A bill protecting birth control access is headed to Virginia’s governor. Here’s why Republicans said they opposed it.

RICHMOND — A bill that would protect the right to access birth control is poised to head to Gov. Glenn Youngkin’s desk — despite pushback from Republican legislators.

Health care providers in Virginia currently can prescribe birth control, and some methods, such as condoms and the emergency contraceptive pill, are available over the counter. But bill sponsor Del. Cia Price said she introduced the measure due to growing concerns that restrictions could be on the horizon following the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision overturning Roe v. Wade.

The bill states individuals have the “right to obtain contraceptives and to engage in contraception” and that health care providers “shall have the right to provide contraceptives and contraception-related information.” It creates a right to file a lawsuit over violations.

The bill defines contraceptives as any drug or device intended for use in the “prevention of pregnancy” that is legally marketed under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. It includes barrier methods — such as condoms and intrauterine devices — and hormonal medications, such as birth control pills, injections, emergency contraception, and transdermal patches.

A few Republicans joined the Democrat-held legislature in passing the bill through the House by a 55-44 vote. But in the Senate, it passed by a party-line vote of 21-19.

“This is not an abortion bill,” Price, a Newport News Democrat, said in an interview. “To vote against the right to access condoms and birth control, that should really perk up some eyes and ears. What is the direction of our nation? Where are we headed?”

___

Republican opposition

Almost all Republican legislators from Hampton Roads voted against the bill, including Sens. Danny Diggs of Yorktown, Emily Jordan of Smithfield, Bill DeSteph of Virginia Beach and Christie New Craig of Chesapeake; and Dels. A.C. Cordoza of Hampton, Baxter Ennis and Jay Leftwich of Chesapeake, and Anne Ferrell Tata and Barry Knight, both of Virginia Beach.

Del. Robert Bloxom of Mappsville was one of only a handful of Republicans to support the bill.

When asked about his vote in the halls of the capitol this week, Diggs said he was told the legislation would protect medications that cause late-term abortions. He then acknowledged he might have misunderstood the bill.

When asked about her vote, Jordan declined to comment.

“Ask caucus,” she said.

A spokesperson for the House Republican Caucus said it had no comment. The Senate Republican Caucus did not respond to a request for comment.

DeSteph told the Pilot he supported birth control access but objected to the provision in the bill that allowed for lawsuits.

During a subcommittee hearing, Del. Keith Hodges, R-Urbanna, voiced similar concerns that the bill would harm health care providers.

He said he worried it would allow women to “go after” doctors who refuse to prescribe them birth control pills because they have underlying conditions, like hypertension or a history of smoking, that make it dangerous for them to take the pill.

The governor declined to share his thoughts. When asked for comment, a Youngkin spokesperson said he reviews all legislation that reaches his desk.

___

Supreme Court impact

Price said she became concerned for the future of birth control access after Roe was overturned in 2022. In his concurring opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote that the court should reconsider other landmark cases, including Griswold vs. Connecticut.

In the 1965 Griswold ruling, the court ruled that the constitutional right to privacy protected the right of married couples to use contraception. The court later extended that right to unmarried individuals in its ruling on Eisenstadt v. Baird in 1972.

Alex Keena, assistant professor of political science at Virginia Commonwealth University, said it’s not implausible that birth control protections could fall.

“Is it farfetched? I don’t necessarily think so,” he said. “It would have been unthinkable to overturn Roe just 10 years ago and look where we are today.”

Thirteen states have legal or constitutional protections for the right to contraception, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation. Voters in three of those states, California, Michigan, and Vermont, passed constitutional amendments through ballot measures after Roe was overturned. Lawmakers in Minnesota, New Mexico and Washington, D.C. enacted laws protecting contraception access since the Supreme Court decision.

Issues pertaining to women’s health — including abortion, birth control, in vitro fertilization (IVF) and miscarriage care — have come to the forefront since Roe fell, nationally and at the state level.

Keena said it’s created a headache for Republicans, who have struggled to define their exact stance on more nuanced aspects of reproductive health.

“It opened up a whole new set of questions and problems that Republicans weren’t really prepared to tackle,” he said. “They are all over the map and they are really struggling to find where they stand on these types of issues.”

But on the topic of birth control, Price said polls show it has widespread support from the general public.

“People want access to contraception,” she said.

A 2022 survey from the Kaiser Family Foundation found the majority of women (90%) ages 18-64 have used contraceptives at some point in their lives. The foundation is a nonpartisan organization focused on polling and health policy research.

___

Questions about what the bill would do

During a House health subcommittee meeting this month, three groups with religious ties spoke against the measure.

Susan Muskett, president of Pro-Family Women, an organization affiliated with the Catholic Church, said it would undermine religious rights and asserted it was broadly written and would protect access to abortion-inducing medications.

“A provider could determine that a woman has a health need for an elective chemical abortion weeks or months into a pregnancy and would be protected from any limitations impeding access to the chemical abortion drug,” said Muskett.

Todd Gathje, vice president of government relations at The Family Foundation, also shared concerns that abortifacients would be “roped in” with the bill.

Price, a subcommittee member, responded and said the bill contained language specifically stating it pertained to devices or medications that prevent — not end — a pregnancy.

“Words matter,” she said. “When someone comes up and says we aren’t sure what could be included, if you look at line 18 (in the bill), contraception means an action taken to prevent pregnancy. This is not a conversation about abortion.”

Several organizations, including the American College of Nurses-Midwives and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists — the nation’s largest organization for OBGYNs — spoke in favor of the legislation. A representative from ACOG said it would protect patients’ rights to family planning and to receive treatment for diseases that benefit from hormonal birth control.

Chandler Brooks, staff attorney with Virginia Division of Legislative Services, told the subcommittee the bill did not contain language forcing health care providers to prescribe birth control pills. VDLS provides nonpartisan legal research services to legislators and committees in the General Assembly.

“This establishes that there is a right to obtain and engage in contraception, and that health care providers have the right to provide contraceptives, but it doesn’t rise to the level of having requirement language in the bill (for providers),” Brooks said.

While discussing the bill on the Senate floor, Sen. David Suetterlein said he supported birth control access but urged legislators to be cautious about making it a right.

“This creating an affirmative legal right (to birth control) gives me some concern about where we go down that path,” said Suetterlein, R-Roanoke. “I think we need to be careful.”

On Wednesday, Sen. Louise Lucas, D-Portsmouth, told the Pilot she didn’t understand why Republicans were opposing the bill.

“If they are opposed to abortion, then why would they be opposed to protecting birth control, which would prevent a person from getting pregnant and needing an abortion in the first place?” she asked.

Given the uncertainties surrounding women’s health care, Alexandria resident Emily Marge said it would be meaningful to see state lawmakers take a stand for birth control. The 27-year-old has polycystic ovarian syndrome. She uses birth control pills to treat some of the symptoms and help her body produce periods.

After hearing Roe was overturned, Marge immediately began to worry that her birth control pills might be targeted next.

“Having that in the back of your mind,” she said. “That the medication that you take to function could be taken away — it’s the scariest thing.”

Katie King, katie.king@virginiamedia.com