state travel bans

We’re sorry, this site is currently experiencing technical difficulties. Please try again in a few moments. Exception: request blocked

• Skip to main content
• Keyboard shortcuts for audio player

California reconsiders its state business travel ban to states with anti-LGBTQ+ laws

Nicole Nixon / CapRadio

California law bans state business travel to other states with discriminatory laws against LGBTQ+ people. With 26 states now on the list, lawmakers are talking about repealing the travel ban.

Copyright © 2023 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by an NPR contractor. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.

Places the U.S. Government Warns Not to Travel Right Now

You may want to reconsider traveling to these countries right now.

Do Not Travel to These Countries

Getty Images

Crime, civil unrest and terrorism are common risk factors for countries that end up on the State Department's "Do Not Travel" advisory list.

In 2024, tourism across the globe is “well on track” to return to pre-pandemic levels, according to projections by UN Tourism.

Global conflicts and natural disasters , ranging from a series of coups across Africa to catastrophic earthquakes in the Middle East affected international travel patterns throughout 2023. Still, international tourist arrivals reached 87% of pre-pandemic levels in 2023, according to estimates by UN Tourism .

In January 2024 alone, about 4.6 million U.S. citizens left the country for international destinations, 17% higher than the same month in 2019, according to the International Trade Administration . But some destinations warrant more caution than others.

On Oct. 19, 2023, following the outbreak of war between Israel and Gaza and flaring tensions in the region, the U.S. State Department issued a worldwide caution advisory due to “increased tensions in various locations around the world, the potential for terrorist attacks, demonstrations or violent actions against U.S. citizens and interests.” Prior to this update, the most recent worldwide caution advisory was issued in 2022 after a U.S. strike killed Ayman al-Zawahiri, Osama bin Laden’s successor as leader of Al Qaeda, causing “a higher potential for anti-American violence.” The worldwide caution advisory remains in effect.

The U.S. State Department also issues individual travel advisory levels for more than 200 countries globally, continually updating them based on a variety of risk indicators such as health, terrorism and civil unrest. Travel advisory levels range from Level 1, which means exercise normal precautions, to Level 4, which means do not travel there.

About 10% of countries – 19 total – have a Level 4: “Do Not Travel” advisory as of Mar. 4. In Level 4 countries, the U.S. government may have “very limited ability” to step in should travelers’ safety or security be at risk, according to the State Department. Crime, civil unrest, kidnapping and terrorism are common risk factors associated with Level 4 countries.

So far in 2024, the State Department made changes to the existing Level 4 advisories for Myanmar, Iran and Gaza, and moved Niger and Lebanon off of the Level 4 list.

Places With a Level 4 Travel Advisory

These are the primary areas the U.S. government says not to travel to right now, in alphabetical order:

Jump to Place: Afghanistan Belarus Burkina Faso Central African Republic Myanmar (formerly Burma) Gaza Haiti Iran Iraq Libya Mali Mexico North Korea (Democratic People's Republic of Korea) Russia Somalia South Sudan Sudan Syria Ukraine Venezuela Yemen

Afghanistan: The Central Asian country is wrestling with “terrorism, risk of wrongful detention, kidnapping and crime,” according to the State Department. U.S. citizens are specifically at risk for wrongful detention and kidnapping. In 2022, the government reinstituted public floggings and executions, and women’s rights are disappearing under Taliban control. The U.S. Embassy in Kabul halted operations in August 2021. Since the Taliban took control , many forms of international aid have been halted . Meanwhile, in 2023, some of the year’s deadliest earthquakes killed more than 2,400 in Afghanistan while the country continues to face a years-long extreme drought.

Belarus: Belarus, which shares a western border with Russia and a southern border with Ukraine, has been flagged for “Belarusian authorities’ continued facilitation of Russia’s war against Ukraine, the buildup of Russian military forces in Belarus, the arbitrary enforcement of local laws, the potential of civil unrest, the risk of detention, and the Embassy’s limited ability to assist U.S. citizens residing in or traveling to Belarus.” The U.S. Embassy in Minsk halted operations in February 2022.

Burkina Faso: Terrorism, crime and kidnapping are plaguing this West African nation. Terrorist attacks may target hotels, restaurants and schools with little to no warning, and the East and Sahel regions of the country are under a state of emergency. In late November 2023, hundreds died in clashes between state security forces and rebels near the country’s border with Mali. In June, more than 2 million people in Burkina Faso were displaced due to “violence linked to al-Qaida and the Islamic State group.”

Central African Republic: While there have not been specific incidents of U.S. citizens targeted with violence or crime, violent crime and sudden closure of roads and borders is common. The advisory states that “Embassy Bangui’s limited capacity to provide support to U.S. citizens, crime, civil unrest, and kidnapping” is a factor in its assessment. Recent data from UNICEF suggests the country has the worst drinking water accessibility of all countries in 2022.

Myanmar (Formerly Burma): Armed conflict and civil unrest are the primary reasons to not travel to this Southeast Asian country, which experienced a military coup in early 2021. Limited health care resources, wrongful detentions and “areas with land mines and unexploded ordnance” are also listed as risk factors. After Ukraine and Israel, Myanmar had the highest conflict-related death toll in 2023.

Gaza : Hamas, a foreign terrorist organization as designated by the State Department, controls much of the Gaza Strip, which shares borders with both Israel and Egypt. On Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas fighters broke across the border into Israel, killing hundreds of civilians and soldiers in a brazen attack that stunned Israelis. On Oct. 10, Israel hit the Gaza Strip with “the fiercest air strikes in its 75-year conflict” according to Reuters . The conflict has since escalated into war between Israel and Hamas, with regular Israeli airstrikes leading to extensive civilian casualties in Gaza. As of mid-December, nearly 85% of Gaza’s population were displaced from their homes, according to UN estimates . The region continues to face shortages of food , water, electricity and medical supplies , with conditions deemed “far beyond a humanitarian crisis.” The State Department warns of terrorism and armed conflict within Gaza’s borders.

Haiti: In July 2023, the Department of State ordered all non-emergency U.S. government personnel and family members to leave the U.S. Embassy in Port-au-Prince in response to the increased risk of kidnapping and violent crime in the country , as well as armed conflict between gangs and police. The travel advisory states that cases of kidnapping “often involve ransom negotiations and U.S. citizen victims have been physically harmed during kidnappings.” The travel advisory also states that “U.S. citizens in Haiti should depart Haiti as soon as possible” given “the current security situation and infrastructure challenges.” A series of gang attacks in late September 2023 caused thousands to flee their homes, and many aid groups have been forced to cut or suspend operations amid escalating violence in recent months.

Iran: Terrorism, kidnapping and civil unrest are risk factors for all travelers to Iran, while U.S. citizens are specifically at risk for “arbitrary arrest.” U.S.-Iranian nationals such as students, journalists and business travelers have been arrested on charges of espionage and threatening national security. Executions in Iran rose sharply between 2021 and 2022, bringing the country’s total to nearly 580 people over the year, according to a report by Amnesty International released in May 2023.

Iraq: The State Department cites “terrorism, kidnapping, armed conflict [and] civil unrest” as cause for the country’s Level 4 distinction. Iraq’s northern borders, and its border with Syria, are especially dangerous. Since the escalation of conflict in neighboring Israel in October, there has been an increase in attacks against Iraqi military bases, which host U.S. troops and other international forces. In October 2023, non-emergency U.S. government personnel and eligible family members were ordered to leave the U.S. embassy in Baghdad.

Libya: Following the end of its dictatorship over a decade ago, Libya has been wrought with internal conflict between armed groups in the East and West. Armed conflict, civil unrest, crime, kidnapping and terrorism are all risk factors. U.S. citizens have been targets of kidnapping for ransom, with terrorists targeting hotels and airports frequented by Westerners. The U.S. Embassy in Tripoli halted operations in 2014. In mid-September 2023, floods, which some say were intensified by climate change , killed thousands in eastern Libya. Clashes between armed factions escalated across the country in the latter half of 2023, including in the capital city of Tripoli and in Benghazi.

Mali: After experiencing military coups in 2020 and 2021, crime, terrorism and kidnapping are all prevalent threats in this West African landlocked nation. In July 2022, non-emergency U.S. government employees and their families were ordered to leave the country due to higher risk of terrorist activity. A U.N. report in August 2023 said that military groups in the country, including both Mali security forces and possibly Russian Wagner mercenaries, were spreading terror through the use of violence against women and human rights abuses. Democratic elections were supposed to occur in February 2024, but Mali’s military junta postponed the plans indefinitely. In December, the U.N. officially ended a decade-long peacekeeping presence in the country, which had been among the agency’s deadliest missions, with hundreds of the mission personnel killed since 2013.

