One year ago on Saturday, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned a long-standing abortion right that had been in place for five decades, sparking significant transformations in discussions surrounding politics, values, freedom, and fairness.
Currently, there are approximately twenty-five million women in their childbearing years residing in states where accessing abortions has become more difficult compared to the pre-ruling era.
The responsibility of determining the laws primarily rests with state legislators and courts. Most states led by Republicans have imposed restrictions on abortion, with fourteen of them prohibiting it in the majority of cases at any stage of pregnancy. On the other hand, twenty states that lean Democratic have safeguarded access to abortion.
Let’s delve into the notable changes that have occurred since the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization verdict.
ABORTION ACCESS HAS BEEN LIMITED OR PROHIBITED IN 25 STATES THROUGH THE ENACTMENT OF NEW LAWS
Last summer, as women and healthcare providers grappled with an environment devoid of legal protection for abortion, Nancy Davis found herself in a situation where her physicians recommended terminating her pregnancy. The fetus she was carrying had a severe condition where it lacked a skull and was projected to pass away shortly after birth.
However, due to a new law in Louisiana, where Davis resided, doctors were unable to perform the abortion as it was banned in most cases throughout pregnancy.
Davis joined the ranks of numerous women whose experiences, shared through news outlets, network news, newspapers, and blogs, highlighted the complex terrain doctors and their patients had to navigate.
Simultaneously, advocates against abortion, who had tirelessly worked for years to eliminate what they deemed as murder, celebrated the Supreme Court’s Dobbs ruling. Anti-abortion organizations argued that the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, which legalized abortion nationwide, was undemocratic as it prevented states from implementing their own bans.
“The Dobbs decision represents a triumph for life that countless generations have fought for,” expressed E.V. Osment, a spokesperson for Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, a prominent anti-abortion group.
While certain states rushed to implement new restrictions, others had already passed laws that were specifically designed to be enacted if the Roe decision was overturned.
Presently, over 25 million women between the ages of 15 and 44, accounting for approximately 2 out of 5 women nationwide, reside in states where accessing abortion has become more limited compared to the pre-Dobbs era. Additionally, more than 5.5 million women live in states where restrictions have been adopted but are presently on hold due to ongoing court challenges. Nearly every state in the Southeast has laws in place that ban abortions beyond the 12-week mark of pregnancy, although some of these bans are not currently in effect.
Many laws include exceptions for medical emergencies, but often fail to clearly define the specific situations. Following Davis’s publicized challenges last year, Louisiana lawmakers engaged in debates regarding whether doctors in the state were justified in denying her an abortion under a law that allows exceptions for pregnancies deemed “medically futile” or when there is a significant risk of death or impairment for the woman. However, no amendments were made to clarify the law.
Davis is among the numerous women who have been compelled to travel to other states in order to undergo a legal surgical abortion. She received assistance from a fund that raises money to support women in traveling for such purposes.
Accompanied by her fiancé, Davis flew to New York in September when she was approximately four months pregnant. The entire experience was devastating for her. She expressed the profound emotional impact, saying, “A mother’s love begins as soon as she knows she’s pregnant. That attachment forms instantly. It was days when I couldn’t sleep. It was days when I couldn’t eat.”
Abortion access has been safeguarded in 20 states.
Despite the changing landscape surrounding abortion rights, there are still 20 states where access to abortion remains protected. These states, which lean Democratic, have taken measures to ensure that women continue to have the option to pursue safe and legal abortions.
While other states have implemented restrictions or outright bans on abortion, these 20 states have prioritized preserving reproductive rights and maintaining access to comprehensive healthcare for women. By enacting laws and policies that protect and uphold the principles established by the Roe v. Wade ruling, they aim to provide women with the freedom to make decisions about their own bodies and reproductive health.
In these states, women can find support and medical care when facing difficult choices, knowing that their right to choose is respected and protected by law.
The impact of abortion restrictions and bans has led to various consequences and responses in different states. While some states have implemented new laws to restrict abortion access, others have taken steps to solidify and protect access to abortion.
As a result of the restrictions, some abortion clinics have relocated across state lines, expanded their staff, and extended their hours to accommodate women traveling from their home states to seek abortion services. States such as California, Colorado, Minnesota, New Mexico, and New York have explicitly invited women from states with restrictive abortion laws to seek services in their jurisdictions.
In states where abortion remains generally legal up to at least 24 weeks of pregnancy, protections have been strengthened through constitutional amendments or laws. Women have been traveling to these states in search of legal access to abortion. For instance, CHOICES Center for Reproductive Health in Memphis, Tennessee, opened a second clinic in Carbondale, Illinois, to accommodate patients from neighboring states.
The availability of accurate data on the number of abortions performed across the United States is limited due to reporting lags and gaps. However, surveys conducted by organizations like #WeCount have shown a decrease in the number of abortions provided through clinics, hospitals, and other providers in states with abortion bans. It is important to note that these surveys may not capture self-managed abortions, estimates from providers who do not supply data, or seasonal variations in pregnancies and abortions.
Medication abortion (using a two-pill regimen) has become a dominant method of abortion in the United States, even prior to the Supreme Court’s ruling. Organizations like Aid Access have been working to provide medication abortion to women in states where abortion is banned by working with doctors overseas and in states with shield laws. The availability of medication abortion has played a significant role in ensuring access to abortions for women who would otherwise face barriers.
In response to the restrictions, some conservative states have also adopted measures to support mothers and children. Mississippi, for example, expanded tax credits for donating to anti-abortion centers, extended Medicaid coverage for lower-income women until a year after giving birth, and introduced income tax credits for adopting children.
The legal landscape surrounding abortion remains contentious, with numerous lawsuits filed since the Dobbs ruling. Challenges to abortion restrictions now require abortion-rights advocates to demonstrate that the restrictions are too harsh, whereas in the past, the burden was on anti-abortion groups to justify the restrictions.
While there is little evidence of doctors, women, or those who assist with abortions being prosecuted, progressive prosecutors in some states have stated that they will not prioritize abortion-related cases. However, there have been instances of suspension or dismissal of prosecutors who do not comply with anti-abortion directives.
Abortion remains a prominent political issue, with Republicans grappling with how to balance the demands of their base for strict bans against the preferences of the broader electorate. Polls have consistently shown that while most Americans believe abortion should be available in certain circumstances, they also support restrictions later in pregnancy. The issue of abortion has had electoral consequences, and there are ongoing efforts to protect abortion access through ballot measures in various states.
Some progressive advocates express concerns about potential threats to other rights following the Supreme Court’s ruling. Justice Clarence Thomas’ concurring opinion in Dobbs, which called for reconsidering substantive due process precedents, raised alarm among some regarding the potential impact on other rights such as access to contraceptives, consensual sexual acts, and same-sex marriage. However, concrete legislative measures in those areas have not gained significant traction thus far.
