With Texas banning most abortions, nearby states prepare for women to go long distances for help
A Texas law banning most abortions has seen nearby states, such as New Mexico, prepare for an increase in women travelling for the procedure.
The law, which the US Supreme Court allowed to stand after it came into force on Wednesday, bans abortions once medical professionals can detect cardiac activity, which is typically around six weeks.
New Mexico is one of the states that has no gestation limits on abortion.
Protesters gather as the nation’s most far-reaching curb on abortions since they were legalized a half-century ago took effect on Wednesday
Joan Lamunyon Sanford, executive director of the New Mexico Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice, told NBC News: “Every time Texas passes some kind of bill restricting abortion, we see more people seeking care here in New Mexico.
“This time, with the worst, most restrictive we’ve ever seen, we’re definitely preparing to serve a significant number of additional patients seeking refuge from the new Texas law.”
Fund Texas Choice, which helps women in Texas and other places with restrictive abortion laws end their pregnancies in other states, said it already has seen more women reaching out.
The organisation typically handles 10 new cases per week but received 10 calls from new clients just on Wednesday, when the law took effect.
An Oklahoma clinic had received more than double its number of typical inquiries, two-thirds of them from Texas.
Meanwhile, a Colorado clinic that already had started seeing more patients from other states, was preparing to ramp up supplies and staffing in anticipation of the law taking effect.
Texas Governor Greg Abbott signed the ‘heartbeat bill’ into law in May
Even before a strict abortion ban took effect in Texas this week, clinics in neighbouring states were fielding growing numbers of calls from women desperate for options.
The number of Texans seeking abortions in Planned Parenthood clinics in the Rocky Mountain region, which covers Colorado, New Mexico, Wyoming and southern Nevada, was 12 times higher in March 2020.
This came after Governor Greg Abbott banned abortions for nearly a month under a COVID-19 executive order.
In Kansas, the number of Texans getting abortions jumped from 25 in 2019 to 289 last year.
The Trust Women clinic in Wichita accounted for 203 of those procedures in a three-month period, with spokesman Zack Gingrich-Gaylord saying: “Last year was a dress rehearsal.”
Abortion rights supporters gather to protest the bill
The clinic typically sees 40 to 50 abortion patients in a week and now is expecting an additional 15 to 20.
One woman from San Antonio discovered she was pregnant just as Abbott’s emergency order banning abortions was lifted, but she and her partner had lost their jobs during the pandemic.
“We didn’t know which way the world was going to go with everything shut down and no change in sight,” said Miranda, who spoke on the condition that only her first name be used. “The last thing I wanted to do was be pregnant.”
She struggled to find an abortion clinic and an online search led her to Fund Texas Choice and the Lilith Fund, which offered to pay for a flight to New Mexico.
“It’s so comforting because it’s like someone saying, ‘We got you. Let’s take care of this together,'” Miranda said, adding that she found an appointment at a clinic in Dallas, a five-hour drive away.
But, despite efforts to ramp up resources and support for Texan women, experts are warning that the journeys remain too expensive or arduous for many.
With the majority of abortion care in Texas shut down, the average one-way driving distance to a clinic will increase twentyfold, from 12 miles to 248 miles, according to Elizabeth Nash, a state policy analyst at the Guttmacher Institute.
Travelling may be impossible for women who would struggle to find child care or take time off work while those without legal US status along Texas’ southern border risk of getting stopped at a checkpoint if they cross state lines to seek an abortion.
Anna Rupani, co-director of Fund Texas Choice, also said: “There’s real panic about how are they going to get an abortion within six weeks.
“There’s this fear that if I can’t get it done in six weeks, I may not be able to get it done because I may not be able to leave my job or my family for more than a day.”
A case of the flesh-eating screwworm parasite has been detected in a person in the United States for the first time.
The parasitic flies eat cattle and other warm-blooded animals alive, with an outbreak beginning in Central America and southern Mexico late last year.
It is ultimately fatal if left untreated.
The case in the US was identified in a person from Maryland who had travelled from Guatemala.
Beth Thompson, South Dakota’s state veterinarian, told Reuters on Sunday that she was notified of the case within the
last week.
A Maryland state government official also confirmed the case.
The person was treated and prevention measures were implemented, Reuters reports.
The Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Maryland Department of Health did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
What is screwworm?
The female screwworm fly lays eggs in the wounds of warm-blooded animals and once hatched, hundreds of screwworm larvae use their sharp mouths to burrow through living flesh.
It can be devastating in cattle and wildlife, and has also been known to infect humans.
Treatment is onerous, and involves removing hundreds of larvae and thoroughly disinfecting wounds. They are largely survivable if treated early enough.
The confirmed case is likely to rattle the beef and cattle futures market, which has seen record-high prices because of tight supplies.
The US typically imports more than a million cattle from Mexico each year to process into beef. The screwworm outbreak could cost Texas – the biggest cattle-producing state – $1.8bn (£1.3bn) in livestock deaths, labour costs and medication
expenses.
A view shows a calf after being sprayed with a disinfectant spray to prevent screwworm. Pic: Reuters
The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) has set traps and sent mounted officers along the border, but it has faced criticism from some cattle producers and market analysts for not acting faster to pursue increased fly production via a sterile fly facility.
What is a sterile fly facility?
The case also comes just one week after the US agriculture secretary, Brooke Rollins, travelled to Texas to announce plans to build a sterile fly facility there in a bid to combat the pest. Ms Rollins had pledged repeatedly to keep screwworm out of the country.