Mexico: Each state in Mexico is assessed separately for travel advisory levels. Six of the 32 states in Mexico are designated as Level 4: Colima, Guerrero, Michoacan, Sinaloa, Tamaulipas and Zacatecas. Crime and kidnapping are listed as the primary risk factors throughout the country. Nearly 112,000 people were missing across the country as of October, a number the U.N. has called “alarming.”

North Korea (Democratic People’s Republic of Korea): U.S. passports are not valid for travel “to, in, or through” this country, home to one of the world's longest-running dynastic dictatorships. The travel advisory states that the Level 4 distinction is due to “the continuing serious risk of arrest and long-term detention of U.S. nationals.” In July 2023, a U.S. soldier fled across the border into North Korea, where he is believed to be in North Korean custody, the first American detained in the North in nearly five years. He was returned to U.S. custody in September 2023.

Russia: The travel advisory for Russia cites its invasion of Ukraine , harassment of U.S. citizens by Russian government officials and arbitrary law enforcement as a few of the reasons for the Level 4 designation. Chechnya and Mount Elbrus are specifically listed as Level 4 regions. Terrorism, civil unrest, health, kidnapping and wrongful detention are all noted as risks.

Russia Invades Ukraine: A Timeline

Somalia: A severe drought resulting from five failed rainy seasons in a row killed 43,000 people in 2022, and caused a famine amid conflict with Islamist insurgents . Violent crime is common throughout Somalia , pirates frequent its coast off the Horn of Africa, and medical facilities, where they exist, have limited capacity. Crime, terrorism, civil unrest, health and kidnapping are all risk factors. In January 2024, some passengers aboard a U.N.-contracted helicopter were taken hostage by al-Shabaab militants after the vehicle crashed in central Somalia.

South Sudan: Crime, kidnapping and armed conflict are the primary risk factors for South Sudan, which separated from Sudan in 2011, making it the world’s newest country . Weapons are readily available, and travelers have been victims of sexual assault and armed robbery.

Sudan: The U.S. evacuated its embassy in Khartoum in April 2023, and the country closed its airspace due to the ongoing conflict in the country, only permitting humanitarian aid and evacuation efforts. Fighting has escalated in the region between two warring generals seeking to gain control after a military coup in 2021 ousted the country’s prime minister. Civil unrest is the primary risk factor for Africa’s third largest country by area. Crime, terrorism, kidnapping and armed conflict are also noted. The International Criminal Court began investigating alleged war crimes and violence against African ethnic groups in the country in 2023. Millions have fled their homes due to conflict, and the U.N. has said its efforts to provide aid have been hindered by a lack of support, safety and resources. As recently as December 2023, the United Nations warned of catastrophic famine , with millions of children at-risk for malnutrition .

Syria: The advisory states that “No part of Syria is safe from violence,” with terrorism, civil unrest, kidnapping, armed conflict and risk of unjust detention all potential risk factors. U.S. citizens are often a target for kidnappings and detention. The U.S. Embassy in Damascus halted operations in 2012. Fighting in neighboring Israel has escalated since October, and the conflict has spilled over into Syria, where the U.S. has carried out air strikes following drone and rocket attacks against American troops in Syria and Iraq, triggered by the Israel-Hamas war.

Ukraine: Russian setbacks in their invasion of Ukraine buoyed hopes in Ukraine in 2023. However, Ukraine is a Level 4 country due to Russia’s invasion, with crime and civil unrest also noted as risk factors. The country’s forces shot down two Russian fighter jets on Christmas Eve 2023, in a move Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said “sets the right mood for the entire year ahead.”

Venezuela: Human rights abuses and lack of health care plague this South American nation, which has been in a political crisis since 2014. In 2019, diplomatic personnel were withdrawn from the U.S. Embassy in Caracas. Threats in the country include crime, civil unrest, kidnapping, wrongful detention and poor health infrastructure.

Yemen: Six of the nine risk factors defined by the State Department – terrorism, civil unrest, health risks, kidnapping, armed conflict and landmines – are all present in Yemen. Despite private companies offering tourist visits to the Yemeni island of Socotra, the U.S. government argues those arranging such visits “are putting tourists in danger.” Civil war and cholera are also both present throughout the country. The U.S. Embassy in Sanaa halted operations in 2015. The country has experienced a relative lull in the civil war fighting, but as peace negotiations have gotten traction, flare ups in the fighting have jeopardized progress. Most recently, the U.S. and U.K. have carried out a series of airstrikes in the country, targeting Iran-backed Houthi sites.

Other Countries to Watch

Since Jan. 1, the State Department has updated travel advisories for 17 different countries as well as for the West Bank and Gaza, adding information about specific regions or risk factors, or simply renewing an existing advisory. Travel advisory levels can change based on several factors in a nation, such as increased civil unrest, policies that affect human rights or higher risks of unlawful detention.

The State Department has given about 25 countries an assessment of Level 3, meaning it recommends people “reconsider travel” to those destinations.

On Oct. 14, one week after the deadly Hamas attack on Israel, Israel and the West Bank were both moved from Level 2 to Level 3, while Gaza remains at Level 4. The region’s travel advisory was updated in November to reflect travel restrictions for certain government employees who have not already left the area, and it was updated again on Jan. 3.

Following the outbreak of the Israel-Hamas war in early October, the U.S. State Department raised Lebanon ’s travel advisory level from a Level 3 to a Level 4 level due to “the unpredictable security situation related to rocket, missile, and artillery exchanges” between Israel and Hezbollah or other militant groups. In December, the U.S. Embassy in Beirut returned to normal staffing and presence, and on Jan. 29, the country was moved back to Level 3. Crime, terrorism, armed conflict, civil unrest, kidnapping and unexploded landmines are listed as the country’s primary risk factors. However, the country’s borders with Syria and with Israel, as well as refugee settlements within Lebanon, are specifically noted as Level 4 regions.

China became a Level 3 country in late 2020, with an update in December 2022 citing “the surge in COVID-19 cases, arbitrary enforcement of local laws, and COVID-19-related restrictions” as the reason for the advisory. In June 2023, the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (SAR) was moved from the Level 3 to the Level 2 list, but travelers are still advised to be cautious in the area due to “arbitrary enforcement of local laws.” Meanwhile, Macau remains at Level 3.

Following an attempted coup in August 2023, Niger was elevated to Level 4 in August and the Department of State ordered all non-emergency U.S. government personnel and family members to leave the U.S. Embassy in Niamey. In early January 2024, the overall risk level for the country was lowered back to Level 3. Despite the new classification, the State Department still asks non-emergency government personnel and eligible family members to depart the country.

In mid-December 2023 there was an explosion at Guinea’s main fuel depot which has since affected access to health care and basic goods and services. The country was subsequently designated a Level 3 nation after having previously been Level 2. Concerns about civil unrest, health, crime and fuel shortages impacting local infrastructure were listed as the primary risk factors contributing to the change.

Several Level 3 countries are among the worst countries for human trafficking, as designated by the State Department’s annual Trafficking in Persons Report . Level 3 countries on this list include Papua New Guinea, Guinea Bissau, China and Chad. There are also nine Level 4 countries designated as among the worst for human trafficking: Afghanistan, Belarus, Iran, Myanmar, North Korea, Russia, Syria, South Sudan and Venezuela.

Over 70 countries are currently at Level 2, meaning the State Department recommends travelers “exercise increased caution” when traveling to those destinations.

Botswana became the newest Level 2 country on Feb. 26 after having previously been Level 1, with crime noted as the primary risk factor.

France, which saw nationwide protests throughout 2023, has civil unrest and terrorism noted as risk factors for its Level 2 status, and Sweden’s Level 2 status is associated with risks of terrorism.

The Level 2 travel advisory for the Bahamas was updated in January to reflect water safety concerns. The advisory warns that “activities involving commercial recreational watercraft, including water tours, are not consistently regulated” and notes that government personnel are “not permitted to use independently operated jet-ski rentals on New Providence and Paradise Islands.” It also warns visitors to be mindful of sharks, weather and water conditions. The advisory also says that crime is a primary risk factor with gang-on-gang violence contributing to high homicide rates in some areas. Visitors are asked to “be vigilant” and to not physically resist robbery attempts.

Bangladesh 's Level 2 travel advisory was updated in October 2023 to add a note about the country’s general election , which took place Jan. 7, 2024. The advisory states “demonstrations intended to be peaceful can turn confrontational and escalate into violence.” The U.S. has since claimed the country’s election was not free nor fair.

In November 2023, several Level 2 travel advisories were updated with new cautionary information. The advisory for Ghana was updated to reflect threats against LGBTQI+ travelers specifically, noting “anti-LGBTQI+ rhetoric and violence have increased in recent years.” Meanwhile, the advisory for South Africa was updated in February to note that routes recommended by GPS may be unsafe with higher risk for crime.

