How California has prepared for abortion decision
Immediately following a report that United States Supreme Court justices would overturn Roe v. Wade, Gov. Gavin Newsom and other California leaders announced that they would work on putting the right to an abortion in the state Constitution.
But California has been bracing for the Supreme Court to dump the
1973 precedent long before Politico published the leaked draft.
Newsom, a Democrat, signed a proclamation on reproductive freedom in May 2019 that welcomed people seeking the procedure to California and reaffirmed peoples' right to terminate a pregnancy.
Since a Texas law allowed citizens to sue people who help someone obtain an abortion after fetal cardiac activity is detectable, around six weeks
of pregnancy, California has initiated a number steps to ensure it is a sanctuary state for abortion services. Other states have drafted legislation inspired by the Texas law, which went into effect on Sept. 1, 2021.
In March 2022, Newsom signed a law that prohibits health insurers from imposing co-pays, deductibles or other cost-sharing requirements for abortions and abortion-related services. California was already one of six states that required health insurance plans to cover abortion services.
In September 2021, Newsom signed laws to heighten privacy around abortions and declared California was a “reproductive freedom state.” One requires information on the procedure and similar ones to be sent to a patient exclusively, rather than to additional members on a health plan, such as guardians of minors. Another law penalizes individuals who post personal information about other people who work for or go to reproductive health centers.
California's constitution already protects the right to privacy, which applies to abortion, through a 1972 voter-approved amendment.
In September 2021, more than 40 organizations that support the right to access an abortion formed the California Future of Abortion Council with the support of state lawmakers. The council recommends policies that strengthen the ability to access an abortion and make California a safe haven for the procedure.
“What we really should be prioritizing in terms of the Legislature is investments. Investments not in just our abortion providers,
but in funds and community-based organizations that are doing the work right now to increase access to care,” Lisa Matsubara, general counsel and vice president of policy at Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California, told The Sacramento Bee. PPAC is part of the California Future of Abortion Council.
Abortion sanctuary
Roe v. Wade and the 1992-case Planned Parenthood v. Casey affirmed that states could regulate, but not bar, abortions before fetal viability. Viability is when a doctor determines a fetus could probably survive outside of the womb, usually around 24 weeks of pregnancy.
People in California would be able to seek an abortion without the federal protection. Under California law, people can have the procedure before fetal viability without restriction. An individual can have an abortion after that if they and their doctor feel their health or life is in danger.
Access to medication abortion through telemedicine has given Californians who cannot get to a provider, like someone in a rural community where health care centers in general are sparse, the ability to terminate an early-stage pregnancy. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration lifted a restriction that required people to go in-person to obtain those medications during the pandemic and has allowed pills to be sent via mail going forward.
The big difference would be that providers could see an overwhelming uptick in people coming from out of state.
California could see up to a 3,000% increase in the number of people coming to the state for the procedure if the Supreme Court allows states to totally ban abortions, according to an analysis by the Guttmacher Institute, a nonprofit that studies the impact of reproductive health policies. Most of those people would be driving from Arizona.
It is highly unlikely that percent is approached because
the analysis assumes that all people who are between the ages of 15 and 49 and presumably could reproduce would seek an abortion.
The analysis is based on driving distance in which the closest abortion provider for these people would be in California. Since California is also a transportation hub, it is likely that people beyond driving distance would consider coming, Matsubara of PPAC noted.
California already has people arriving from out of state for abortion care.
For example, Santa Clara County Supervisor Cindy Chavez requested a $3 million injection from the county's Board for Planned Parenthood Mar Monte to bolster its services. Its health centers have seen 80 people from out of state since July 2021, per a release on April 29, 2022, before the draft was leaked, and anticipated a greater influx.
“We're one of the most friendly states in terms of getting reproductive care,”
Matsubara said in reference a Guttmacher Institute review of policies nationwide.
National response
The draft of the Supreme Court majority opinion is for Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, a lawsuit surrounding a Mississippi law that outlaws abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy with limited exceptions. In the draft, Justice Samuel Alito wrote that the precedent set by Roe v. Wade was “egregiously wrong from the start.”
“I remember the days when abortion was illegal, when we would pass the hat at Stanford to collect money so a classmate could go to Mexico for an abortion,” California Sen. Dianne Feinstein, a Democrat, said in a release on Tuesday. “Overturning Roe would return us to those dark ages where women don't have safe, open access to reproductive care.”
Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. confirmed the draft's authenticity but said it does not represent a final decision in a statement on Tuesday. He directed the court to launch an investigation of the leak.
The Guttmacher Institute predicts 26 states are likely or certain to ban abortions in some capacity if the Supreme Court guts Roe v. Wade. Since that precedent was set 49 years ago, 2021 saw the most number of abortion restrictions signed into law of any year, the Institute found.
“It's time for Congress to get off the sidelines and protect women's fundamental right to choose,” U.S. Sen. Alex Padilla, D-Calif., said in a release. He urged passage of the Women's Health Protection Act, which would put the right to an abortion into federal law.