1 big thing:

1 big thing: The shame of the Atlanta pen

A black-and-white photo of the Atlanta Federal Penitentiary's circa 1902 building

2. New lawsuit challenges Georgia abortion ban  

A photo of a person (face not shown) holding an abortion rights sign at a rally

3. County tells churches they can't host homeschooled students

Illustration of wooden child’s play block with an exclamation point

4. A poll, hot off the presses

On the job hunt?

5. One photo to go: Whatever you do, do it with style

A photo of Atlanta Falcons running back Cordarrelle Patterson arrives at the team's NFL football camp in an open-air car with two large wheels in front and one in back

It's 🐪 day. How do you plan to conquer it?

⛱ Today's weather: Mostly sunny, with a high near 92. 

Situational awareness: The CEO of Bryan County-based Daniel Defense will be on a panel testifying before the House Oversight Committee this morning about gun manufacturers' role in the country's gun violence. 

Daniel Defense produced the weapon used by the Uvalde shooter, and its marketing techniques have come under scrutiny.

Today's newsletter is 948 words — a 3.5-minute read.

🤓 Thomas is nerding out on the Georgia State University library's Planning Atlanta photography archive.

😍 Kristal wants to add this plant to her growing collection. 

🤤 Emma is pretty excited about Poco Loco & Butter and Cream’s "Choco Loco Taco" reboot. 

Plus: 📚 Churches cited for homeschooling

Atlanta

A daily look at the most significant and interesting stories affecting Atlanta. Written by Emma Hurt, Kristal Dixon and Thomas Wheatley.

Axios Atlanta

National

Democrats are stepping up efforts to portray Sen. Lindsey Graham's proposed 15-week nationwide abortion ban as a de facto criminalization of certain forms of reproductive health care.

Driving the news: The White House's Gender Policy Council said in a memo obtained by Axios that the ban would "create a nationwide health crisis" and open the door to "doctors being thrown in jail if they fulfill their duty of care to patients according to their best medical judgment."

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists this week expressed "grave concerns" to the Biden administration about the legislation, which it said "is not grounded in science and medical evidence."

The big picture: Since Roe v. Wade was overturned, Democrats have made abortion access a central campaign plank.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) has launched an investigation to look into the ban's potential health ramifications.

Catch up fast: Graham introduced the ban this month, to the surprise of some of his Republican colleagues who have distanced themselves from the issue ahead of the midterms.

White House unloads on Lindsey Graham's abortion ban

Since Roe v. Wade was overturned, Democrats have made abortion access a central campaign plank.

Photo: Yasin Ozturk/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images

Abortion

Democrats are stepping up efforts to portray Sen. Lindsey Graham&#x27;s <a class="gtmContentClick" data-vars-link-text="proposed 15-week nationwide abortion ban" data-vars-click-url="https://www.axios.com/2022/09/13/lindsey-graham-national-abortion-restrictions-bill" data-vars-content-id="43b5f60e-9b2d-450c-a112-802d6898bc87" data-vars-headline="White House unloads on Lindsey Graham&#x27;s abortion ban" data-vars-event-category="story" data-vars-sub-category="story" data-vars-item="in_content_link" href="https://www.axios.com/2022/09/13/lindsey-graham-national-abortion-restrictions-bill" target="_self">proposed 15-week nationwide abortion ban</a> as a de facto criminalization of certain forms of reproductive health care.Driving the news: The White House&#x27;s Gender Policy Council said in a memo obtained by Axios that the ban would &quot;create a nationwide health crisis&quot; and open the door to &quot;doctors being thrown in jail if they fulfill their duty of care to patients according to their best medical judgment.&quot;

The U.S. faces a range of health care flashpoints — unaffordable drugs, opioids, vaping — as we debate whether to adopt universal care. For now, the Affordable Care Act is the law of the land, but Republicans want to issue it a final death blow.

Health

President Biden has made the COVID-19 crisis and a post-Trump return to national unity and traditional democratic ideals his top priorities. From vaccinations to stimulus to schools, Biden is seeking bipartisan compromise while showing a willingness to use executive authority and bare Democratic majorities in the U.S. House and Senate to implement his policies. Republican leaders are navigating deep party divisions over if and how to move beyond former President Trump.

Politics & Policy

Reporting on the physical and psychological harms from cancer screenings is inconsistent, making it hard to compare risks with rewards and potentially exposing patients to unnecessary hazards, according to new research published Monday in the Annals of Internal Medicine.

Why it matters: Assessing the tradeoffs is critical, because most of the people screened won't have a detectable disease at the time of screening and will not benefit from early detection.