Turkmenistan was moved off of the Level 2 list to become the newest addition to the Level 1 list on Jan. 22, meaning normal precautions are recommended but there are no risk factors causing travelers to practice increased caution.

The State Department asks travelers to pay attention to travel advisory levels and alerts , review country information pages for their destinations and read related country security reports before going abroad.

Join the Conversation

Tags: Russia , Ukraine , Travel , Coronavirus , Travel Tips , Israel , Gaza , violence , Civil War , crime , kidnapping , international relations

Recent Articles

Best countries.

National News

Best Countries Rankings

• # 1 Switzerland
• # 5 Australia
• # 5 United States

Healthiest Communities

Your trusted source for in-depth analysis on the issues impacting your community’s well-being delivered right to your inbox.

Sign in to manage your newsletters »

Sign up to receive the latest updates from U.S News & World Report and our trusted partners and sponsors. By clicking submit, you are agreeing to our Terms and Conditions & Privacy Policy .

You May Also Like

Switzerland is world's best country.

Julia Haines Sept. 6, 2023

Photos: Best Countries Around the World

Sept. 6, 2023

The 25 Best Countries in the World

Elliott Davis Jr. Sept. 6, 2023

Yellen Says US Ties With Vietnam Don't Require It to Sever Ties With Russia, China

Reuters June 20, 2024

Burkina Faso Junta Leader Denies Reports of Army Mutiny

California lawmakers vote to end travel ban to states with anti-LGBTQ laws

SACRAMENTO, Calif. — California may soon lift  a ban on state-funded travel  to states with anti-LGBTQ laws and instead focus on an advertising campaign to bring anti-discrimination messages to red states.

California started banning official travel to states with laws it deemed discriminatory against LGBTQ people in 2017, starting with Kansas, Mississippi, North Carolina and Tennessee. Since then, the list has grown to include a total of 26 states, most of them Republican-led, following a surge of anti-LGBTQ legislation these past few years.

The prohibition has prevented elected officials, state workers and university scholars from traveling to more than half of the country using the state’s money. That has posed a significant challenge to sports teams at public colleges and universities, which have had to find alternative funding sources to pay for their road games in states like Arizona and Utah. It has also complicated some of the state’s other policy goals, like  using state money to pay for people who live in other states to travel to California for abortions.

California lawmakers in the state Assembly on Monday passed legislation to end the travel ban. The bill, introduced by state Senate leader Toni Atkins, would also establish an outreach and advertising campaign in states on the travel ban list to promote pro-LGBTQ messages. Atkins, who is a lesbian, said the travel ban has helped raise awareness about many anti-LGBTQ issues, but it has also led to unintended consequences.

For more from NBC Out,  sign up for our weekly newsletter .

“In many instances, the travel ban has inadvertently caused California to isolate its services and citizens in a time when we are leading the nation in ensuring inclusivity and freedom,” said Democratic Assemblymember Rick Zbur, the former executive director of the advocacy group Equality California. “With nearly 500 anti-LGBTQ bills having been introduced in legislatures nationwide this year alone, now more than ever, we need to reach into those communities with messages of support, inclusivity and understanding.”

Some Republicans voted against overturning the ban, but there was no debate.

The bill will head to the Senate for a final vote before landing on Gov. Gavin Newsom’s desk. The Democratic governor has until Oct. 14 to decide whether to sign it into law. The governor’s office did not immediately return a request for comment about the legislation.

The reversal on the travel ban comes amid intense political battles across the country over transgender rights, including efforts to  impose bans on gender-affirming care ,  bar trans athletes  from girls and women’s sports, and  require schools  to notify parents if their children ask to use different pronouns or changes their gender identity.

The legislation is among nearly 1,000 bills that lawmakers have been debating during the hectic final two weeks of the Legislative session. The Legislature has until Sept. 14 to act on these bills.

The unconstitutional plan to stop women from traveling out of state for an abortion, explained

The age of travel bans is now upon us.

by Ian Millhiser

More than a year ago, anti-abortion activists appeared eager to prohibit anyone seeking an abortion in a state where it is banned from traveling to another state where it is legal. Indeed, many lawmakers appeared so eager to enact such travel bans that Justice Brett Kavanaugh, of all people, attempted to cut off these laws before they could be enacted.

“May a State bar a resident of that State from traveling to another State to obtain an abortion?” Kavanaugh asked in his concurring opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (2022), the decision overruling Roe v. Wade . “In my view, the answer is no,” Kavanaugh replied to his own question, “based on the constitutional right to interstate travel.” The Constitution has long been understood to allow US citizens to travel among the states.

For the most part, state and local lawmakers have not tested whether Kavanaugh would hold to this view if a travel ban actually became law. But a few jurisdictions in Texas are now breaking with this consensus. As the Washington Post reports, two Texas counties and two Texas cities have passed local ordinances making it illegal to transport someone through one of these counties or cities for the purpose of obtaining an out-of-state abortion.

Notably, this list of anti-abortion localities includes Mitchell County, Texas , a sparse community of about 9,000 people. This matters because Interstate 20, the route that many people traveling from Dallas to New Mexico to receive an abortion will take, passes through Mitchell County. Several other counties with major highways or airports are also considering similar laws.

These ordinances and proposed ordinances largely track model legislation, which anti-abortion activist Mark Lee Dickson shared on Twitter , that is itself modeled after SB 8 — the statewide anti-abortion law that allows private bounty hunters to sue abortion providers and collect bounties of $10,000 or more.

In fairness, Dickson’s model legislation does prohibit such bounty hunter suits from being filed against “the pregnant woman who seeks to abort her unborn child.” But the legislation would potentially allow abortion funds that help pay for abortion care, or anyone who drives a pregnant patient to an out-of-state abortion clinic, to be sued.

Ordinarily, Kavanaugh’s preemptive rejection of travel bans would be a clear sign that these laws will not survive judicial review. But, in Whole Woman’s Health v. Jackson (2021), the Supreme Court effectively shut down federal lawsuits challenging unconstitutional laws that are enforced solely by bounty hunters. And Kavanaugh joined the Court’s decision in Jackson .

The upshot is that these unconstitutional Texas ordinances may succeed, not because they are lawful but because the Supreme Court has largely immunized them from constitutional review.

Travel bans are unconstitutional

Citizens of the United States have a right to travel freely among the states. As the Supreme Court said in Shapiro v. Thompson (1969), “the nature of our Federal Union and our constitutional concepts of personal liberty unite to require that all citizens be free to travel throughout the length and breadth of our land uninhibited by statutes, rules, or regulations which unreasonably burden or restrict this movement.”

Indeed, the Supreme Court held over 150 years ago that states may not impose even fairly insignificant barriers on US citizens who wish to travel outside that state. This issue arose in Crandall v. Nevada (1867), which struck down a Nevada law that imposed a tax of one dollar “upon every person leaving the State by any railroad, stage coach, or other vehicle engaged or employed in the business of transporting passengers for hire.”

In striking down this fairly small tax, the Court spoke in sweeping terms about each citizen’s right to travel freely. “We are all citizens of the United States, and as members of the same community must have the right to pass and repass through every part of it without interruption, as freely as in our own States,” the Court declared in Crandall.

Moreover, the Court also made clear that this rule applies equally to “persons residing in the State who may wish to get out of it, and upon persons not residing in it who may have occasion to pass through it.”

Again, Crandall involved a fairly minor imposition on travelers: a single dollar tax (about $18 in today’s value). If the Constitution does not permit such a small burden to be laid on interstate travelers, it follows that a state or local government may not effectively take someone hostage for months — potentially for the duration of their pregnancy — in order to prevent them from leaving the state to obtain an abortion.

As the Court explained in Saenz v. Roe (1999), the right to travel has “three different components” — the right of citizens to “enter and to leave another State,” the right to be treated “as a welcome visitor” when visiting another state, and the right to be treated the same way as established residents of a state after moving to that state. Each of these rights flows from a different provision of the Constitution.

Of those three components, the right to travel out of state to obtain an abortion flows from the right to citizens to “enter and leave another State,” and the Court indicated in Edwards v. California (1941) that this right is rooted in a doctrine known as the dormant commerce clause . The Constitution gives Congress the power to “ regulate commerce ... among the several states ,” and the Court has long held that, by vesting authority over multi-state commerce in the national government, the Constitution implicitly prevents states from enacting laws that impose excessive burdens on commerce among the states.

That includes laws that burden people’s ability to travel across state lines. As Edwards held, “it is settled beyond question that the transportation of persons is ‘commerce.’”