Read more:
Trump seeking to ‘manufacture a crisis’ in Chicago
Menendez brothers denied parole
A sterile fly facility produces a large number of male flies and sterilises them – these males are then released to mate with wild female insects, which collapses the wild population over time. This method eradicated screwworm from the US in the 1960s.
Mexico has also taken efforts to limit the spread of the pest, which can kill livestock within weeks if not treated. It had started to build a $51m sterile fly production facility.
The USDA has previously said 500 million flies would need to be released weekly to push the fly back to the Darien Gap, the stretch of rainforest between Panama and Colombia.
National Guard troops deployed to Washington DC in an effort to mitigate crime will begin carrying firearms, an official has said.
Defence secretary Pete Hegseth ordered the authorisation of roughly 2,000 National Guard troops to begin carrying weapons.
The majority of the guard members will carry M17 pistols, their service-issued weapons, while a small number will be armed with M4 rifles, reports Sky’s US partner organisation, NBC News.
The troops are authorised to use their weapons for self-protection.
A White House official told NBC News that despite being armed, as of Saturday night, the National Guard troops in DC are not making arrests, and will continue to work on protecting federal assets.
The troops were largely deployed from outside the state and were framed by President Trump as a concerted effort to tackle crime and homelessness in the nation’s capital.
Such deployments are not common, and are typically used in response natural disasters or civil unrest.
Democrats have bashed the deployment as partisan in nature, accusing Mr Trump of trying to exert his presidential authority through scare tactics and said his primary targets have been cities with black leadership.
Armed members of the South Carolina National Guard patrol outside of Union Station. Pic: AP
Pentagon plans to deploy US army to Chicago
Yesterday it was reported that the Pentagon was drafting plans to deploy the US army in Chicago, the largest city in the state.
The governor of Illinois then accused Mr Trump of “attempting to manufacture a crisis” and “abusing his power to distract from the pain he is causing working families”.
Read more from Sky News:
Man and boy arrested after restaurant fire
Fast-track asylum appeals process to be introduced
Officials familiar with the proposals told the Washington Post that several options were being weighed up by the US defence department, including mobilising thousands of National Guard troops in Chicago as early as September.
Mr Trump had told reporters on Friday that “Chicago is a mess”, before attacking the city’s mayor, Brandon Johnson, and hinting “we’ll straighten that one out probably next”.
The governor of Illinois has accused Donald Trump of “attempting to manufacture a crisis” over reports the US president was considering deploying the military in the state.
US newspaper The Washington Post reported on Saturday that the Pentagon was drafting plans to deploy the US army in Chicago, the state capital.
It comes as part of Mr Trump’s crackdown on crime, homelessness, and illegal immigration in mainly Democrat-run cities. He recently deployed the National Guard in Washington DC.
In a statement responding to the report, governor JB Pritzker said Illinois had “received no requests or outreach from the federal government asking if we need assistance, and we have made no requests for federal intervention”.
He added: “The safety of the people of Illinois is always my top priority.
“There is no emergency that warrants the President of the United States federalising the Illinois National Guard, deploying the National Guard from other states, or sending active duty military within our own borders.”
The governor then said: “Donald Trump is attempting to manufacture a crisis, politicise Americans who serve in uniform, and continue abusing his power to distract from the pain he is causing working families.
“We will continue to follow the law, stand up for the sovereignty of our state, and protect the people of Illinois.”
Officials familiar with the proposals told the Post that several options were being weighed up by the US defence department, including mobilising thousands of National Guard troops in Chicago as early as September.
The Pentagon said it would not comment on planned operations, adding: “The department is a planning organisation and is continuously working with other agency partners on plans to protect federal assets and personnel.”
People protest against President Donald Trump’s use of federal law enforcement and National Guard troops in Washington DC. Pic: AP
Mr Trump, however, told reporters on Friday that “Chicago is a mess,” before attacking the city’s mayor Brandon Johnson and hinting “we’ll straighten that one out probably next”.
Mr Johnson has not yet commented on Saturday’s reports, but said on Friday that the president’s approach to tackling crime has been “uncoordinated, uncalled for and unsound”.
“There are many things the federal government could do to help us reduce crime and violence in Chicago, but sending in the military is not one of them,” he added.
Read more from Sky News:
‘I’m deprived of my UK citizenship but I’m not a convicted terrorist’
Analysis: Farage has finally embraced Trump-style rhetoric
What Epstein’s right-hand woman says about Trump and Prince Andrew
Listen to The World with Richard Engel and Yalda Hakim every Wednesday
It comes after around 800 National Guard troops were deployed in Washington DC earlier this month, despite the US capital’s mayor revealing crime in the capital was at its “lowest level in 30 years”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
What’s it like having the army on DC’s streets?
According to preliminary figures from Washington DC’s Metropolitan Police, violent crime is down 26% in 2025 – after dropping 35% in 2024 compared with 2023.
In June Mr Trump ordered 700 US Army marines and 4,000 National Guard troops to Los Angeles in California, during protests over mass immigration raids.
The deployment came against the wishes of state governor Gavin Newsom, who said: “The federal government is sowing chaos so they can have an excuse to escalate.
“That is not the way any civilised country behaves.”
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Sports2 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment11 months agoHere are the best electric bikes you can buy at every price level in October 2024