"If the potential for severe harm is great, or there is a low likelihood of detecting a cancer earlier when it can be treated more successfully, then screening may do more harm than good," said study co-author Paul Doria-Rose, chief of the health care assessment research branch at the National Cancer Institute.

State of play: Guidance on screenings has generally played up the health benefits, the authors wrote.

But they noted there also are immediate and longer-term burdens, including the potential for diagnoses or additional procedures. For example, a biopsy may be accompanied by risk of bleeding, infection, or by patient anxiety over a possible future illness.

Details: The study focused on screenings for breast, cervical, colorectal, lung and prostate cancer and compared guidelines from multiple health organizations.

When looking at the frequency of risk reporting, researchers "saw inconsistency" in how harms were reported for different organ types.

Minor and moderate harms like dizziness, fainting, bleeding and bruising were mentioned in less than 50% of guidelines for breast, lung and prostate cancer. 

At the same time, serious harms — such as hospitalization and death — from screenings were mentioned in less than 50% of guidelines for breast, colorectal or lung cancer.

Reporting on consequences was most complete for prostate cancer screening and least complete for colorectal cancer screening.

Zoom in: The study also considered whether the magnitude of the consequences were recorded and if numerical measures were used.

Researchers recommend that cancer screening guidelines include quantitative estimates because they are "more informative and precise than terms like "high" or "low."

What they're saying: "Thorough reporting of harms alongside benefits provides clinicians and patients with more complete information to support decisions about screening," Doria-Rose said.

Study finds gaps in reporting harms from U.S. cancer screenings

Poor harm reporting from cancer screenings could lead to patients being exposed to unnecessary risks.

Picture of a doctor and patient during a cancer screening

Photo: Heather Charles/Chicago Tribune/Tribune News Service via Getty Images

Cancer

Reporting on the physical and psychological harms from <a class="gtmContentClick" data-vars-link-text="cancer screenings" data-vars-click-url="https://www.axios.com/2022/09/22/cancer-deaths-treatments-screening" data-vars-content-id="4b54c17c-de24-48f5-acf9-eb3310b6a2eb" data-vars-headline="Study finds gaps in reporting harms from U.S. cancer screenings" data-vars-event-category="story" data-vars-sub-category="story" data-vars-item="in_content_link" href="https://www.axios.com/2022/09/22/cancer-deaths-treatments-screening" target="_self">cancer screenings</a> is inconsistent, making it hard to compare risks with rewards and potentially exposing patients to unnecessary hazards, according to new research published Monday in the Annals of Internal Medicine.Why it matters: Assessing the tradeoffs is critical, because most of the people screened won&#x27;t have a detectable disease at the time of screening and will not benefit from early detection.

Data: Axios Research; Map: Baidi Wang/Axios

A total of 17 states have moved to ban or restrict abortion following the Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. Wade and end all federal protections for abortion.

Why it matters: At least 26 Republican-led states in total are expected to ban abortions or heavily restrict access to them in the wake of the ruling, according to the Guttmacher Institute, an abortion-rights organization.

As more bans go into effect, people seeking abortions will be forced to either travel hundreds of miles to another state that allows abortions or order abortion pills that are prescribed online and are delivered through the mail.

However, state lawmakers have already cracked down on abortion medications and may seek to prosecute women who cross state lines to get an abortion.

How it works: The Supreme Court's 1973 decision in Roe established the constitutional right to an abortion within the due process clause of the 14th Amendment.

The court's ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson, a case challenging a Mississippi law on the grounds that it violated Roe and other precedents, overturned Roe and granted states the legal authority to ban the procedure at any point in pregnancy — including at fertilization.

17 states have banned or restricted abortion, as of Sept. 28: Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah and West Virginia.

Abortions in Oklahoma have been unavailable since May, when Gov. Kevin Stitt (R) signed into law a bill banning abortion that is enforced by lawsuits from private citizens.

Another abortion ban went into effect that makes abortions illegal unless necessary to save a pregnant person's life.

Utah's trigger law took effect shortly after the Supreme Court released its ruling overturning Roe, but it has since been temporarily blocked.

The state currently has an 18-week abortion ban in place.

Shortly after Roe was overturned, a court lifted an injunction in Alabama on a near-total ban. The law is now in effect.

In Texas, the state's Supreme Court has allowed a pre-Roe ban to be enforced.

Additionally, the state's trigger ban took effect on Aug. 25, 30 days after the Supreme Court's judgment.

In Tennessee, a federal court vacated an injunction blocking a six-week abortion ban, which had been granted nearly two years ago. The law is in effect in the state.

The state's trigger law went into effect on Aug. 25, 30 days after the Supreme Court's judgment was issued.

Florida currently has 15-week abortion bans in place. 

In Arizona, a judge allowed the state's pre-Roe ban to take effect. The law prohibits nearly all abortions, except those necessary to save the life of the pregnant person.