For what it’s worth, Dickson told the Washington Post that his model ordinance is lawful because it is similar to the federal Mann Act , which makes it illegal to transport “any woman or girl for the purpose of prostitution or debauchery, or for any other immoral purpose.” If the Mann Act is constitutional, he argued, so too must a travel ban targeting abortions be constitutional.

Dickson might have a point if Congress enacted a Mann Act-like law that prohibits interstate travel to obtain an abortion. But, again, the Constitution gives Congress, and not state or local governments, exclusive authority over interstate commerce. Neither Texas nor any Texas county may pass a law that targets conduct occurring in New Mexico. Nor may they prevent people in Texas from leaving the state.

The fact that travel bans are unconstitutional might not matter to this Supreme Court

The Court’s decision in Whole Woman’s Health v. Jackson looms over this discussion of travel bans like a plague. Dickson’s model legislation was clearly written with Jackson in mind, as it relies on the sort of private bounty hunters that the Court embraced in Jackson .

As a general rule, someone who fears that their rights will be curtailed by an unconstitutional state or local law may obtain a federal court order blocking that law. The Supreme Court held in  Ex parte Young  (1908) that someone seeking such a court order must sue the specific state official who is tasked with enforcing the unconstitutional law. So, for example, if Texas passed a law ordering the state police to blockade I-20 to prevent anyone from traveling on it to obtain an abortion, a plaintiff who wished to block this law might sue the head of the state’s police force.

SB 8, the law the Court embraced in Jackson , tried to immunize itself from judicial review by stating that no state official may attempt to enforce it — only private bounty hunters filing lawsuits could do so. And, in a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court agreed that this bounty hunter framework immunized the law from federal lawsuits seeking to block it .

In fairness, someone who is sued under SB 8 could still allege at their trial that the law is unconstitutional. But SB 8 permits virtually anyone to sue any abortion provider who performs an abortion after the sixth week of pregnancy. So anyone accused of violating the law risked being bombarded with so many lawsuits that their legal fees would bankrupt them.

That’s why it was so important to block the law before anyone was sued under it, and why the Supreme Court’s decision to immunize SB 8 from federal review was such a harsh blow to abortion rights in Texas.

Meanwhile, Dickson’s model legislation uses a similar mechanism to evade judicial review. Under that legislation, the ban on traveling through the wrong Texas county to help someone obtain an abortion “ shall be enforced exclusively through ... private civil actions .”

As a practical matter, it’s unclear if this framework will actually be effective in deterring people from traveling to New Mexico to seek abortions. If a man drives his pregnant girlfriend through Mitchell County on the way to an abortion clinic in New Mexico, how is anyone other than the two of them supposed to know where they are headed?

But the law could wind up deterring women in abusive relationships, or other patients whose acquaintances or family members learn that they are seeking an abortion. Indeed, according to the Washington Post, Dickson suggested that “ a husband who doesn’t want his wife to get an abortion could threaten to sue the friend who offers to drive her .”

If that lawsuit happens, the wife’s friend should prevail — he can argue at trial that the Mitchell County ordinance violates the constitutional right to travel. But even if this friend does prevail, they will wind up having to hire legal counsel and endure the stress of a lawsuit that never should have been filed in the first place.

Most Popular

Biden’s ads haven’t been working. now, he’s trying something new., mysterious monoliths are appearing across the world. here’s what we know., the christian right is coming for divorce next, bridgerton finally gave us queer storylines. fans aren’t having it., the world is running out of soldiers, today, explained.

Understand the world with a daily explainer plus the most compelling stories of the day.

More in Abortion

The Supreme Court’s abortion pill case is only a narrow and temporary victory for abortion

The Comstock Act, the long-dead law Trump could use to ban abortion, explained

The 9 worst court decisions since Trump remade the federal judiciary

The history of Arizona’s Civil War-era abortion ban

The astonishing radicalism of Florida’s new ban on abortion

The Supreme Court’s likely to make it more dangerous to be pregnant in a red state

This number can measure how dangerous a heat wave is for you

Why Americans hate inflation — and its cure

Drug-resistant bacteria are killing more and more humans. We need new weapons.

The hollowness of corporate Pride

It shouldn’t be so hard to live near your friends

Most Americans are wrong about crime  Video

Advertisement

171,000 Traveled for Abortions Last Year. See Where They Went.

By Molly Cook Escobar ,  Amy Schoenfeld Walker ,  Allison McCann ,  Scott Reinhard and Helmuth Rosales

Source: The Guttmacher Institute

Orange states had a total or six-week ban in 2023.

More than 14,000 Texas patients crossed the border into New Mexico for an abortion last year. An additional 16,000 left Southern states bound for Illinois. And nearly 12,000 more traveled north from South Carolina and Georgia to North Carolina.

These were among the more than 171,000 patients who traveled for an abortion in 2023, new estimates show , demonstrating both the upheaval in access since the overturn of Roe v. Wade and the limits of state bans to stop the procedure. The data also highlights the unsettled nature of an issue that will test politicians up and down the ballot in November.

Out-of-state travel for abortions — either to have a procedure or obtain abortion pills — more than doubled in 2023 compared with 2019, and made up nearly a fifth of recorded abortions. On Thursday, the Supreme Court rejected a case that would have sharply curtailed access to medication abortion, allowing the pills to remain available to patients traveling from states with bans.

Where patients traveled for abortions

Number of patients

171,300 patients traveled

Total or six-week abortion ban in 2023

73,100 patients traveled

Source: Guttmacher Institute

Note: Map reflects abortion laws as of Dec. 31, except in Wisconsin, where a ban was in place for a majority of the year. Routes with fewer than 100 patients are not shown.

Most traveling patients went to the next closest state that allowed abortions. But those in the South, where 13 states banned or restricted the procedure, had to go farther.

One traveler was a 24-year-old woman from Columbus, Ga., who asked to be identified by only her first initial, A. She flew to New York City last summer after discovering she was past six weeks of pregnancy, when Georgia no longer allows abortion.

She decided to travel over a weekend instead of self-managing with pills at home. “I had to go back to work on Monday,” she said. “I just didn’t have that kind of time.”

Texas, the largest state to ban abortion, had the most residents travel across state lines for the procedure, the data shows.

An exodus from Texas

35,500 Texas patients traveled

2,400 Texas patients traveled

Note: Routes with fewer than 100 patients are not shown.

On the receiving end, nowhere saw more out-of-state patients — and from more states — than Illinois.

An island of access in the Midwest

37,300 patients traveled to Illinois

8,500 patients traveled to Illinois

People in states where the procedure remained legal also traveled for abortions, sometimes because the closest clinic was across state lines or the influx of out-of-state patients made appointments scarce. The data shows that abortions rose in nearly every state where they remained legal.

Many traveling patients faced multiday trips, lost income and child care costs. Some patients were unable to travel. Earlier research found that in the first half of 2023, almost a quarter of women living in states with near-total bans — who may have otherwise sought an abortion — did not get one.

“Abortion is one of the most common procedures in medicine,” said Amy Hagstrom Miller, the founder of Whole Woman’s Health, which runs clinics in Maryland, Minnesota, New Mexico and Virginia.

“We’re having people travel hundreds or thousands of miles for a procedure that typically takes less than 10 minutes and can be done in a doctor’s office setting,” she said. “Nobody does that for any other medical procedure.”

The new estimates of resident and out-of-state abortions come from the Guttmacher Institute, a research organization that supports abortion rights, and they offer the first detailed picture of the interstate travelers who helped push the number of abortions nationwide to a high in 2023. The researchers surveyed a sample of clinics in each state where abortion remained legal to estimate the number of abortions.

For some anti-abortion groups, the feeling of victory after the overturn of Roe has been dimmed by the number of people circumventing abortion bans — and the lack of political will to address the issue in an election year.

“We’re agitating some of the Republicans who would be very comfortable spiking the football, patting themselves on the back, running for re-election, and then focusing on other issues that they’re more interested in,” said John Seago, the president of Texas Right to Life.

“We’ve never had a sense of finality. We’ve only seen the other side escalate their efforts to promote abortion,” he added.

Change in abortions by state

Note: No data was collected from 13 states that had near-total abortion bans for all of 2023. A ban was in place in Wisconsin for a majority of the year.

The availability of abortion pills has significantly blunted the impact of many state bans. But some patients still must travel to see a provider because of a medical condition or how far along they are in pregnancy. Others simply prefer it.

“I didn’t want the pills to get delivered to my school,” said Mia, 20, a college student in Houston who asked to be identified by only her first name. Instead, last August, she drove 12 hours to an Albuquerque clinic. “In case anything went wrong, I didn’t know if I could go to a hospital,” she said. “I figured it would be best to go in person and that way I’d know that it was taken care of.”

