>> CROSSLEY: WELCOME TO "BASIC BLACK."

SOME OF YOU ARE JOINING US ON OUR BROADCAST AND OTHERS OF YOU ARE JOINING US ON OUR DIGITAL PLATFORMS.

I'M CALLIE CROSSLEY, HOST OF "UNDER THE RADAR," 89.7.

TONIGHT: ROE V. WADE.

WE, LIKE YOU, ARE DEALING WITH THE EFFECTS OF THE CORONAVIRUS PANDEMIC AND ARE TAKING PRECAUTIONS.

WE ARE WORKING WITH LIMITED STAFF, AND OUR GUESTS ARE JOINING US REMOTELY.

IT'S FINAL.

THE SUPREME COURT TODAY HAS STRUCK DOWN ITS OWN 1973 LANDMARK RULING ON ROE v. WADE, AND NOT SURPRISINGLY, THE DECISION PRETTY MUCH MIRRORS THE LEAKED DRAFT ORIGINALLY AUTHORED BY ASSOCIATE JUSTICE SAMUEL ALITO.

STATES WITH TRIGGER LAWS BLOCKING ACCESS TO ABORTIONS AND CRIMINALIZING THOSE WHO HELP SOMEONE SEEKING ACCESS WILL SOON BE IN EFFECT.

WOMEN OF COLOR WILL BE HIT HARDEST BY THIS RULING AS WELL AS PEOPLE IN OTHER MARGINALIZED GROUPS, WHOSE RIGHTS ARE NOW ALSO POTENTIALLY AT RISK.

WILL A RETURN TO ABORTION LEGISLATION REGULATED BY THE STATES UNDERMINE OTHER LEGAL PROTECTIONS FOR PEOPLE OF COLOR, AND WHAT DOES A FUTURE WITHOUT THE CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTIONS ROE OFFERED LOOK LIKE?

JOINING US REMOTELY, RENEÉE LANDERS, PROFESSOR OF LAW AND FACULTY DIRECTOR OF THE HEALTH AND BIOMEDICAL LAW CONCENTRATION AND THE MASTERS OF SCIENCE IN LAW LIFE SCIENCES PROGRAM AT SUFFOLK UNIVERSITY LAW SCHOOL IN BOSTON.

CHASTITY BOWICK, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE TRANSGENDER EMERGENCY FUND OF MASSACHUSETTS, RENEÉE LANDERS, ASSOCIATED EDITOR AND OPINION COMIST FOR THE "BOSTON GLOBE"'S OP-ED PAGE, AND IVAÁN ESPINOZA-MADRIGAL, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR LAWYERS FOR CIVIL RIGHTS IN BOSTON.

WELCOME TO ALL.

I JUST WANT TO START WITH YOU, RENEÉE AND IVAÁN, LOOK AT WHAT THE RULING SAYS.

IT LOOKS LIKE WHAT ALITO WROTE BUT TO BE CLEAR, RENEÉE LANDERS, START US OFF.

>> OBVIOUSLY, I HAVEN'T HAD A CHANCE TO READ THE ENTIRE THING YET, BUT I THINK THE SUMMARY THAT THE COURT PROVIDED OF THE OPINION INDICATES THAT THE COURT HAS OVERRULED ROE V. WADE AND THE SUBSEQUENT DECISION IN CASEY AGAINST PLANNED PARENTHOOD WHICH HAD ESTABLISHED A CONSTRAINT ON THE STATES IN REGULATNG ABORTION AND SAYING ABORTION COULD NOT BE PROHIBITED IN THE STATES UNTIL THE POINT OF VIABILITY, WHICH RIGHT NOW UNDER MEDICAL SCIENCE, IS ABOUT 23 WEEKS OF GESTATIONAL AGE.

SO THE WHOLE REGIME IS -- HAS BEEN CHANGED.

I WILL POINT OUT THAT CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS' CONCURRENCE, WHICH WAS NOT NECESSARY FOR THE MAJORITY OPINION, IT JUST SUPPLIED THE SIXTH VOTE, WOULD HAVE OVERTURNED THE VIABILITY LIMIT BUT NOT HAVE, YOU KNOW, OVERTURNED, YOU KNOW, THE WHOLE THING WHOLESALE.

