The shockwaves from the leaked Supreme Court draft ruling are reverberating across the US - in both anti-abortion and pro-choice circles.
If you thought Roe v. Wade itself led to discord and division, just wait until it’s gone.
The draft opinion about overturning Roe would not ban abortion nationwide but instead allow states to drastically restrict or even ban abortion, which advocates for reproductive rights say could have seismic consequences for the country.
“There’s no question that legal abortion makes it possible for women in all classes and races to have some control over their economic lives and ability to work outside the home,” said Rosalind Petchesky, a retired professor of political science at Hunter College, whose research was cited in the Supreme Court’s 1992 ruling in the case Planned Parenthood v. Casey, which reaffirmed Roe.
Even in states with the strictest abortion laws, pregnant people have a safe, inexpensive option to terminate their pregnancies. But few know about it.
Don’t believe the claims that other rights are in jeopardy if Roe v. Wade falls.
The mistaken abortion decision, a product of vanity, roiled and distorted our politics and poisoned our culture.
My youngest patients are unborn babies, and today’s ultrasounds show they are fully alive and human.
The Court’s job is not to determine which rights we should possess but rather which rights we do possess.
Norma McCorvey, the plaintiff in Roe v. Wade, never had the abortion she was seeking. She gave her baby girl up for adoption, and now that baby is an adult. After decades of keeping her identity a secret, Jane Roe’s child has chosen to talk about her life.
The most important battle over reproductive freedom in nearly 30 years has finally come to the Supreme Court.
When the all-male supreme court ruled to protect abortion rights in 1973, activists didn’t foresee the fight that lay ahead.
Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which the Supreme Court will hear on Wednesday, is the single greatest threat to abortion rights since Roe v. Wade was handed down in 1973. It involves a Mississippi law that prohibits nearly all abortions after the 15th week of pregnancy, a law which violates the Supreme Court’s holding in Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992) that “a State may not prohibit any woman from making the ultimate decision to terminate her pregnancy before viability.”
“Viability” refers to the moment when a fetus can live outside of the womb, which typically occurs around the 24th week of pregnancy.
The question presented by Dobbs is not “Should Roe v. Wade be overruled,” it is a slightly narrower question: “Whether all pre-viability prohibitions on elective abortions are unconstitutional.”
Today’s oral argument signaled that the Court is poised to reverse Roe v. Wade outright.
Access to mifepristone and misoprostol has revolutionized how people imagine abortions outside the clinical setting, with images of dangerous back alleys replaced by internet searches for medications that are safer than over-the-counter medications like aspirin.
Studies show that most people can accurately determine if they are eligible for a medication abortion, including how far along they are in their pregnancies. The medication combination is safe and effective whether a person takes the pills after a physician hands them over or when they obtain and take the pills on their own.
The brief by Mississippi’s attorney general makes a surprising argument aimed at Chief Justice Roberts.
Republican presidents have said for years that they would appoint justices who will overrule Roe. They’ve probably succeeded.
If the Supreme Court overturns Roe, it will betray the Fourteenth Amendment’s promise of bodily autonomy.
For the first time in a generation, the Supreme Court appears likely to overturn Roe v. Wade. The end of Roe need not herald the end of an era of reproductive freedom. It may instead launch a new strategy that protects the fundamental human right to decide whether to have children and raise them in safety and dignity.
The loss of abortion rights may not even be the most troubling aspect of the Supreme Court’s inaction over the law.
For abortion proponents, the case for pessimism is strong. But the case for caution before forecasting catastrophe can be made as well. The Supreme Court has surprised us before. And Casey’s curious history demonstrates that justices may defy expectations even when the future of reproductive freedom seems bleaker than ever before.
Young people don’t remember life when abortion was illegal. Now they're grappling with the erosion of a national right.
In the wake of S.B. 8, I’ve been thinking about the way I was raised to think about my body, and the way I will raise my son to think about his.
No topic related to the feminist movement has aroused such passion and controversy as much as the right to an abortion. In the 1960s, there was no federal law regulating abortions, and many states had banned the practice entirely, except when the life of the mother was endangered.
Interrogated, examined, blackmailed: how law enforcement treated abortion-seeking women before Roe.
The ongoing debate at the Supreme Court is less about the existence of the abortion right and more about the second ruling in Roe v. Wade in 1973 – that the right is limited by the emerging personhood of a fetus.
The state of Mississippi has redefined the emergence of personhood to be at 15 weeks, not 24,
Norma McCorvey — the “Jane Roe” whose search for a legal abortion led to Roe v. Wade — famously changed her mind about abortion rights. She flipped from being a pro-choice activist in her 30s to a pro-life activist and born-again Christian in her 40s.
We are women who came of age before Roe v. Wade. Many of us had illegal abortions. We are the lucky ones who survived. Thousands didn’t. The process was fraught with committing illegal acts and being compelled to have blind faith in practitioners who had dubious medical credentials.
Legal abortion access would be unchanged in more than half of states, but it would effectively end for those living in much of the American South and Midwest, especially those who are poor, according to the analysis.
For nearly a half-century, abortion has been a constitutional right in the United States. But this week, the U.S. Supreme Court hears arguments in a Mississippi case that directly challenges Roe v. Wade and subsequent decisions.
Those rulings consistently declared that a woman has a constitutional right to terminate a pregnancy in the first two trimesters of pregnancy when a fetus is unable to survive outside the womb. But with that abortion right now in doubt, it's worth looking back at its history.
Roe is a much-criticized decision. Most of the criticism is dead wrong.