The clinic covered the procedure’s cost, but Mia paid around $500 for gas, two nights at an Airbnb and Uber rides to get to and from her appointment.

The explosion of out-of-state travel has been met with support from abortion clinics and abortion funds, which expanded access to services and financial support for patients.

“Now we have places where people who’ve been driving all night can nap in our clinics,” said Ms. Hagstrom Miller. “We have couches. We have waiting rooms specifically for children, with toys. We bring in sandwiches and food.”

States with liberal abortion laws have also played a significant role.

“It looks like the protective policies that the states are enacting do matter,” said Kelly Baden, the vice president for public policy at the Guttmacher Institute. “But we should not be normalizing the reliance on networks of volunteers and donations.”

Illinois has invested upwards of $23 million into expanding abortion access and reproductive health care since 2022. Providers in the state have extended clinic hours and increased staffing and the availability of hospital-based abortion care .

“Things are running along very smoothly,” said Dr. Allison Cowett, the medical director at Family Planning Associates, a Chicago clinic whose patient volume has doubled since 2018. “We’ve caught up to the speed of things. This is our new normal.”

The Chicago Abortion Fund provides, on average, about $880 to each patient seeking an abortion in Illinois, up from around $545 in 2022, thanks to donations and city and state grants .

“It still feels precarious — you don’t know when the priority of a single institution or a single foundation will change,” said Megan Jeyifo, the fund’s executive director.

Despite restrictions, patients traveled across the Southeast

12-week ban

Six-week bans

15-week ban in 2023

Note: Routes shown are for patients traveling into and out of Florida, Georgia, North Carolina and South Carolina. Routes with fewer than 100 patients are not shown.

In Florida, the fight over abortion restrictions is far from over, with consequences for women across the South. The state had an 18 percent rise in abortions last year, including nearly 10,000 out-of-state patients.

A six-week ban that took effect in May has already upended those patterns, and advocates are asking voters to preserve abortion rights in the state’s Constitution in November.

For now, the closest state offering abortions later than six weeks in pregnancy is North Carolina, which requires counseling and a 72-hour waiting period.

“It’s a logistical nightmare,” said Kelly Flynn, the chief executive of A Woman’s Choice, which has clinics in Florida, North Carolina and Virginia. To save patients two trips out of Florida, physicians at her Florida clinic are licensed in North Carolina so that they can perform the mandatory counseling before the patient travels north.

• Share full article

Gov. Newsom signs bill replacing California’s state travel ban over LGBTQ laws with outreach funding

G ov. Gavin Newsom has signed a bill effectively ending California’s travel ban to more than half of U.S. states over their LGBTQ laws, acknowledging that it was more trouble than it was worth and replacing it with a plan to fund educational outreach to those states to try and foster acceptance of the LGBTQ community.

The ban began with legislation by Assemblyman Evan Low, a Cupertino Democrat, in 2016 that initially restricted state-funded travel to four states: Kansas, Mississippi, North Carolina and Tennessee. But that number doubled in the law’s first year. It was at 23 states when, in July, Attorney General Rob Bonta announced his office was adding three more states — Missouri, Nebraska and Wyoming — to the list, bringing it to 26.

The growing list created problems for state leaders. Legislative analysts reported that California lawmakers had to use their own political funds to attend a National Conference of State Legislatures in Tennessee, and that others skipped events in prohibited states.

It also became a liability for Newsom, who was criticized last year for traveling to one of the banned states, Montana , to visit his wife’s family. Newsom’s office said at the time such personal and privately paid travel is not considered state sponsored but declined to say whether California footed the bill for his security staff.

State Sen. pro Tempore Toni Atkins, the powerful San Diego Democrat who authored the bill Newsom signed Wednesday, said the growing number of prohibited states suggested the ban wasn’t working and that a new approach is needed.

Her bill calls for a “BRIDGE Project” — which she said would “create a fund that could be used to create non-partisan, inclusive messaging, discourage discrimination, and help members of the LGBTQ+ community feel less isolated.”

The legislature approved the law as an urgency measure, and it became effective immediately.

Legislative analysts said the bill would authorize outreach efforts through the Governor’s Office of Business and Economic Development, or GO-Biz. It would cost taxpayers “about $583,000 annually for four staff at GO-Biz to oversee the BRIDGE Project fund as well as ongoing costs for the BRIDGE Projects’ education, marketing, and advertising campaigns,” analysts said, though “state costs could be offset by donations.”

Supporters argued it would “develop marketing campaigns designed to raise awareness and educate the public” in other states, while opponents said it would amount to “funding advertising and media specifically aimed at unduly influencing other states’ laws.”

Newsom in a statement thanked Atkins for “this important measure that enables California to continue taking a stand for the rights of LGBTQ+ people throughout the country and combating intolerance and hate with empathy and allyship.”

“In the face of a rising tide of anti-LGBTQ+ hate, this measure helps California’s message of acceptance, equality and hope reach the places where it is most needed,” Newsom said.

The state laws that led California to expand its travel ban mostly dealt with transgender access to school bathrooms, participation in youth sports and “gender affirming” hormonal and surgical procedures on children, a matter that has roiled school boards, health care and athletics in recent years. Advocates for those laws argue that the policies protect girls’ rights and kids, while critics called them anti-LGBTQ.

Statistics provided by the Human Rights Campaign, a pro-LGBTQ group, seemed to affirm that the travel ban wasn’t effective in preventing anti-trans or anti-LGBTQ laws and policies. The group reported in May that a record 520 “anti-LGBTQ+ bills” have been introduced in state legislatures. The group said 70 laws have been enacted, including 15 “banning gender affirming care for transgender youth,” seven “allowing misgendering of transgender students,” four “censoring school curriculum” and two “targeting drag performances.”

Related Articles

• California News | Kentucky couple awarded $100,000 over marriage license denial
• California News | After Pride flag ban, could a recall of East Bay school board succeed?
• California News | Whole Foods cites web designer’s Supreme Court win in fight against BLM masks
• California News | Editorial: Elections matter, even in tiny Sunol school district
• California News | Southern California school board OKs policy banning pride, other flags from schools

“With an unprecedented number of anti-LGBTQ+ bills having been introduced in state legislatures nationwide, California can further position itself as a national leader on inclusivity and serve as a beacon of hope and support for those who have been isolated by state-sponsored discrimination elsewhere,” Atkins said.

Low, who is gay, has defended AB 1887 and argued that repealing it would amount to backing down in the face of anti-LGBTQ+ legislation.

“While the removal of our state-funded travel ban to these states does not protect Californians from potential harm,” Low said in a statement Thursday, “I am hopeful that the BRIDGE project will help change hearts and minds in states that have pursued and enacted anti-LGBTQ laws.”

United States Travel Restrictions

Traveler's COVID-19 vaccination status

Traveling from the United States to the United States

Open for vaccinated visitors

COVID-19 testing

Not required

Not required for vaccinated visitors

Restaurants

Not required on public transportation.

Ready to travel?

Find flights to the united states, find stays in the united states, explore more countries on travel restrictions map, destinations you can travel to now, dominican republic, netherlands, philippines, puerto rico, switzerland, united arab emirates, united kingdom, know when to go.

Sign up for email alerts as countries begin to open - choose the destinations you're interested in so you're in the know.

Can I travel to the United States from the United States?

Most visitors from the United States, regardless of vaccination status, can enter the United States.

Can I travel to the United States if I am vaccinated?

Fully vaccinated visitors from the United States can enter the United States without restrictions.

Can I travel to the United States without being vaccinated?

Unvaccinated visitors from the United States can enter the United States without restrictions.

Do I need a COVID test to enter the United States?

Visitors from the United States are not required to present a negative COVID-19 PCR test or antigen result upon entering the United States.

Can I travel to the United States without quarantine?

Travelers from the United States are not required to quarantine.

Do I need to wear a mask in the United States?

Mask usage in the United States is not required on public transportation.

Are the restaurants and bars open in the United States?

Restaurants in the United States are open. Bars in the United States are .

More than 171K patients traveled out-of-state for abortions in 2023, new data shows

More than 171,000 patients traveled out-of-state to receive abortion care last year, according to new data from the Guttmacher Institute, which underscores the widespread impact of state abortion bans that followed the overturning of Roe v. Wade in 2022 .

Out-of-state travel for abortion care has more than doubled since 2019 when 73,100 patients traveled across state lines for abortions, according to the Guttmacher Institute's Monthly Abortion Provision Study project . The project estimates the number of abortions in each state without a total ban from January 2023 to March of this year.

The project found that over 1 million clinician-provided abortions took place in 2023. Of that figure, 171,300 people traveled out-of-state to have abortions, according to the data .