SO I THINK THAT HE WAS STILL TRYING TO ARGUE FOR A MIDDLE PATH, BUT THIS MEANS HIS INFLUENCE ON THE COURT FOR THESE MIDDLE -- FOR JUDICIAL RESTRAINT I THINK IS VERY LIMITED AS EVIDENCED BY THIS OPINION TODAY.

>> Crossley: OKAY, IVAÁN, RENEÉE LANDERS WAS REFERENCING THE DOBBS CASE IN MISSISSIPPI WHICH IS THE CASE THAT LED THEM -- THEY ACCEPTED THE CASE, SOME SAID, KNOWING THAT THEY WANTED TO USE A CASE TO OVERTURN ROE.

SO YOUR RESPONSE.

>> IT IS EXTREMELY DAMAGING AND DANGEROUS, THE PATH THAT THE COURT HAS OPTED TO FOLLOW HERE.

THIS CONCEPT THAT FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT, INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS NEED TO BE DEEPLY ROOTED IN HISTORY AND TRADITION, WHERE DOES THAT LEAVE US?

ROE v. WADE WAS DECIDED IN 1973.

GENERATIONS OF AMERICANS HAVE LIVED WITH THIS AS A LEGAL PRINCIPLE, AS A WAY TO ORGANIZE THEIR DAY-TO-DAY LIVES.

WHO IS TO SAY THAT BROWN vs. BOARD OF EDUCATION FROM 1954 IS DEEPLY ROOTED, OR THE IDEA OF INTERRACIAL MARRIAGES, OR EVEN LGBT EQUALITY, NONE OF THESE THINGS WERE WRITTEN INTO IS IT CONSTITUTION IN THE WAY THE MAJORITY IMPLIED THAT IS NECESSARY FOR RIGHTS TO BE RECOGNIZED, AND THAT IS APPALLING, SIMPLY APPALLING.

>> Crossley: SO, RENEÉE GRAHAM, SO WHAT IVAÁN IS SAYING IS THAT THIS CASE IS NOT JUST ABOUT ROE v. WADE OR THE DOBBS CASE IN MISSISSIPPI, BUT ACTUALLY LOOKS AT "SETTLED LAW" OR SUPPOSEDLY SETTLED LAW AND MAKES CHANGES TO IT AND, SO, THEREFORE, PUTS IN THE CROSSHAIRS OTHER CASES WITH SIMILAR KINDS OF RIGHTS.

>> WELL, YOU KNOW, I THINK, IN THE DRAFT OPINION, WE HEARD THE TELL FROM SAMUEL ALITO, WHEN HE SAID THAT ABORTION IS NOT DEEPLY ROOTED IN THE HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES.

THAT WAS THE HINT OF WHAT'S TO COME, BECAUSE THIS ISN'T ONLY GOING TO BE ABOUT ABORTION.

IT'S GOING TO BE ABOUT SAME-SEX MARRIAGE.

IT CAN BE ABOUT, AS IVAÁN MENTIONED, BROWN vs. BOARD OF EDUCATION.

IT PUTS EVERYTHING ON THE TABLE.

ALL RIGHTS ARE NOW UNDER ASSAULT.

AND WITH THIS COURT AND SOME OF THE DECISIONS THEY'VE MADE IN THIS WEEK ALONE, WE CAN KIND OF SEE THE PATTERN THAT RIGHTS WILL NOT BE EXPECTED, THAT THERE WILL BE THESE EXTREME RIGHT-WING DECISIONS THAT WILL UNDERMINE LAWS.

YOU KNOW, THE DRAFT OPINION THAT CAME OUT, THAT LEAKED LAST MONTH WAS LIKE THE WARNING OF A CATEGORY 5 HURRICANE, AND NOW IT'S HIT LAND, AND IT'S GOING TO UPEND THIS COUNTRY LIKE NOTHING I'VE EVER SEEN IN MY LIFETIME.

>> Crossley: CHASTITY -- AN I -- I'M SORRY.

GO AHEAD.

>> Crossley: I'LL COME BACK AROUND.

I WANT TO GET CHASTITY'S INITIAL TAKE.

GO AHEAD, CHASTITY.

>> YOU KNOW, JUST HEARING THIS THIS MORNING, THAT IT IS NOW OVERTURNED, I FEEL AS THOUGH THE RIGHT OF MY COMMUNITY, THE TRANS COMMUNITY, LGBTQ A + COMMUNITY, OUR RIGHTS WILL BE ENDANGERED.

