmakers all served in the military or at intelligence agencies.

In addition to Kelly, the other lawmakers in the video were Sens. Elissa Slotkin of Michigan, as well as Reps. Chris Deluzio and Chrissy Houlahan of Pennsylvania, Maggie Goodlander of New Hampshire and Jason Crow of Colorado.

GRAND JURY REJECTS DOJ EFFORT TO INDICT DEMOCRATIC LAWMAKERS WHO URGED MILITARY TO DEFY ILLEGAL ORDERS

Advertisement

Pentagon chief Hegseth said the Pentagon’s legal counsel will review Sen. Mark Kelly’s latest comments. (Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

“This administration is pitting our uniformed military and intelligence community professionals against American citizens,” the lawmakers said in the video. “Like us, you all swore an oath to protect and defend this Constitution. Right now, the threats coming to our Constitution aren’t just coming from abroad but from right here at home. Our laws are clear. You can refuse illegal orders. You must refuse illegal orders. No one has to carry out orders that violate the law or our Constitution.”

Grand jurors declined to sign off on charges against the lawmakers in February.

In November, the Pentagon launched an investigation into Kelly, pointing to a federal law that allows retired service members to be recalled to active duty on orders of the secretary for possible court-martial or other punishment.

Hegseth has censured Kelly and has attempted to retroactively demote him from his retired rank of captain over his participation in the video, which affirms that refusing unlawful orders is a standard part of military protocol.

Advertisement

But a federal court ruling blocked the Pentagon from demoting the lawmaker over the video. The court also found the Pentagon likely violated Kelly’s First Amendment rights, and those of “millions of military retirees,” when it formally censured him on Jan. 5.

Hegseth subsequently appealed that ruling.

Sen. Mark Kelly has repeatedly said he would not back down amid the Pentagon’s attempts to punish him over the video. (Graeme Sloan/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Last week, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit heard oral arguments and appeared largely skeptical of Hegseth’s attempt to punish Kelly for the video.

Advertisement

“I will not back down from this fight,” Kelly said after the hearing.

President Donald Trump had accused the lawmakers of being “traitors” who engaged in “sedition at the highest level” and “should be in jail” after the video was posted last fall. He even suggested they should be executed over the video, although he later attempted to walk that comment back.

Slotkin, who previously worked at the CIA and Pentagon, was targeted with a bomb threat just days after the clip and Trump’s subsequent statements suggesting the Democrats be executed.

Continue Reading

Politics

‘Extremely scary’: Specter of an all-GOP governor’s race spurs push to remake open primary

Published

on

‘Extremely scary’: Specter of an all-GOP governor’s race spurs push to remake open primary

Voters in California may get a chance to remake the state’s open primary system in two years.

Political consultant Steve Maviglio filed an application Friday with state officials that seeks to alter California’s voting system by reverting to a traditional primary. Under the proposal, the top candidates from each party would advance to the general election in November.

The current system allows the top two candidates, regardless of party, to move on to the runoff. That has led to instances in which two Democrats or two Republicans have faced off in the general election.

The state’s gubernatorial election, for example, has prompted concern that two Republicans could shut out the Democratic candidates. Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco and former Fox News commentator Steve Hilton have polled high in various surveys and are facing a large field of Democrats.

Advertisement

Democratic voters vastly outnumber Republicans in California, yet some political consultants said they feared there were so many Democrats running that voters wouldn’t coalesce around one candidate and the field would be split. Those fears have eased somewhat in recent months as some Democratic candidates advance from the pack.

The state’s top-two primary system has been in place since California voters passed Proposition 14 in 2010. The state’s major political parties opposed the initiative, while Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger supported it.

The goal was to help end partisan gridlock in Sacramento and force candidates in primaries to appeal to a wider range of voters, rather than just those in their own party.

Proposition 14, as well as the state’s once-a-decade redistricting process, has led to some dramatic races, including the 2012 face-off between Democratic Reps. Brad Sherman and Howard Berman for a congressional seat in Los Angeles’ San Fernando Valley. Amid aspersions and attack ads, the pair nearly came to blows at a community debate.

Maviglio described the ballot measure as a simple repeal of Proposition 14, and said he was inspired by the governor’s race.

Advertisement

“It was extremely scary to envision the November ballot for governor with Republicans on it,” Maviglio said.

The New York Times first reported on the ballot measure proposal.

A news release from Maviglio states that the proposed repeal of Prop. 14 “is fueled by concerns that California’s primaries are disenfranchising a majority of California voters by limiting choice to candidates from one party.”

A website for the effort includes criticisms of the current primary system by Democratic Party Chair Rusty Hicks and Ron Nehring, former chairman of the California Republican Party.

Maviglio’s ballot initiative proposes to appear on the 2028 ballot and take effect in 2030.

Advertisement

Talk of changing Proposition 14 has been swirling in Sacramento for months.

Secretary of State Shirley Weber told reporters at an unrelated news conference last week that she had voted years ago against Proposition 14. She questioned whether it had actually succeeded in creating more diversity.

“I did not like the open primary,” Weber said. “I didn’t think it would solve any problems. They had a list of problems it would solve, and none of those have been solved.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending