Conservative states continue to restrict abortion following overturn of Roe v. Wade

Read the Full Transcript

• Amna Nawaz:

  It's been nearly three months since the Supreme Court struck down Roe v. Wade, and several states have continued to implement far-reaching abortion bans.

  William Brangham has the latest.

• William Brangham:

  That's right, Amna.

  Conservative state legislatures continue to pass laws that restrict women from getting an abortion. There are 14 states where abortion bans are in effect. And, just this week, West Virginia passed a near total ban that will be signed by their governor in coming days.

  Following all of this closely is Mary Ziegler. She's a law professor at the University of California, Davis, and is the author of "Dollars for Life: The Anti-Abortion Movement and the Fall of the Republican Establishment."

  Mary Ziegler, great to have you back on the "NewsHour."

  Today, Indiana's near total ban goes into effect. Earlier this week, we saw West Virginia pass something similar.

  Where do these states fit in the spectrum of other states that have acted post this Dobbs ruling?

  Mary Ziegler, University of California, Davis: Well, in some ways, this is kind of a familiar script.

  We expected these to be — these are deeply conservative states we expected to pass sweeping bans and that's what we're getting. If anything, though, there are some signs that Republicans in these states are getting cold feet a little bit when it comes to passing the most extreme forms of abortion bans.

  West Virginia dialed back the kinds of punishments that people could face for violating its abortion ban, undid the idea of criminal punishment, for example. Indiana, at least in theory, has exceptions to its abortion ban, although whether those are actually available in practice remains to be seen.

  So I think both of these are a sign that bans are continuing are going to continue to appear in red states, but also that Republicans in red states are exactly not entirely sure how to play the politics of abortion in a post-Dobbs America.

• William Brangham:

  It's been a few months, as we said, since this ruling.

  What has the impact been in all of these states on women and on providers?

• Mary Ziegler:

  Well, we know that, in many of these states, people are either having to carry pregnancies to term or to carry out — to travel out of state to access abortion.

  That, of course, adds levels of risk to people for whom out-of-state travel is complicated. We also have seen evidence that access to care for people who are pregnant who are not seeking abortions is being affected, in part because many states are prescribing pretty harsh criminal penalties for people who perform abortions, which creates uncertainty about exactly what abortion is, and has made doctors reluctant to intervene, even in some emergency medical situations when they're afraid that doing so could land them in serious legal trouble.

• William Brangham:

  We have seen some pushback from voters.

  We saw Kansas, where voters there protected the right to abortion on a ballot measure. Michigan is going to face a similar question in November. I mean, Democrats are certainly hoping that this issue will continue to animate their base.

  But are these voter pushbacks falling along traditional partisan lines?

• Mary Ziegler:

  Well, it's too early to say, obviously, in every context. There's a lot of variation.

  But you mentioned Kansas. In Kansas, the answer pretty clearly is no. We saw Kansans overwhelmingly reject a proposal to undo state constitutional abortion rights in that state. That kind of resounding loss would have required many independents and Republicans to join in for it to be possible.

  We have seen, in Michigan, for example, the number of signatures gathered in support of a state constitutional amendment record noticing abortion rights would far outpace what you would expect if this had just been a kind of partisan initiative.

  And that's supported by polling. We know that, in many states that may not vote for Democrats for state legislature or state office, may well want to vote for abortion rights. So this doesn't always break down cleanly along partisan lines when you present the issue directly to voters.

• William Brangham:

  And what about on the legal front?

  We have seen some courts stepping in to block some of these trigger laws. Are these legal battles, in a sense, from the pro-abortion rights angle, are these just prolonging the inevitable, or are these actually winnable fights?

• Mary Ziegler:

  It really depends on the context.

  So, in a kind of post-Dobbs America, we're going to see state constitutional battles. So, people on the pro-abortion rights side who are saying, essentially, these laws violate the state Constitution, even if there's no longer a federal right to choose, some of those may fare pretty well. It's going to just depend on who's sitting on those state Supreme Courts, because partisan composition there matters, just as it does on the U.S. Supreme Court.

  In other cases, we're seeing federal constitutional challenges on different bases, so, for example, the idea that some of these trigger laws are so vague that reasonable doctors couldn't possibly know what was allowed and what wasn't allowed. The fate of those challenges is a little bit unpredictable, simply because it's a different legal ground than the one the U.S. Supreme Court has weighed in on.

  But I think it's fair to assume that, in a lot of places where the judges making the decisions, were nominated by Republicans, we're looking at postponing the inevitable, but the overall legal picture is complicated and chaotic.

• William Brangham:

  Complicated and chaotic, indeed. That's why we always keep coming back to you.

  Mary Ziegler of U.C. Davis Law School, thank you so much for being here.

• Mary Ziegler:

  Thanks for having me.

Improved audio player available on our mobile page