ARE WE GOING BACK TO SEGREGATION?

EVERYTHING IS UP FOR GRABS WHEN IT COMES TO OUR RIGHTS.

SO I'M STILL A LITTLE SPEECHLESS OVER HERE.

>> Crossley: RENEÉE LANDERS, I WANT YOU TO MICK UP WHERE YOU WANTED TO GO BUT I WANT TO NOW PUT THE EMPHASIS ON WOMEN OF COLOR AND PEOPLE OF COLOR AND OTHER MARGINALIZED GROUPS AND THE IMPACT OF THIS OVERTURNING THROUGH THAT LENS.

IN YOUR RESPONSE, COULD YOU ADDRESS THAT?

>> CERTAINLY.

SO, FIRST OF ALL, I WANT TO AGREE WITH IVAÁN THAT I'VE NEVER BEEN A VAN OF THE HISTORY AND TRADITION TESTS BECAUSE IT'S A TEST THAT, YOU KNOW, OVERVALUES THE PAST AND DOESN'T ALLOW FOR SOCIETAL PROGRESS AND THE EVOLUTION OF THE CONSTITUTION TO ADAPT TO NEW UNDERSTANDINGS OF WHAT SOCIETY SHOULD BE ORGANIZED AROUND.

SO -- AND THEN, JUST TO RENEÉE GRAHAM'S POINT, THE -- JUST THIS WEEK, THE COURT DECIDED, YOU KNOW, A CASE INVOLVING THE RIGHT TO THE MIRANDA WARNINGS, YOU KNOW, WHEN ONE IS DETAINED AND QUESTIONED BY THE POLICE, WHERE IT KIND OF CHIPPED AWAY AT THAT MIRANDA PRECEDENT, AND THE COURT SORT OF, IN THE ALITO DRAFT OPINION, RELIED HEAVILY ON MIRANDA HAVING OVERRULED PRIOR LAW.

SO I THINK THE SENSE OF RENEÉE AND IVAÁN AND CHASTITY THAT ALL RIGHTS ARE AT RISK IS DEFINITELY CORRECT.

WITH REGARD TO THE IMPACT ON PEOPLE OF COLOR, YOU KNOW, THE -- PEOPLE OF COLOR DISPROPORTIONATELY TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE RIGHT TO HAVE ACCESS TO ABORTION CURRENTLY FOR A WHOLE LOT OF REASONS -- ECONOMIC REASONS, LACK OF HEALTHCARE IN MANY OF THESE STATES THAT ARE RESTRICTING ABORTION RIGHTS, A LACK OF MEDICAID COVERAGE FOR LOW-INCOME PEOPLE IN THOSE SAME STATES.

SO THIS NOTION THAT THIS IS A DECISION ABOUT RESPECTING THE HEALTH AND WELL BEING OF WOMEN AND CHILDREN OR PREGNANT PEOPLE AND CHILDREN IS JUST NOT CREDIBLE, GIVEN THE, YOU KNOW, CURRENT STATUS OF THINGS.

AND, SO, I THINK PEOPLE OF COLOR WILL HAVE SIGNIFICANTLY IN THE STATES WITH RESTRICTIVE LAWS WILL HAVE A SIGNIFICANTLY HARDER TIME GAINING ACCESS TO ABORTION RIGHTS BECAUSE THEY WILL HAVE TO TRAVEL, THEY JUST PERHAPS WILL NOT HAVE THE ECONOMIC RESOURCES TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE RIGHTS THAT MAY EXIST AND BE AVAILABLE IN OTHER STATES.

>> Crossley: PICK THAT UP, IVAÁN, BECAUSE, WHEN WE TALK ABOUT GOING BACK TO THE STATES REGULATING NOW AGAIN THROUGH THE LENS OF PEOPLE OF COLOR, STATES' BEEN EQUATED WITH, AS CHASTITY SAID, SEGREGATION TIMES.

STATES' RIGHTS HAVE NEVER BEEN PUT BLACK FOLKS IN A SITUATION OF FEELING PROTECTED.

CAN YOU ADDRESS THAT?

>> ABSOLUTELY.

ABSOLUTELY.

ABSOLUTELY.

