Help |
Site Map
|
Legal
AS OF APRIL 4, 2022
Background
Changes to the makeup of the U.S. Supreme Court in 2018 raise the possibility that Roe v. Wade could be severely undermined — or even overturned — essentially leaving the legality of abortion to individual states. A reversal of Roe could establish a legal path for states’ pre-1973 abortion bans, as well as currently unenforced post-1973 bans, to take effect.
Many state lawmakers continue to consider and enact abortion bans that fly in the face of constitutional standards and Roe’s precedent in anticipation of an eventual lawsuit on such a ban coming before a Supreme Court hostile to abortion rights.
Some bans prohibit abortion under all or nearly all circumstances, a tactic widely viewed as an attempt to provoke a legal challenge to Roe. Several of this type of ban that were passed by states have been blocked by court orders and would require further court action to be enforced.
Other bans enacted after Roe are designed to be “triggered” and take effect automatically or by swift state action if Roe is overturned. Several states even have laws declaring the state’s intent to ban abortion to whatever extent is permitted by the U.S. Constitution, making their desire to halt abortion access in the state clear. A few states have amended their constitution to declare that it does not contain any protection for abortion rights or allow public funds to be used for abortion.
Meanwhile, policymakers in some states have approved laws to protect abortion rights without relying on the Roe decision. Most of these policies prohibit the state from interfering with the right to obtain an abortion before viability or when necessary to protect the life or health of the pregnant person.
Visit our state legislation tracker for policy activity on all sexual and reproductive health topics.
Highlights
- 23 states have laws that could be used to restrict the legal status of abortion.
- 9 states retain their unenforced, pre-Roe abortion bans.
- 13 states have post-Roe laws to ban all or nearly all abortions that would be triggered if Roe were overturned.
- 9 states have unconstitutional post-Roe restrictions that are currently blocked by courts but could be brought back into effect with a court order in Roe’s absence.
- 7 states have laws that express the intent to restrict the right to legal abortion to the maximum extent permitted by the U.S. Supreme Court in the absence of Roe.
- 4 states have passed a constitutional amendment explicitly declaring that their constitution does not secure or protect the right to abortion or allow use of public funds for abortion.
- 16 states and the District of Columbia have laws that protect the right to abortion.
- 4 states and the District of Columbia have codified the right to abortion throughout pregnancy without state interference.
- 12 states explicitly permit abortion prior to viability or when necessary to protect the life or health of the pregnant person.
Printer-friendly version
TOPIC
GEOGRAPHY
- Northern America: United States
- Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, Wyoming
Related Content
Guttmacher Policy Review
*State Policy Resources: The Guttmacher Institute monitors and analyzes state policy developments—including legislative, judicial and executive actions — on a broad range of issues related to sexual and reproductive health and rights. These resources, on such issues as access to and availability of abortion, contraceptive services and sex education, are updated regularly to provide a comprehensive picture of the state policy landscape.
"I always contended that if not revealing my age would actually make me younger, I would be as tight-lipped as the enigmatic Mona Lisa; but since nothing can actually erase the years, why not just accept and admit them?... Above all, almost all my friends would submit to waterboarding before revealing their age, blissfully unaware that these days that statistic is available to anyone who makes a simple Google query or two. They don’t realize that the mere fact that they don’t know that identifies them as ancient and that exactly how ancient is no longer a secret. They believe they can guard that number to the bitter end — and beyond. No exaggeration. One woman I knew made her son vow not to put her date of birth on her headstone when she died." more »
"The framers of the Civil War Amendments recognized that access to the ballot is a fundamental aspect of citizenship and self-government. The Voting Rights Act of 1965 sought to make the promise of those amendments real. To do so, it gave the Justice Department valuable tools with which to protect the right to vote. In recent years, however, the protections of the Voting Rights Act have been drastically weakened. The Supreme Court’s 2013 decision in the Shelby County case effectively eliminated the preclearance protections of Section 5, which had been the department’s most effective tool for protecting voting rights over the past half-century. Subsequent decisions have substantially narrowed the reach of Section 2 as well. Since those decisions, there has been a dramatic increase in legislative enactments that make it harder for millions of eligible voters to vote and to elect representatives of their own choosing. Those enactments range from: practices and procedures that make voting more difficult; to redistricting maps drawn to disadvantage both minorities and citizens of opposing political parties; to abnormal post-election audits that put the integrity of the voting process at risk; to changes in voting administration meant to diminish the authority of locally elected or nonpartisan election administrators. Some have even suggested permitting state legislators to set aside the choice of the voters themselves." more »
In the centuries before the self-inking notary public’s stamp, U.S. government clerks and secretaries used brightly-colored silk ribbons, wax seals, and embossed paper seals attached with wafers to verify the security of important documents. Ribbons were used to attach important documents together, but they also served a security function as proof against tampering. The clerk would cut slits in the paper or parchment, weave the ribbon through it, and then the signatories or government official would attach their wax seal, attach an embossed paper seal to the paper with sealing wax or a wafer, or emboss the paper itself. Sealing wax was used for a number of reasons: to verify a document hadn’t been opened, to verify someone’s identity, and for decorative purposes more »
Jo Freeman Reviews: “All citizens are created equal but some or more equal than others” is the message of this book. Women are not the only unequal citizens in this country, but they are the most numerous. The Equal Rights Amendment was an attempt to bring real equality to women’s legal status after the 19th Amendment gave women the right, but not always the reality, to the franchise. Focusing on the first 40 years of the struggle for the ERA, DeWolf divides proponents and opponents into emancipationists and protectionists... Although this book is on the ERA, it does go into other laws that affected women, especially their employment opportunities. Read it as a general review of public policy on women, especially at the federal level. Then imagine how different things would have been if the ERA had been ratified several decades ago." more »
|
|