§ 12X.11. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE.  


Latest version.
  • The right to choose to have an abortion is protected by the Constitutional right to privacy under the Due Process clause of the 14th Amendment. In Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973), the U.S. Supreme Court held that the U.S. Constitution protects a personal decision to end a pregnancy.
    The right to control if and when to have a child is fundamental to gender equality, and protecting the right to comprehensive reproductive healthcare makes for healthier states with stronger economies. For instance, the ability to make this personal healthcare decision has enabled people to pursue educational and employment opportunities, including serving as a main driver increasing college enrollment and wage gains for women. In 1992, the Supreme Court noted that “the ability of women to participate equally in the economic and social life of the Nation has been facilitated by their ability to control their reproductive lives.”
    Restrictive abortion bans can impact anyone who is capable of becoming pregnant, including trans-men, non-binary, and intersex people. Further, roll backs on reproductive rights, including passing abortion bans or restricting funding for clinical healthcare facilities that provide reproductive healthcare services, including abortions, contraception, and other healthcare services, have a disproportionate impact on LGBTQI individuals. These individuals access healthcare services at clinical healthcare facilities like Planned Parenthood— including abortions, contraception and other healthcare services such as HIV and AIDS related services, hormone therapy, and other LGBTQI related care.
    Abortion is a medically safe procedure and critical part of reproductive health care. Nearly 1 in 4 U.S. women will have an abortion by age 45. Abortion is safer than childbirth, with only 0.23% of all abortions resulting in a major complication compared to 1.3% for childbirth.
    San Francisco has a legacy of leadership on women’s human rights. In 1998, San Francisco became the first city in the world to adopt the principles of the United Nations’ Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women as a local ordinance committing the City to take proactive measures to eliminate discrimination and advance women’s human rights including the right to sexual and reproductive health.
    San Francisco has always been a national leader in supporting reproductive freedom for all. According to the National Institute for Reproductive Health Local Reproductive Freedom Index, San Francisco received the highest scores of 4.5 stars and is listed as having the most reproductive health, rights, and justice policies in place, out of 40 cities across the United States.
    The City also has a history of protecting reproductive rights. In 2014, the City enacted an ordinance establishing “buffer-zones” to prohibit harassment of people attaining services at reproductive health clinics. The City also banned false and misleading claims by “Crisis Pregnancy Centers,” and enacted multiple resolutions in support of continued state and federal funding for reproductive health services.
    Abortion access is increasingly restricted in many states across the country. Since 1995, states have enacted 1,041 anti-choice measures, and in 2018, 22 states enacted 50 anti-choice legislative measures. Given the risks that these measures pose to health and access, San Francisco must continue to support vital efforts to protect access to safe and legal abortion services at the local, state and federal levels.
    The City has a strong interest in dissociating itself from states that enact laws that limit the legal right to abortion guaranteed by the United States Constitution. By prohibiting City-funded travel to such states and by prohibiting the City from entering into contracts with companies headquartered in such states, the City voices its opposition to these severe anti-choice policies by refusing to expend City funds that would support such states through the tax revenue that would result from such expenditures.
    (Added by Ord. , File No. 190658, App. 8/9/2019, Eff. 9/9/2019)