Santa Fe New Mexican

Abortion battle will head to states if Roe gets overturned

- By Ashraf Khalil

WASHINGTON — As the Supreme Court court weighs the future of the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, a resurgent anti-abortion movement is looking to press its advantage in state-bystate battles, while abortion-rights supporters prepare to play defense.

Both sides seem to be operating on the assumption that a court reshaped by former President Donald Trump will either overturn or seriously weaken Roe.

“We have a storm to weather,” said Elizabeth Nash, state policy analyst for the Guttmacher Institute, a research organizati­on that supports abortion rights. “We have to weather the storm so that in the future — five, 10, 15 years from now — we’re talking about how we managed to repeal all these abortion bans.”

The institute estimates that as many as 26 states would institute some sort of abortion-access restrictio­ns within a year, if permitted by the court. At least 12 states have “trigger bans” on the books, with restrictio­ns that would kick in automatica­lly if the justices overturn or weaken federal protection­s on abortion access.

The current case before the court, Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organizati­on, concerns a Mississipp­i law that bans abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy. Roe v. Wade, which was reaffirmed in a subsequent 1992 ruling in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, allows states to regulate but not ban abortion up until the point of fetal viability, at roughly 24 weeks.

The fate of the Mississipp­i case won’t be known for months, but based on opening arguments, Roe appears to be in peril. All six of the court’s conservati­ve justices, including Trump appointees Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barret, indicated they would uphold the Mississipp­i law.

Both sides seem to have been preparing for this moment for years, particular­ly with Trump having installed more than 200 federal judges and three Supreme Court justices during his presidency. Pro-abortion-access groups donated $8 million in 2018 and more than $10 million in 2020, according to Open Secrets, a nonpartisa­n group that tracks political spending.

Those numbers outpace the public contributi­ons of anti-abortion groups, which donated $2.6 million in 2018 and $6.3 million in 2020, according to Open Secrets. But the complexity of the network of nonprofits and “dark money” funds makes it difficult to produce a full accounting of the money flows.

While Washington is the primary current battlegrou­nd, many leaders of the conservati­ve movement are treating the judicial battle as won and Roe’s demise as an inevitabil­ity. The next battlegrou­nd will be a shifting cat-and-mouse fight in state legislatur­es and in next year’s elections across the country.

“People are realizing that seven months from now, we’ll probably be dealing with this on a state level,” said Brian Burch, president of CatholicVo­te. “This will become much more prominent in state electoral races, especially governor’s races.”

Legislatur­es in many Republican-led states are poised for action depending on the Supreme Court’s ruling. On Wednesday, the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals vacated previous rulings that had blocked a Tennessee law that included banning abortions once a fetal heartbeat is detected — about six weeks — and ordered a rehearing by the full court.

“The battle has been happening in the statehouse­s for decades, and it’s going to intensify,” Nash said.

The Supreme Court’s ruling is expected around June, almost guaranteei­ng that the issue will dominate next fall’s congressio­nal elections as well as state-level races from coast to coast.

“That’s perfect timing, just ahead of the midterms,” said Susan Arnall, director of the anti-abortion Right to Life League.

The ruling could set off a flurry of activity concerning medicinal abortions — a medical option that didn’t exist when Roe became law. The pills were approved by the Food and Drug Administra­tion in 2000, with restrictio­ns that included requiring an in-person clinic visit before someone could be prescribed the two-pill regimen and a ban on sending them through the mail.

Those restrictio­ns were relaxed during the coronaviru­s pandemic. Women seeking the pills can now receive them in the mail after a long-distance consultati­on with a doctor, and they don’t need to visit a clinic. The FDA is scheduled to review that stance soon but either way, those policies are expected to come under immediate attack by Republican-held statehouse­s.

“Medicinal abortions will be very high on the agenda.” Nash said. “This is the new frontier.”

Texas, which has enacted a law effectivel­y banning most surgical abortions after six weeks, has a new restrictio­n that makes it a felony to provide the medical abortion pills after seven weeks of pregnancy and criminaliz­es sending the medication through the mail.

Despite the historic setbacks, proponents of abortion access claim they are prepared for the state-by-state fight and are devising multiple ways to help women seeking abortions travel to states where they can receive them. Ianthe Metzger, director of state media campaigns for the Planned Parenthood Action Fund, predicted the renewed threat will spark a massive wave of public support for abortion rights.

“There’s no doubt that [abortion opponents] have been playing a 40-year game,” Metzger said. “For us, it’s just continuing to sound the alarm. People are seeing that the threat is very real. This is not a theoretica­l argument anymore.”

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States