The state legislature had passed a 15-week ban earlier this week that took effect after the pre-Roe ban became enforceable. The 15-week restriction says that it does not repeal the pre-Roe prohibition.

In Georgia, a federal appeals court lifted an injunction on a six-week abortion ban that had been blocked since 2019. The law is now in effect.

A judge reinstated Louisiana's trigger laws, which took effect after the high court's ruling and were temporarily blocked.

In Kentucky, a judge took away an injunction that had been placed on the state's near-total and six-week bans, allowing for them to become enforceable.

The Idaho Supreme Court allowed a six-week abortion ban to take effect and refused to block the state's trigger ban, which has been in effect since Aug. 25.

In North Carolina, a federal judge lifted an injunction on a 20-week ban that had been in place for over three years. The ban is in effect.

 The judge lifted the injunction on his own accord. Health providers and state officials had asked the court to keep the law blocked.

West Virginia enacted a near-total abortion ban that went into immediate effect in mid-September. It became the second state to enact a new post-Roe abortion ban.

Most abortions could be banned or heavily restricted in Iowa, Michigan, Wisconsin, Montana, South Carolina and Nebraska, according to the Guttmacher Institute.

These states did not have trigger laws but either still have state laws enacted before 1973 that ban abortions or have passed laws that heavily restrict access to abortions that are being challenged but could be upheld.

Additionally, their "political composition, history and other indicators" suggests that they could look to ban the procedure, Guttmacher says.

In Wisconsin, clinics stopped offering the procedure after Roe was overturned in fear that they could be prosecuted under the states' pre-Roe bans.

In South Carolina, lawmakers rejected a near-total ban. However, they are currently considering a six-week ban, even as another six-week ban remains blocked by the state Supreme Court.

Abortion bans are currently blocked in five states: Indiana, North Dakota, Ohio, South Carolina and Wyoming.

A judge in Indiana temporarily blocked the state's near-total ban a week after it took effect, arguing that it violates the state's constitution.

North Dakota's trigger ban was set to take effect following the Supreme Court's ruling. However, it was temporarily blocked on Aug. 25 while a state judge considers a case brought by the only abortion clinic in the state, which has now moved to Minnesota.

In Ohio, a six-week abortion ban was allowed to take effect after Roe's fall. It was temporarily blocked after abortion providers filed a lawsuit to challenge the law arguing that the "fundamental right to an abortion" was guaranteed under the Ohio Constitution. 

A federal court stayed an injunction on a six-week ban in South Carolina, allowing for it to take effect in the state just days after the Dobbs decision. But the state's Supreme Court has temporarily blocked the ban.

While Wyoming's trigger law took effect on July 27, just hours after it became active, a state judge temporarily blocked the law. The judge sided with health providers who sued the state arguing that the ban violated the state's constitution.

The abortion trigger laws that have gone into effect now that Roe v. Wade is overturned

Where abortion access is guaranteed without Roe v. Wade

Where abortion has been banned now that Roe v. Wade is overturned

At least 26 states in total are expected to ban abortions or heavily restrict access to them.

Axios Explains: Abortion

A total of 17 states have moved to ban or restrict abortion following the <a class="gtmContentClick" data-vars-link-text="Supreme Court&#x27;s decision" data-vars-click-url="https://www.axios.com/2022/06/24/roe-wade-decision-abortion" data-vars-item="in_content_link" href="https://www.axios.com/2022/06/24/roe-wade-decision-abortion" target="_self">Supreme Court&#x27;s decision</a> to overturn Roe v. Wade and end all federal protections for abortion.Why it matters: At least 26 Republican-led states in total are expected to ban abortions or heavily restrict access to them in the wake of the ruling, according to the <a class="gtmContentClick" data-vars-link-text="Guttmacher Institute" data-vars-click-url="https://www.guttmacher.org/article/2022/06/13-states-have-abortion-trigger-bans-heres-what-happens-when-roe-overturned" data-vars-item="in_content_link" href="https://www.guttmacher.org/article/2022/06/13-states-have-abortion-trigger-bans-heres-what-happens-when-roe-overturned" target="_blank">Guttmacher Institute</a>, an abortion-rights organization.

Fallout from the demise of Roe v. Wade is forcing college administrators to weigh how reproductive health services offered on campus may conflict with state abortion bans and if their employees could face prosecution.

Why it matters: The University of Idaho this week issued guidance that it could stop offering birth control, citing a section of the Idaho penal code dating back to the 1970s.

The potential for other colleges to consider cutbacks is something "we are very concerned about," said Rachel Mack, director of marketing and communications for the American College Health Association.