"What’s striking about this new data is how often people are traveling across multiple state lines to access abortion care," Isaac Maddow-Zimet, Guttmacher data scientist and project lead, said in a statement Thursday. "Traveling for abortion care requires individuals to overcome huge financial and logistical barriers, and our findings show just how far people will travel to obtain the care they want and deserve."

The new data revealed a trend of patients, mostly residents in southern states with strict abortion laws, traveling across multiple state lines to receive abortion procedures or dispensed pills. Before the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022, patients had traveled for abortion care due to legal barriers or the availability of providers within their state, according to the Guttmacher Institute.

But the significant increase in 2023 was a result of abortion bans and restrictions in individual states that were quickly implemented after the Supreme Court's decision, the Guttmacher Institute said. Patients have been forced to travel for abortion care because of the lack of access in their home states.

Where is abortion on the ballot?: Tracking abortion-related ballot measures in the upcoming election

Abortion laws 'affect thousands of people beyond that state’s borders'

The number of patients that travel out-of-state for abortion care has "always been particularly high" in states with restrictions, according to the Guttmacher Institute.

"Historically, however, many of the people traveling from restrictive states went to states that now have total abortion bans," the Guttmacher Institute said in a news release . "For instance, in 2020, more than 800 Louisiana residents traveled to Texas for abortion care; following the overturning of Roe v. Wade in 2022, that was no longer possible. In 2023, more than 3,500 Louisianans traveled across multiple states to get care in places like Florida, Illinois, and Georgia."

Data showed that most patients in states with strict policies traveled to the nearest or neighboring state that allowed abortions. But patients in southern states, which have the most restrictive laws compared to the rest of the country, had to travel across multiple state lines to receive care.

The state that had the most patients leave for abortion care was Texas, according to the data. A majority — more than 14,000 — traveled to New Mexico but thousands of others crossed several state lines for the procedure.

The state that received the most patients traveling for abortion care was Illinois, the data found. It showed that about 37,300 from 16 states went to Illinois to have an abortion.

Kelly Baden, vice president for public policy at the Guttmacher Institute, noted that Florida had a significant role last year in "maintaining some level of abortion access in the Southeast." More than 85,000 abortions occurred in the state in 2023.

But that figure is expected to drop because of Florida's six-week abortion ban that took effect in May. Currently, the closest state that provides abortion care later than six weeks in pregnancy is North Carolina, according to the Guttmacher Institute.

"The state of residence data makes it clear that this policy change will be devastating not only for Floridians, but also for the thousands of others who would have traveled there after being denied care in their home states," Baden said in a statement. "Once again, we see that a state’s abortion policies affect thousands of people beyond that state’s borders."

States with near-total bans on abortion

As of June, 14 states have near-complete bans on abortions with limited exceptions such as when the parent's life is at risk, rape, incest, and/or fetal anomalies. These states include Alabama, Arkansas, Idaho, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, and West Virginia.

In Missouri, abortion is prohibited in nearly all cases, except for medical emergencies, with no exceptions for rape or incest.

Last April, North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum signed one of the country’s  most restrictive abortion measures  into law. The bill abortion at any stage of pregnancy, allowing exceptions only within the first six weeks for cases of rape, incest, or medical emergencies.

In Oklahoma, abortion is banned in almost all cases, without exceptions for rape or incest. In 2023, the State Supreme Court permitted the procedure for only when the parent's life was at risk.

Contributing: Cy Neff, USA TODAY

• Today's news
• Reviews and deals
• Climate change
• 2024 election
• Fall allergies
• Health news
• Mental health
• Sexual health
• Family health
• So mini ways
• Unapologetically
• Buying guides

Entertainment

• How to Watch
• My watchlist
• Stock market
• Biden economy
• Personal finance
• Stocks: most active
• Stocks: gainers
• Stocks: losers
• Trending tickers
• World indices
• US Treasury bonds
• Top mutual funds
• Highest open interest
• Highest implied volatility
• Currency converter
• Basic materials
• Communication services
• Consumer cyclical
• Consumer defensive
• Financial services
• Industrials
• Real estate
• Mutual funds
• Credit cards
• Balance transfer cards
• Cash back cards
• Rewards cards
• Travel cards
• Online checking
• High-yield savings
• Money market
• Home equity loan
• Personal loans
• Student loans
• Options pit
• Fantasy football
• Pro Pick 'Em
• College Pick 'Em
• Fantasy baseball
• Fantasy hockey
• Fantasy basketball
• Download the app
• Daily fantasy
• Scores and schedules
• GameChannel
• World Baseball Classic
• Premier League
• CONCACAF League
• Champions League
• Motorsports
• Horse racing
• Newsletters

New on Yahoo

• Privacy Dashboard

Parole, probation rules that limit travel can be complicated for people seeking abortions

the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to take the case, making Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. U.S. Food and Drug Administration the high Anti-abortion and abortion rights activists protest during the 50th annual March for Life rally in front of the U.S. Supreme Court on January 20, 2023, in Washington, D.C. (Getty Images)

In the two years since Roe v. Wade was overturned in June 2022, the number of patients forced to seek out-of-state abortion services has doubled. Fourteen states have total abortion bans, three more restrict abortions after six weeks — before most people know they are pregnant — and two others limit them after the first trimester.

One population often overlooked in reproductive rights conversations are people under community supervision, also known as probation and parole, which often prohibits travel across state lines without government approval. A new briefing by the public policy think tank Prison Policy Initiative puts these challenges into context for a country without Roe.

This report was originally published by The 19th . The Illuminator is a founding member of The 19th News Network.

About 800,000 U.S. women are under probation or parole, according to PPI’s analysis. Probation happens when a convicted person serves their time outside of a jail or prison but is still under legal surveillance and restrictions. Parole is a similar concept, but is given to a person who has served time in prison and is released early under the condition that they follow a strict set of rules.

These conditions can include hefty fees, curfews, job requirements, travel restrictions and meetings with a probation or parole officer. Every state and Washington, D.C. restricts the movement of people under community supervision. Violating these restrictions can lead to prison time.

Fifty-three percent of women on probation and parole live in the 21 states that have abortion restrictions set earlier than the point of fetal viability, which is usually around 22 to 25 weeks. As a result, only 1 in 6 women on probation or parole can access abortion services at any stage of their pregnancy without needing permission to cross state lines, according to the PPI briefing.

“It’s exponentially more difficult, I would say, for people on community supervision because they have to literally go and ask permission from their probation parole officers, or from the court, to cross state lines,” said Wendy Sawyer, research director at the Prison Policy Initiative. “You have to give really detailed information about what your travel plan is, so that means that you’re leaving their ability to access abortion care to people who shouldn’t have any say in the decision.”

The PPI briefing does not go into detail on trans or nonbinary people who may become pregnant. Sources of data like the U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics often do not specifically mention LGBTQ+ people.

Three states with some of the toughest abortion bans in the country have a large share of women under community supervision. Together Texas, Florida and Georgia hold 227,801 women on probation or parole, or nearly thirty percent of the women under community supervision nationwide, according to PPI’s breakdown.

Texas first outlawed abortions after six weeks of pregnancy with S.B. 8 in 2021. The next year after Roe was overturned, the state banned the procedure almost completely except to save the life of a pregnant person. Last year the Georgia Supreme Court upheld a six-week abortion ban, and Florida’s six-week ban took effect in May . Southern states represent a majority of those with either total abortion bans or six-week bans, leaving people in the south with few options for care.

“It is devastating. It is no surprise at all to me that the same states that have consistently restricted health care for people are the same states that make up the largest number of community surveillance of women in their state. That is not a coincidence,” said Kylee Sunderlin, the legal services director for If/When/How: Lawyering for Reproductive Justice, a reproductive health legal advice and aid organization that operates the Repro Legal Helpline .

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX

Sunderlin oversees the helpline and has taken calls from people on parole or probation.

“Every day when I’m on the helpline, my primary goal for people is, ‘How can I help reduce harm?’ ‘How can I share information so that you can feel best equipped to make the decision that is right for you and your family?’” Sunderlin said. “I feel inept in these particular scenarios, because there is no harm reduction, there is no risk mitigation. I feel completely helpless.”

Access to abortion medication is also inconsistent. Last week, the Supreme Court unanimously dismissed a case that would have limited access to the abortion pill. Some health care providers mail pills to people in states with bans, but this is not widely available to everyone who might want it.

The demographics of women disproportionately affected by abortion restrictions around the country — low income women and women of color, particularly Black women — are also those more affected by incarceration and criminalization. Another PPI report based on 2019 data found that 70 percent of women on probation and 65 percent of women on parole make incomes below $20,000 annually.