IT IS INCONSISTENT, RIGHT, THE WHOLE NOTION THAT THE COURT CAN SPEAK WITH ONE VOICE AND BE ABLE TO PROVIDE A DEFINITIVE SOLUTION FOR THESE TYPES OF ISSUES, THAT IS A CRITICAL ROLE.

IF YOU EVEN THINK JUST A FEW YEARS BACK, WHEN ISSUES OF SAME-SEX MARRIAGE WERE BEING DEBATED -- IN ONE STATE YOU WERE MARRIED, IN ANOTHER ONE YOU HAD NO RIGHTS -- AND THAT INCONSISTENCY IS VERY DIFFICULT TO LIVE WITH AND TO NAVIGATE, AND THE IDEA THAT YOU CROSS STATE LINES AND THAT CHANGES YOUR ENTIRE LEGAL IDENTITY.

SO THE ISSUE HERE OF RETURNING THINGS TO THE STATE, THOUGH THAT MAY MAKE SENSE IN SOME OTHER CONTEXTS, IN A PARTICULAR CONTEXT OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS, OF INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS, THAT CERTAINLY DOES NOT MAKE SENSE, BECAUSE THE CONSISTENCY IS WHAT PEOPLE NEED TO RELY ON TO ORGANIZE THEIR LIVES.

I THINK THE OTHER ISSUE HERE OF HOW PEOPLE OF COLOR ARE AFFECTED AND NOT JUST BY THE DEPRIVATION OF REPRODUCTIVE JUSTICE, BUT ALSO THE TRICKLE EFFECT THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, IN MANY DIFFERENT WAYS.

CRIMINALIZATION IS ALREADY AFFECTING OUR COMMUNITIES.

MANY OF THE PROVISIONS THAT ARE GOING TO COME INTO PLACE ARE GOING TO CRIMINALIZE WOMEN.

WE DON'T KNOW HOW THIS IS GOING TO MANIFEST FOR PEOPLE WHO CROSS STATE LINES.

WILL WE SEE SCENES REMINISCENT OF FUGITIVE SLAVE LOSS WHERE PEOPLE ARE BEING HAULED BACK TO THEIR HOME STATE IN SHACKLES, AND ARE WE GOING TO SEE OTHER CASES GOING TO THE SUPREME COURT WHERE THE RIGHTS OF PEOPLE HAVE BEEN DILUTED.

TEXAS ALREADY ANNOUNCED IT'S GOING TO CHALLENGE THE IDEA OF UNDOCUMENTED CHILDREN HAVING ACCESS TO PUBLIC SCHOOLS, A SEMINAL CASE WHICH WILL CERTAINLY NOW BE IN THE CHOPPING BLOCK.

SO THE SLIPPERY SLOPE IS DANGEROUS BECAUSE OF CRIMINALIZATION AND HAS COLLATERAL IMPACT.

>> Crossley: I WANT TO PICK UP, RENEÉE GRAHAM, WITH THE CRIMINALIZATION AND WHAT YOU HAVE DESCRIBED AS ANTI-WOMEN TAKE ON A LOT OF THIS LEGISLATION.

AND, SO, WHEN WE START TALKING ABOUT CRIMINALIZATION AND ANTI-WOMEN TAKE AND REPRODUCTIVE -- WHAT SOME PEOPLE CALL REPRODUCTIVE JUSTICE WITH REGARD TO WOMEN OF COLOR AND THIS RULING, SPEAK ABOUT WHAT THAT IMPACT REALLY IS.

>> WELL, THE HANDWRITING WAS ALREADY ON THE WALL WHEN STATES BEGAN TO PASS LAWS THAT SAID ANYONE COULD FILE SUIT AGAINST SOMEONE WHO HAD AN ABORTION, WHETHER YOU KNEW THEM OR NOT, THAT IF YOU HEARD ABOUT IT THAT YOU HAD A RIGHT TO DO THAT.

SO ALREADY WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS IDEA OF CRIMINALIZING WHAT PEOPLE CAN DO, OF REALLY MINDING OTHER PEOPLE'S BUSINESS.

SO PART OF THE IDEA OF THAT IS TO TERRORIZE PEOPLE INTO NOT DOING THIS THING, THE IDEA THAT IF I DO THIS I OR A DOCTOR COULD GET IN TROUBLE.

