attacks on their work, abortion providers remain an essential and valued part of their communities, providing high-quality, compassionate, and necessary health care. (34) There is a critical shortage of health care providers, including abortion care providers, and it is estimated that 28 percent of OB/GYN residency programs are based in States or territories that are currently enforcing abortion bans. (35) Residents desiring abortion care training living in hostile States are forced to travel to States without abortion restrictions. (36) Abortion care training residents face barriers to training including obtaining licensure and liability insurance, making it difficult for the next generation of abortion providers to provide comprehensive sexual and reproductive health care in their communities. (37) In the face of the fear and stigma following the Dobbs decision, health care facilities have denied patients lawful emergency care because of the similarities in abortion care and miscarriage management. (38) 91 facilities that provide abortion care have closed since the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. Of these, 62 facilities closed as a direct consequence of Dobbs and enforced or anticipated abortion bans. (39) The ability to meaningfully access abortion gives meaning to the right to abortion. (40) In the United States there is an existing support network, including abortion funds, providers, doulas, and many more, to help abortion seekers access care and navigate restrictions with expertise in providing patient-centered care. (41) Investments to improve telehealth would improve care for people with barriers to accessing in-person care, people with disabilities, and rural communities, by providing expanded autonomy and decreased barriers to access. (42) Creating more opportunities for telehealth services should not substitute building much needed capacity for high-quality, in-person care, particularly in underserved rural, low-income, and Black, Indigenous, and people of