For those in states with near-total bans, there is little they can do to officially request travel for an abortion. In Texas, for example, a number of cities and counties have passed bans to restrict people from traveling outside the state for the procedure. Even in states that allow abortions up to a certain point, pregnant people under community supervision come up against delays for travel approval.

Depending on their location, people on parole or probation have to submit a travel request from 10 days to four weeks in advance of travel. One travel request form in Nebraska, which has a 12-week ban, asks the departure and return date, method of travel, purpose of the trip and the address of their accommodations. Additionally, dozens of states that allow abortion have mandatory waiting periods and require counseling before receiving one. This means that pregnant people either have to stay overnight in the area where their abortion will be performed, or return a second time or third time.

These restrictions can put people on probation or parole in tricky situations: Their travel requests could be denied, or they could risk violating the parameters of their travel approval.

“Black bodies are definitely being surveilled, and they’re under attack, and it is the history and foundation which this country is built on,” said Kamyon Conner, executive director of Texas Equal Access Fund. “At TEA Fund, we say abortion bans are racist for a reason, because they know which communities and people they are targeting, and it’s purposeful. It’s another way to control what we do with our bodies, where we move with our bodies, how they can keep track of our bodies.”

SUPPORT NEWS YOU TRUST.

The post Parole, probation rules that limit travel can be complicated for people seeking abortions appeared first on Louisiana Illuminator .

Recommended Stories

What to know about mifepristone, the abortion pill the supreme court just ruled to protect.

Mifepristone, a drug that’s used in medication abortions, has been under fire since Roe v. Wade was overturned.

Supreme Court decision guide: A breakdown of major cases and rulings expected in June and early July

Here's a guide to some of the major cases the justices will rule on in the coming weeks.

You can now restrict Instagram Lives to Close Friends

Instagram has rolled out an option to limit the audience of a Live to Close Friends. You can also now add music to carousel posts that feature videos.

Walmart+ Travel is my go-to for booking trips — get extra savings during Walmart+ Week

Planning a last-minute summer vacation or thinking ahead to a fall getaway? Book now and get 20% back in Walmart Cash.

Walmart's 40+ best deals this week: Samsung, Ninja, Dyson and more

Behold: a 65-inch Samsung 4K smart TV for over $1,400 off, an HP laptop for just $320 and a Margaritaville machine for $205.

The best face mask of 2024 is powerful, unique and extremely fun to use

We tested face masks for enlarged pores, wrinkles, dryness and more — here's why Peach Slices Snail Rescue is our ace pick.

Thousands of car dealers crippled by 2-day cyberattack

Auto retailers across the U.S. suffered a second major disruption in as many days due to another cyberattack at CDK Global, the software provider thousands of dealers rely on to run their stores.

Want to live a longer, healthier life? New research sheds light on the lifestyle factors that matter.

What a new study teaches us about longevity — and how you can live a longer life.

The 10 best deals hiding in Kate Spade's sale section — all under $150

For a limited time, take an extra 40% off already-marked-down crossbodies, totes, wallets and more.

Kourtney Kardashian Barker says son Rocky needed fetal surgery due to fluid in his lungs. Families share what the experience is like.

"Anything you can do to save our child, we're in," one mom says of undergoing fetal surgery, which is performed in utero.

EU delays decision over scanning encrypted messages for CSAM

The EU has delayed a decision over a plan to scan encrypted messages for child sexual abuse material. Critics say this is a c" that could break encryption.

The best deals ahead of Amazon Prime Day 2024: Huge savings on Apple, Sony and more

Grab a Ninja indoor grill for $200 off and AirPods for just $80, plus snag additional savings of up to 90%.

Yahoo Sports AM: Mini World Cup

In today's edition: Copa América kicks off, Connor McDavid is incredible, All-SEC Final, MLB at historic Rickwood Field, and more.

Snap will pay $15 million to settle California lawsuit alleging sexual discrimination

The California Civil Rights Department has revealed that Snap Inc. has agreed to pay $15 million to settle the lawsuit it filed "over alleged discrimination, harassment, and retaliation against women at the company."

Mortgage rates today, June 20, 2024: Expect rate drops in September at the earliest

These are today's mortgage rates. They have bobbled a little, but there are no significant changes. Lock in your rate today.

Anthony Richardson's film, albeit limited, doesn't lie. There's supernova talent and plays waiting for the Colts

For Richardson to stay on this path of a true needle-moving QB, one with the upside of a perennial MVP candidate, he has to learn how to take care of his body and get down or rid of the ball a half-beat quicker.

California Governor Gavin Newsom wants to restrict phone use in schools

Gavin Newsom said he will work with lawmakers "to restrict the use of smartphones during the school day" this summer, because children and teens "should be focused on their studies — not their screens."

Pornhub to leave five more states over age-verification laws

Pornhub will block access to its site in five more states in the coming weeks.

Top Yankees prospect Jasson Domínguez returns to IL due to oblique injury weeks after return from Tommy John surgery

Domínguez made a splash in his 2023 MLB debut, with four home runs in eight games before being sidelined due to a UCL tear.

These No. 1 bestselling waterproof storage totes are down to only $5 each

They're huge and surprisingly sturdy, fans say: 'They have never ripped on me, no matter how much I stuff them.'

An official website of the United States government

Here’s how you know

Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS A lock ( Lock A locked padlock ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

• Fact Sheets

Fact Sheet: Presidential Proclamation to Suspend and Limit Entry and Joint DHS-DOJ Interim Final Rule to Restrict Asylum During High Encounters at the Southern Border

Today, the Biden-Harris Administration took decisive new action to strengthen border security, announcing a series of measures that restrict asylum eligibility, and significantly increase the consequences for those who enter without authorization across the southern border. These extraordinary steps, which will be in effect during times when high levels of encounters exceed our ability to deliver timely consequences, will make noncitizens who enter across the southern border ineligible for asylum with certain exceptions, raise the standard that is used to screen for certain protection claims, and speed up our ability to quickly remove those who do not qualify for protection.

These actions follow a series of steps that the Administration has taken over the past three years as it prepared for the end of the Title 42 public health Order, and since it was lifted last year, including surging personnel, infrastructure, and technology to the border, issuing the Circumvention of Lawful Pathways Rule, and referring record numbers of noncitizens into expedited removal. Over the past year, we have removed or returned more than three quarters of a million people, more than in any fiscal year since 2010. Despite these efforts, our outdated and broken immigration and asylum system, coupled with a lack of sufficient funding, make it impossible to quickly impose consequences on all noncitizens who cross irregularly and without a legal basis to remain in the United States.

The Administration has repeatedly called on Congress to provide the resources and legal authorities needed to secure our border. The measures announced today will better enable the Department to quickly remove individuals without a legal basis to remain in the United States, strengthening enforcement and change the calculus for those considering crossing our border irregularly. However, they are no substitute for Congressional action. We continue to call on Congress to provide the new tools and resources we have asked for to support the men and women on the frontlines.

President Biden issued a Presidential Proclamation to temporarily suspend the entry of noncitizens across the southern border. The Secretary of Homeland Security and the Attorney General also jointly issued an interim final rule that, consistent with the Proclamation, generally restricts asylum eligibility for those who irregularly enter across the southern border – including the Southwest land and the southern coastal borders. The rule also limits fear screenings to those who manifest a fear or express a desire to file for protection and heightens the screening standard for statutory withholding and claims under the Convention Against Torture. Taken together, these measures will significantly increase the speed and scope of consequences for those who cross our borders irregularly or who attempt to present themselves at Ports of Entry without authorization, allowing the Departments to more quickly remove individuals who do not establish a legal basis to remain in the United States. The restriction on asylum eligibility will be discontinued when encounters fall below certain levels but will come back into effect if encounters rise again.

The rule makes three key changes to current processing under Title 8 immigration authorities during periods of high border encounters:

• First, noncitizens who cross the southern border unlawfully or without authorization will generally be ineligible for asylum, absent exceptionally compelling circumstances and unless they are excepted by the Proclamation.
• Second, noncitizens who cross the southern border and are processed for expedited removal while the limitation is in effect will only be referred for a credible fear screening with an Asylum Officer if they manifest or express a fear of return to their country or country of removal, a fear of persecution or torture, or an intention to apply for asylum.  
• Third, the U.S. will continue to adhere to its international obligations and commitments by screening individuals who manifest a fear as noted above and do not qualify for an exception to the Rule for withholding of removal and Convention Against Torture protections at a reasonable probability of persecution or torture standard – a new, substantially higher standard than is currently applied under the Circumvention of Lawful Pathways rule.  

Like the Proclamation, the rule provides for an end to these enhanced measures following a sustained reduction in southern border encounters. Specifically, these measures are in effect until 14 calendar days after there has been a 7-consecutive-calendar-day average of less than 1,500 encounters between the ports of entry. The measures would again go into effect, or continue, as appropriate, when there has been a 7-consecutive-calendar-day average of 2,500 encounters or more.

