Abortion rights groups say California lawmakers must stay ‘nimble’ ahead of anticipated challenges

At a restaurant two blocks from the Capitol, California Lt. Governor Eleni Kounalakis told a group of people lobbying for abortion rights that with the upbringing she had, in a Greek immigrant community in the 1970s, she very nearly didn’t have the life and career she has had. 

“My older sister is just two and a half years older than me, was married with her first baby when she was 19,” she said. 

Kounalakis, whose announcement that she was married with her first baby at 35 drew a round of applause, said women, when she was growing up, were expected to stay home with children, or possibly be a teacher or a nurse. 

“I still look back and think, you know, how did I manage on this journey?” Kounalakis told the group. She said, central to her ability to follow her ambition and career was the knowledge that she could have an abortion if she needed one. Kounalakis announced last week that she’s running to replace Governor Gavin Newsom, who’s term-limited, in 2026. 

“The fact that this is being taken away, the fact that Roe [v. Wade] was stripped away in our country has been a shock to the system,” she said. “it was a shock to women across the political spectrum and across the country. And it was really a shock to young women.”

In California, Kounalakis said, passing legislation to protect abortion is easy and policymakers are only limited by their technical ability and imaginations. The main mission of the NARAL Pro-Choice California members she was speaking to was to convince legislators to pass a 17 bill package this season. The bills were assembled by the California Legislative Women’s Caucus and the California Future of Abortion Council, and are intended to shore up legal protections for providers, strengthen patient privacy and improve access to abortion and gender-affirming care.   

Shannon Olivieri Hovis, director of NARAL Pro-Choice California, said after last year’s package of 15 bills, plus a voter-approved state constitutional amendment to protect abortion, “many folks in the Capitol community may have said, ‘well, didn't you get it all done?’” she said. “But the reality is this year's bill package is even bigger. And that's because we are reacting in real time to what we are seeing across this country.”

The most high-profile challenge of the past few months has been to the FDA’s approval of the abortion pill mifepristone, which is normally part of a two-pill regimen. In April, a federal judge in Texas sided with anti-abortion medical groups, arguing the agency’s approval was unlawful. A conflicting ruling from Washington state — on the same day — sent the case to the Supreme Court. The high court chose to leave the decision to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, which is expected to hear the case on May 17. 

Hovis characterized the move as an attempt to enact a “nationwide backdoor abortion ban” that would certainly affect those seeking abortions in California. In response to the legal fight, the state stockpiled around two million tablets of misoprostol, the second pill in the two-pill regimen. 

“That's what we're going to have to continue to do, be extraordinarily nimble and really responsive and anticipate the next challenge,” she said. “And so that's the reason that this work is never over in a way.”

Hovis said two highlights of the 17 bill package for her are Senate Bill 345 and Senate Bill 36, both authored by Senator Nancy Skinner (D–Berkeley).

SB 345 would protect any California doctor providing telehealth to patients that are outside the state and SB 36 would make it illegal for bail agents to come into California and arrest people based on another state’s laws against abortion or gender-affirming care. 

“We've had to acknowledge the severity and just how extreme and horrifying other states are as far as what they're willing to threaten people with criminally and respond to that,” Hovis said. “And [SB 36] is a reaction to that.”

In early May, the bill was placed on the suspense file, a precarious place for bills that carry a cost to the state of $50,000 from the General Fund or $150,000 from “special funds” in a single year.

SB 345 will be heard by the Appropriations Committee on May 8.

Both bills, and the general legislative package, are intended to advance California’s intention to be a refuge for people who are seeking reproductive or gender-affirming health care. 

That effort has been gaining ground in other states, even as more restrictions are passed in other areas of the country. The leaders of Washington state and Minnesota are the most recent to sign laws protecting people who come into their jurisdictions for abortions or gender-affirming care.