WE HEARD THIS AS WELL IN STATES THAT HAVE BEEN REALLY HARD ON THE TRANS COMMUNITY AND THE IDEA THAT DOCTOR CAN BE CRIMINALIZED IF THEY'RE GIVING GENDER-AFFIRMING HEALTHCARE.

THE IDEA IS ALWAYS BASED ON PUNISHMENT.

AS MUCH AS THEY WANT TO TALK ABOUT, YOU KNOW, HEALTHCARE OR TAKING CARE OF WOMEN AND BABIES, THEY DON'T CARE ABOUT THAT.

WHAT THEY CARE ABOUT IS REMOVING BODY AUTONOMY FROM ADULTS AND FROM PEOPLE TO MAKE DECISION THAT ARE BEST FOR THEIR LIVES AND HEALTH.

SO WHEN YOU ADD AN ELEMENT OF CRIMINALIZATION TO THAT, THAT IS A TERRORIZING EFFECT, AND I THINK THAT'S A BIG PART OF WHAT IS GOING ON AS WELL, AND NOW YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE LITERALLY MILLIONS OF WOMEN TRYING TO MAKE THESE DECISIONS THAT -- OR WHAT'S BEST FOR THEIR FAMILY, BUT ALSO TRYING TO KEEP THEMSELVES OUT OF A LEGAL SYSTEM THAT SEEMS RATHER EAGER TO PULL THEM INTO IT.

>> Crossley: CHASTITY, YOU HAVE LONG TALKED ABOUT, IN REPRESENTING YOUR COMMUNITY, ABOUT THE FINANCIAL ISSUES AROUND JUST TRYING TO MAINTAIN YOUR PERSONHOOD.

SO HERE WE HAVE A SITUATION THAT IS DEFINITELY COMING IN WITH AN EXTRA FINANCIAL BURDEN ON, TO BEGIN, WITH BLACK WOMEN WHO USE 60% OF THE ABORTION ALSO -- THAT WAS THE LATEST STATISTIC -- IN THE COUNTRY.

AGAIN, RENEÉE LANDERS SAID THERE ARE MANY REASONS FOR IT, BUT IN THE TRANS COMMUNITY, YOUR FEAR IS THAT IT NOW GOES RIGHT AT THE KINDS OF HEALTHCARE CONCERNS AND NEEDS THAT YOU ABSOLUTELY HAVE TO HAVE TO LIVE.

>> EXACTLY, CALLIE.

AND, RIGHT NOW, LIKE IVAÁN SAID, IT'S FOR -- FOR THE TRANS COMMUNITY, IT DEPENDS ON WHAT STATE YOU LIVE IN.

SO, CURRENTLY, IN MASSACHUSETTS, THE RIGHT THAT I HAVE AND ACCESS TO HEALTHCARE, MY TRANS SISTERS IN ALABAMA DON'T HAVE THE SAME ACCESS.

SO IT'S AN UNEVEN PLAYING FIELD, AND THAT'S WHAT'S SCARING ME THE MOST WILL GET WORSE BECAUSE WHAT IF THEY SAY, WE'RE NOT PRODUCING HORMONE MEDICATIONS AND IT'S ILLEGAL FOR PROVIDERS TO PRESCRAPE THEM.

YOU THINK ABOUT SOMEONE LIKE MYSELF WHO'S BEEN ON HORMONE THERAPY NOW FOR TWELVE YEARS AND WHAT ARE THE EFFECTS GOING TO DO TO MY BODY IF I NO LONGER HAVE THE ACCESS TO THAT MEDICATION.

DO I HAVE TO GO ON THE BLACK MARKET AND SEARCH FOR THE HORMONES WHERE WHO KNOWS WHAT I'M GETTING?

IT'S GOING TO TAKE US BACK IN TIME FROM TRANS WOMEN AND WOMEN IN GENERAL ARE FINDING BACK ALLEY SURGEONS AND HAVING UNHEALTHY PROCEDURES TO TRY TO AFFIRM OUR GENDER.

SO I THINK, ALL AROUND, YES, IT'S GOING TO GET WORSE FOR TRAVEL BANS PEOPLE BUT JUST WOMEN IN GENERAL, AND I THINK THAT WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING, I DON'T KNOW WHAT, WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING TO TRY TO HOLD ON TO THE RIGHTS THAT WE HAVE BEFORE THEY'RE TAKEN AS WELL.