During periods of high encounters, the Proclamation will apply across the southern border. Lawful permanent residents, unaccompanied children, victims of a severe form of trafficking, and other noncitizens with a valid visa or other lawful permission to enter the United States are excepted from the Proclamation.

In addition, the suspension and limitation on entry and rule will not apply to noncitizens who use a Secretary-approved process—such as the CBP One mobile app—to enter the United States at a port of entry in a safe and orderly manner or pursue another lawful pathway.

Noncitizens who cross the southern border and who are not excepted from the Proclamation will be ineligible for asylum unless exceptionally compelling circumstances exist, including if the noncitizen demonstrates that they or a member of their family with whom they are traveling:

• faced an acute medical emergency;
• faced an imminent and extreme threat to life or safety, such as an imminent threat of rape, kidnapping, torture, or murder; or
• satisfied the definition of “victim of a severe form of trafficking in persons” currently provided in 8 CFR 214.11.

Consequences

Noncitizens who are subject to the rule’s limitation on asylum eligibility and who manifest or express a fear of return to their country or country of removal, express a fear of persecution or torture or an intention to apply for asylum, but do not establish a reasonable probability of persecution or torture in the country of removal will be promptly removed.

Those ordered removed will be subject to at least a five-year bar to reentry and potential criminal prosecution.

The Proclamation and rule will significantly enhance the security of our border by increasing the Departments’ ability to impose swift consequences for individuals who cross the southern border irregularly and do not establish a legal basis to remain in the United States.  Together, the Proclamation and rule make critical changes to how the Departments operate during times when encounters are at historically high levels—levels that, in the absence of these changes, undermine the government’s ability to process individuals through the expedited removal process. These changes will enable the Departments to quickly return those without a lawful basis to stay in the United States and thereby free up the asylum system for those with legitimate claims.

These extraordinary measures are a stop gap. Even with these measures in place, the Departments continue to lack the authorities and resources needed to adequately support the men and women on the frontlines. The Administration again calls on Congress to take up and pass the bipartisan reforms proposed in the Senate, which provide the new authorities, personnel, and resources that are needed to address the historic global migration that is impacting countries throughout the world, including our own. Until Congress does its part, we will continue to take any actions needed under current law and within existing resources to secure the border.

• Border Security
• Immigration
• Biden-Harris Administration
• Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
• Department of Justice (DOJ)

Security Alert May 17, 2024

Worldwide caution, update may 10, 2024, information for u.s. citizens in the middle east.

• Travel Advisories |
• Contact Us |
• MyTravelGov |

Find U.S. Embassies & Consulates

Travel.state.gov, congressional liaison, special issuance agency, u.s. passports, international travel, intercountry adoption, international parental child abduction, records and authentications, popular links, travel advisories, mytravelgov, stay connected, legal resources, legal information, info for u.s. law enforcement.

Replace or Certify Documents

Share this page:

Latest Information for U.S. Citizens

Information for U.S. Citizens in Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza

The Department reminds U.S. citizens of the continued need for caution and increased personal security awareness as security incidents often take place without warning. The security environment remains complex and can change quickly depending on the political situation and recent events. Please see the latest Israel Security Alert .

U.S. citizens should heed the  Travel Advisory  for Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza. The U.S. Embassy continues to closely monitor the dynamic security situation in Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza. There are active military operations and active rocket and mortar fire in Gaza and the Gaza periphery.  Terrorist groups, lone-actor terrorists and other violent extremists continue plotting possible attacks in Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza. Terrorists and violent extremists may attack with little or no warning, targeting tourist locations, transportation hubs, markets/shopping malls, and local government facilities. Violence can occur in Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza without warning. If you require emergency assistance while in Israel, the West Bank or Gaza, contact the  U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem  by email ( [email protected] for those in Jerusalem, the West Bank, and Gaza or [email protected] for those in Israel outside of Jerusaleml).

Individuals seeking to depart Gaza: As of May 7, the Israel Defense Forces control the Gaza side of the Rafah Crossing. Since that day, the Rafah Crossing between Egypt and Gaza has remained closed. As soon as the U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem receives information regarding new exit procedures from Gaza to Egypt, including when crossings resume, we will communicate this to the public immediately.

This remains a complex situation with serious implications for the safety and security of U.S. citizens. U.S. citizens in Gaza in need of assistance should contact [email protected] . U.S. citizens in Gaza are reminded that the U.S. government is unable to provide routine or emergency consular services to U.S. citizens in Gaza as U.S. government employees are prohibited from traveling there.

The U.S. government does not control who is permitted to depart Gaza or enter Egypt. Individuals must assess their own safety and risks in attempting to cross the border. Individuals permitted to enter Egypt will likely receive a 72-hour Egyptian visa; all those who cross should have a plan for onward travel from Egypt in this timeframe. U.S. citizens, LPRs and their immediate family members who successfully enter Egypt and require further consular assistance should contact the  U.S. Embassy in Cairo  via the  U.S. Citizens Services Navigator .  Individuals may apply for a U.S. visa at any U.S. Embassy or Consulate; U.S. immigration laws and regulations will apply.

We continue to work in partnership with Egypt and Israel towards safe passage for U.S. citizens, LPRs, and their immediate family members.

Immediate family members of U.S. citizens include:

• unmarried children under the age of 21, and
• parents of U.S. citizens.

If the U.S. citizen is under 21, immediate family will also include any siblings who are also unmarried and under 21.

Immediate family members of LPRs include:

• unmarried children under 21 years of age.

Enroll in STEP

Subscribe to get up-to-date safety and security information and help us reach you in an emergency abroad.

Recommended Web Browsers: Microsoft Edge or Google Chrome.

Make two copies of all of your travel documents in case of emergency, and leave one with a trusted friend or relative.

External Link

You are about to leave travel.state.gov for an external website that is not maintained by the U.S. Department of State.

Links to external websites are provided as a convenience and should not be construed as an endorsement by the U.S. Department of State of the views or products contained therein. If you wish to remain on travel.state.gov, click the "cancel" message.

You are about to visit:

Get the best experience and stay connected to your community with our Spectrum News app. Learn More

Continue in Browser

Get hyperlocal forecasts, radar and weather alerts.

Please enter a valid zipcode.

New report shows more Texans traveling out of state to get an abortion

TEXAS — Nearly 35,000 Texans drove or flew out of state last year to get an abortion. That's more than any other state in the country. A large number went to Colorado and Kansas, and 14,000 went to New Mexico.

What You Need To Know

More texans travel out of state to get an abortion than any other state anti-abortion advocates are trying to implement what they call abortion trafficking bans in cities around texas. legal experts say it’s not a sound argument even with texas having one of the most restrictive abortion bans in the country, some anti-abortion advocates say the state is still not safe for the unborn the texas abortion law has narrow exceptions for medical emergencies, and the texas medical board is scheduled to meet friday to provide more clarification on what qualifies.

“The majority of the patients we see are Texans,” said Andrea Gallegos of the Alamo Women’s Clinic.

Gallegos shuttered her San Antonio clinic and opened new ones in New Mexico and Illinois. The move to New Mexico was prompted by Texas passing its six-week abortion ban in 2021.

“And we really started looking into a second location, probably around the time of the leak decision, before the official decision in Dobbs,” said Gallegos.

About 80 to 85% of Gallegos' patients travel from Texas. She says it’s sometimes a daunting experience for patients.

“Pure exhaustion, really, from long journeys from traveling in the car all night, the night before, and sometimes plane rides,” said Gallegos.

The Amarillo City Council recently rejected an ordinance that would outlaw the use of local roads and its airport to access an abortion out of state. A similar ordinance did pass in Lubbock County last October.

“Abortion trafficking is something that I see no different than sex trafficking or human trafficking,” said Mark Lee Dickson, founder of Sanctuary Cities for the Unborn Initiative.

Anti-abortion advocates are trying to implement what they call abortion trafficking bans in cities around Texas. Legal experts say it’s not a sound argument.

“Usually, the motivation for these other forms of trafficking is profit. Whereas it's a little bit difficult to see much abortion travel as being for profit purposes,” said Seth Chandler, a University of Houston professor of law.

Even with Texas having one of the most restrictive abortion bans in the country, some anti-abortion advocates say the state is still not safe for the unborn.

“Unborn human beings, they're worthy of protection,” said Dickson.

But providers say nothing will stop their patients from getting abortions.

“Bans don't eliminate the need. And we know many patients will do whatever they need to do to get these services,” said Gallegos.

The Texas abortion law has narrow exceptions for medical emergencies, and the Texas Medical Board is scheduled to meet Friday to provide more clarification on what constitutes an emergency.