The big picture: Abortion rights advocates say that state bans are designed to prevent people from not only getting an abortion, but from accessing other reproductive health care services.

The language of the laws varies in matters like when life begins, creating a host of legal ambiguities, according to experts.

"We're seeing a rush to hunker down and unfortunately cut people off from the information and care they need, likely at the behest of overly cautious legal counsel, in efforts to shield the institutions or their employees from this prospect of criminal prosecution," said Andrea Miller, president of the National Institute for Reproductive Health, which advocates for access to abortion care.

Driving the news: The University of Idaho said that due to an "unclear and untested" 1972 anti-abortion law, the university will stop providing access to nearly all types of birth control.

The memo sent to university employees cites language that a health provider who "publishes any notice or advertisement of any medicine or means ... for the prevention of conception" is guilty of a felony.

"Since violation is considered a felony, we are advising a conservative approach here, that the university not provide standard birth control itself," according to the memo obtained by Axios.

The enforceability of the 1972 law remains unclear. But since states can enforce abortion restrictions as they see fit, University of Idaho officials are being cautious with this particular statute — which they call "not a model of clarity."

While university employees are not allowed to offer birth control, students can access counseling on contraception at locations that are run by Moscow Family Medicine, a medical network that is not associated with the university.

What they're saying: "While abortion can be discussed as a policy issue in the classroom, we highly recommend employees in charge of the classroom remain neutral or risk violating this law," said Jodi Walker, a spokesperson for the University of Idaho.

"We support our students and employees, as well as academic freedom, but understand the need to work within the laws set out by our state," Walker added.

Yes, but: The university has drawn backlash from abortion rights advocates.

"I don't think there's ever a strong enough reason for restricting health care and access to essential health care, which includes abortion and birth control. I understand the fear. But I don't think that any institution should be restricting access in any way," said Tamara Marzouk, director of abortion access at Advocates for Youth, a nonprofit that supports abortion rights.

Zoom out: Since the Supreme Court overturned Roe in June, other universities have staked out positions to ensure that their students can access reproductive health care.

In Michigan, where a 1931 pre-Roe abortion ban has been struck down, the president of the University of Michigan said, "I will do everything in my power as president to ensure we continue to provide this critically important care."

In Ohio, where a ban took effect shortly after Roe's fall, the president of Oberlin College said that the university "will continue to support the reproductive health needs of our students, faculty, and staff, even as the state and federal climate has made this more difficult."

The other side: Abortion foes say that it is not their goal to restrict access to contraceptives.

"In regard to the University of Idaho's new policy, we need to know more about their reasoning for the change. No organization I'm aware of ... has called for such a policy change," said Kristi Hamrick, chief media and policy strategist for Students for Life for America, one of the largest anti-abortion organizations in the U.S.

Worth noting: Students could potentially be dissuaded from attending colleges that have similar guidance.

"Are you going to be at an institution that is going to put your health and well being at the forefront, or are you going to be at an institution that ... may take as an exceedingly and overly cautious approach that further denies access even to the basic information you might need?," the National Institute for Reproductive Health's Miller told Axios.

Lack of reproductive health care will lead to "negative outcomes for higher ed enrollment, retention, and persistence to degree," Mack said.

By the numbers: Young people already face challenges accessing birth control. 

88% of young people faced at least one barrier to obtaining a prescription for oral contraceptives, according to a recent poll from Advocates for Youth. 

Around 55% of respondents said that they faced so many barriers that they were unable to access birth control.

Go deeper: Dems fear red states banning abortion will zero in on birth control next

Editor's note: This story originally published on Sept. 30. 

Post-Dobbs birth control fight heads to college campuses

Universities in the post-Roe era are struggling to offer students the full range of reproductive health care.

Illustration of a collage of the Supreme Court, birth control pills and a person's silhouette. 

Judge temporarily blocks Indiana's near-total abortion ban

As of Thursday, abortion in Indiana is legal up until the 22nd week of pregnancy.

Picture of a person holding a yellow sign that says "abortion bans replace freedom with force"

Photo: Jeremy Hogan/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images

A judge in Indiana on Thursday temporarily blocked a near-total abortion ban in the state that had been in effect for a week.Why it matters: As of Thursday, abortion in Indiana is legal up until the 22nd week of pregnancy.

Sections

Axios Local

Axios gets you smarter, faster with news & information that matters.

About

Subscribe

Oriana Gonzalez

Stories

Post-Dobbs birth control fight heads to college campuses

Study finds gaps in reporting harms from U.S. cancer screenings

White House unloads on Lindsey Graham's abortion ban

Where abortion has been banned now that Roe v. Wade is overturned

Judge temporarily blocks Indiana's near-total abortion ban

Newsletter editions

Federal prison misconduct