Help |
Site Map
|
Issues
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.
FTC Issues Annual Report to Congress on Agency’s Actions to Protect Older Adults; Adults 60 and older report losses of $1.6 billion in 2022 to scams. The analysis of fraud reports ...showed that adults aged 60 and over were substantially less likely to report losing money to fraud than adults aged 18-59... Consumers 80 and older reported losing a median of $1,750 to fraud, while those in their 70s reported a median loss of $1,000, with both numbers increasing over 2021...The report calls on Congress to update the FTC Act in response to the Supreme Court’s 2021 ruling in the AMG Capital Management case, which severely limited the FTC’s ability to recover money that older adults and other consumers lose to scammers. more »
Christopher J. Waller: "The data in the past few months has been overwhelmingly positive for both of the FOMC's goals of maximum employment and stable prices. Economic activity and the labor market have been strong, with what looks like growth well above trend and unemployment near a 50-year low. Meanwhile, there has been continued, gradual progress in lowering inflation, and moderation in wage growth. This is great news, and while I tend to be an optimist, things are looking a little too good to be true, so it makes me think that something's gotta give. Either growth moderates, fostering conditions that support continued progress toward our 2 percent inflation objective, or growth doesn't, possibly undermining that progress. But which is going to give — the real side of the economy or the nominal side?" more »
"This FEDS Note summarizes high-level findings from the COVID-19 questions, showcasing differences in families' experiences of the first years of the pandemic across income and education groups and connecting these differences to income and net worth measured in the SCF. In particular, lower-income families and families with lower levels of educational attainment were more likely to experience a reduction in work, which could reflect their lower incidence of telework and higher incidence of a severe COVID-19 infection. These differential employment experiences appear to map well to between-survey income growth across the income distribution, especially after accounting for unemployment benefits, which were temporarily expanded over this period." more »
"...the Justice Department, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) have worked with plaintiffs to identify class members and their children, developed plans for reunification, and reunified class members with their children. On Jan. 26, 2021, the Justice Department rescinded the Department’s 2018 zero-tolerance policy for offenses under 8 U.S.C. § 1325(a). In Feb. 2021, President Biden issued an Executive Order establishing the Interagency Task Force on the Reunification of Families, comprised of representatives from various federal agencies, including the Justice Department, DHS, and HHS. The parties have worked extensively to reunify families in accordance with the Executive Order and subsequent orders from the district court." more »
|
|