Two years have passed since the landmark Supreme Court decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, and the landscape of reproductive rights nationwide has been fundamentally recalibrating ever since. As the country grapples with the aftermath, deeper concerns regarding abortion rights continue to arise. That was made abundantly clear during a recent panel discussion in the post Roe world in The Great Hall at The Ethical Culture Society. The panel included Kelly Baden, Jennifer Driver and Paula Avila-Guillen.
“Opponents of abortion were not going to stop with overturning Roe v. Wade. Unfortunately, at this point, it is about seeing how much farther they will go and what components of the legal system they will try to use to reach the end goal of banning abortions for everyone in any state for any reason,” says Kelly Baden, Vice President for Public Policy of the Guttmacher Institute, a non-profit think tank policy institute that studies reproductive rights, conditions and policies.
Recent events regarding reproductive rights demonstrate that right-wing conservatives are stepping up the ante and proving Baden’s point. Last week, the Supreme Court ruled on the first of two abortion-related cases this term. The Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, an anti-abortion activist group in Texas, alleged that the abortion pill, mifepristone, was too dangerous to be kept on the market. The FDA, which approved the drug in 2000, broadened access in 2016 by allowing medical abortions with mifepristone from six weeks to ten weeks and, since 2021, has permitted mifepristone to be mailed to telehealth patients. Although the Supreme Court dismissed the case based upon a technicality that the plaintiffs had no legal standing, meaning the drug did not directly harm them, women’s reproductive rights advocates believe that SCOTUS will soon hear more cases seeking to limit or ban abortion pills.
The second case of this term, Idaho v. United States, involves whether the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act requires hospitals to provide abortions to patients in need of emergency medical treatment, even if it violates their state abortion laws. Anti-abortionists are emboldened by SCOTUS overturning Roe v. Wade and will likely continue presenting the conservative court with more opportunities to limit abortion access.
Individual states have continued to enact stricter abortion laws as well. Fourteen states have a total ban on abortions with few exceptions for rape or incest, and another seven states ban abortions with a gestational limit beyond 6-18 weeks. As of May 1st, Florida changed their ban from fifteen weeks to six weeks, severely limiting abortion access as most women do not even know they are pregnant at six weeks gestational duration. Louisiana, which has banned abortions with no exceptions for rape or incest, recently went a step further as well. In May, its governor signed into law the first of its kind, categorizing abortion pills as controlled substances. This means that anyone who possesses the drugs without a prescription in the state commits the crime of “coerced criminal abortion” and can be sentenced to up to ten years in prison and a fine of $75,000; if the pregnant person is over three months pregnant, they could face up to 20 years in prison and a fine of $100,000.
The panel commented that this exemplifies anti-abortionists succeeding in their legal efforts to increase stigma by criminalizing abortion while decreasing access to care.
Since the overturning of Roe v. Wade, state legislatures have been able to pass bills at lightning speed, as seen in Louisiana, making it increasingly challenging to keep track of all developments, as noted by Jennifer Driver, Senior Director of Reproductive Rights at the State Innovation Exchange. Driver points out that state legislators are becoming “older, whiter, and more male.”
In a very short time, they may encounter upwards of 4,000 bills, even if not all pass, indicating the rapid pace at which legislation can be enacted. This environment makes it less likely for state legislators to effectively represent diverse ideas, even acting against what the majority of their voters want, resulting in anti-abortion bills being passed with alarming speed before their constituents have opportunities to voice concerns or opposition.
The Guttmacher panelists noted that abortion rights advocates need to focus not only on SCOTUS but the quickly evolving state landscape. This strategy, however, spreads resources thin.
According to the Guttmacher Institute, the rate of abortion care in the US has increased by 11% from 2020 to 2023. The Supreme Court may have overturned Roe v. Wade, but the reality is that abortion rates are still increasing. As Baden stated, “This is not an issue as simple as pro-life versus pro-choice…Provisions of abortion care in the US have risen while policy environments have become more restrictive.”
According to The New York Times, in 2023, over 171,000 women traveled across state lines to receive an abortion, double the number in 2019. Oftentimes, these women need to travel farther as more states restrict access to abortions, which also requires greater financial means. This places an even larger burden on younger women’s access to care, who often have less financial support networks. States such as Illinois are performing abortions for people who travel from all over the country; the panel articulated that society should not normalize out-of-state care, which currently accounts for roughly 20 percent of all abortions and will likely continue to rise given recent state legislation banning or further restricting abortion rights.
Beyond financial constraints, young people face additional hurdles to accessing abortions. Driver explained that the movement faces the dilemma of making concessions in the fight for abortion access. Specific groups of people are carved out in order for the pro-abortion rights movement to have a greater chance of achieving incremental victories.
Unfortunately, young people are often marginalized in the process. For example, Idaho, which broadly bans all abortions with narrow exceptions, is currently deliberating whether it is a crime to help a minor to cross state lines for an abortion without parental consent. Access to reproductive rights should not be conditional upon age, as this undermines the fundamental principle that all individuals deserve healthcare regardless of their age. Ultimately, the end goal needs to be to “build sustainable access so that no matter where you live, how much money you have, how old you are, it does not depend on the type of healthcare you get,” says Driver.
Panelist Paula Avila-Guillen, Executive Director at the Women’s Equality Center, highlighted what the United States can learn from Latin America’s latest victories towards achieving reproductive rights for all. Avila-Guillen explained the Green Wave, a movement that advocated expanding abortion rights across Latin America. This movement led to Mexico decriminalizing abortion nationwide in 2023, Colombia decriminalizing abortion up to 24 weeks of gestation in 2022 and Argentina decriminalizing abortion up to 14 weeks of gestation in 2020. The Green Wave offers a roadmap for advancing reproductive rights in the US, such as appealing to the middle and not to the far right or far left, using data with powerful storytelling to support abortion rights and reaching a broader audience by forming strategic partnerships.
To get more involved with reproductive rights advocacy: the Social Service Board of Ethical NYC is sponsoring a Reclaim Our Vote postcard writing event focusing on sending postcards to Florida and encouraging its residents to vote in favor of an amendment guaranteeing access to abortion. Email rov.nysec@gmail.com to receive a package of postcards, stamps and instructions.
