View this post on the web at [link removed]
How the CDC Failed to Track Deaths Related to Abortion Bans
Across the country, state maternal mortality review committees are charged [ [link removed] ] with reviewing deaths that occur during and in the year after pregnancy—but some seem to be sidestepping the issue of pregnancy-related deaths in the aftermath of Dobbs. The Texas Maternal Mortality Committee, for example, has chosen to simply skip [ [link removed] ] reviews for deaths that occurred in 2022 and 2023. This means that the committee will not investigate the cases of women like Porsha Ngumezi [ [link removed] ], who bled to death in a Houston hospital while waiting for an abortion procedure.
In late December, ProPublica spoke [ [link removed] ] to public health experts and researchers who argued that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) could have played a much larger role in directing states to collect data about pregnancy-related deaths. Instead, it declined to issue specific guidance concerning the loss of reproductive rights to maternal mortality review committees. In Oklahoma, a spokesperson for the state’s health department pointed [ [link removed] ] to this lack of direction when explaining why procedures for evaluating maternal deaths had not changed after Dobbs.
Meta Continues to Ignore CSAM Risk of Parent-Run Accounts for Minors
Earlier this week, the New York Times published another installment [ [link removed] ] in its series on parent-run Instagram accounts for underage influencers, which have become part of an online marketplace [ [link removed] ] for child sexual abuse material (CSAM). While Meta does not allow children younger than 13 to operate their own accounts, it makes an exception [ [link removed] ] for accounts featuring children that are run by adults, requiring them to “clearly state in the account’s bio that the account is managed by a parent or manager, and provide identification to prove the account is run by an adult if requested.” Unfortunately, Meta’s policies are still failing [ [link removed] ] to protect children from systemic exploitation.
The company has defended [ [link removed] ] its decision to allow parent-run accounts for minors by arguing that an adult is ultimately responsible for the account’s “content, privacy settings and any interactions with others.” This approach is undermined by the fact that parental figures can play a significant [ [link removed] ] role in the production of CSAM; many accounts identified [ [link removed] ] by the Times were operated by the mothers of young girls, who posted photographs of their own children in revealing clothing and sold “subscriptions” for exclusive photos. Instead of banning accounts that exclusively post images of minors, though, Meta has allowed them to thrive—and even takes a cut [ [link removed] ] of the revenue brought in by the children’s adult subscribers.
Planned Parenthood Asks Kansas City Judge to Consider Striking Down Intentionally Burdensome Rules for Abortion Providers
In late December, a Kansas City judge temporarily blocked [ [link removed] ] Missouri’s near-total abortion ban, ruling that it was incompatible with a reproductive rights amendment that had recently been enshrined [ [link removed] ] in the state’s constitution. While the ban may be lifted, the judge’s order failed to address the many regulations [ [link removed] ] placed on abortion facilities under Missouri law, which Planned Parenthood has described [ [link removed] ] as “burdensome and constitutional.” Exam rooms, for instance, are required to have ceilings that are at least nine feet high, with walls no shorter than 12 feet across. Providers are also forced to conduct pelvic examinations of patients seeking abortions, even though the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has denounced [ [link removed] ] the practice as "unwarranted, invasive, and not supported by evidence.” This requirement remains in place even for medication abortions.
Now, Planned Parenthood is urging [ [link removed] ] the same judge to reconsider her order and strike down Missouri’s restrictive licensing requirements. The organization’s attorneys argue that the laws constitute discrimination against abortion facilities by “subjecting them to penalties faced by no other health care providers,” and are therefore a violation of the state’s new constitutional protections [ [link removed] ] for reproductive rights.
What We’re Reading
AI security company made false claims about weapons-detection system used at Colorado STEM school, FTC says [ [link removed] ]
Khan-Led FTC Makes Final Court Plea for Worker Noncompete Ban [ [link removed] ]
Challenge to N.Y. abortion bias law revived by US court [ [link removed] ]
Unsubscribe [link removed]?