>> Crossley: SO, IVAÁN, IS MASSACHUSETTS READY TO BE THE CANADA IN A PART OF A NEW KIND OF UNDERGROUND RAILROAD, AS THE KINDS OF FOLKS THAT CHASTITY IS TALKING ABOUT, AND THEN WOMEN OF COLOR FROM OTHER STATES TRY TO MAKE THEIR WAY HERE TO A STATE THAT, FOR NOW, LEAST, OFFERS THE PROTECTIONS FOR WOMEN SEEKING ABORTION ACCESS?

>> WELL, ONE, WE CERTAINLY ARE BETTER OFF THAN MANY OTHER STATES, IN TERMS OFIC A SEASES AND AVAILABILITY -- OF ACCESS AND AVAILABILITY, BUT BY NO MEANS ARE WE READY FOR WHAT'S COMING, FIRST OF ALL BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW THE IMPLICATIONS OF CROSSING STATE LINES, THE CRIMINALIZATION ELEMENTS, HOW THAT IS GOING TO REALLY PLAY OUT IS YET TO BE SEEN.

SO THERE COULD BE PROVIDERS WHO SIMPLY DO NOT WANT TO SERVE WOMEN FROM OUT OF STATE BECAUSE OF THE UNCERTAINTY SURROUNDING THE ILLEGAL CONSEQUENCES.

BUT EVEN IF WE STAY WITH THE LANDSCAPE HERE IN MASSACHUSETTS, THERE IS SIMPLY NOT ENOUGH PROVIDERS AS IT IS.

I MEAN, WE'VE ALL SEEN HOW FRAGILE THE HEALTHCARE SYSTEM HAS BEEN DURING THE PANDEMIC.

THE REPRODUCTIVE JUSTICE BASE IS NO EXCEPTION, AND, SO, JUST IN TERMS OF THE NUMBER OF PROVIDERS, WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH, AND WE ALSO HAVE SOME LAWS IN THE BOOKS THAT ARE ACTUALLY NOT IDEAL, LIKE PARENTAL CONSENTS FOR SOME YOUNGER PEOPLE WHO NEED ACCESS TO THIS TYPE OF REPRODUCTIVE JUSTICE SERVICES, AND WE ALSO HAVE OTHER -- WHICH WAS ALLUDED BY SOME OF OUR PANELISTS -- PERIODS OF GESTATION.

SO WE ALREADY HAVE SOME PRETTY STRICT GUARDRAILS IN MASSACHUSETTS, I WOULD SAY.

AND, SO, WE NEED TO REVISIT SOME OF THAT TO DETERMINE HOW WE CAN BECOME THE BEACON THAT YOU'RE ALLUDING TO, CALLIE, WHICH I THINK IS CRITICAL, AND, AT THE SAME TIME, IT'S ALSO REALLY IMPORTANT TO UNDERSCORE HERE THAT WE NEED TO BE EXTRAORDINARILY VIGILANT ABOUT HOW WE GO ABOUT ORGANIZING OUR DAY-TO-DAY LIVES WITH THE LANDSCAPE, THE RISK OF CRIMINALIZATION.

IT IS REALLY IMPORTANT TO GET LEGAL ADVICE, ESPECIALLY IF YOU'RE IN A STATE WHERE THESE TRIGGER LAWS ARE STARTING TO POP UP.

IT'S CRITICAL TO HAVE LEGAL ASSISTANCE AS YOU GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS, WHICH WAS JUST TERRIBLY SAD TO SAY, BUT THAT IS WHERE WE ARE RIGHT NOW.

>> Crossley: RENEÉE LANDERS, WOULD YOU ADD TO THAT?

>> YES, SO I THINK THAT IVAÁN IS CORRECT, THAT EVEN THOUGH THE SITUATION IN MASSACHUSETTS IS MUCH BETTER FOR RESIDENTS IN THE STATES THAN OTHER PARTS OF THE COUNTRY, THERE ARE STILL SOME LIMITATIONS, THERE ARE STILL SOME AREAS TO HAVE THE STATE WHERE THERE ARE NO PROVIDERS, YOU KNOW, TO MAKE AVAILABLE ACCESS TO CERTAIN REPRODUCTIVE HEALTHCARE SERVICES.

AND, SO, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF ORGANIZATIONS HAVE BEEN TRYING TO ADDRESS THOSE, YOU KNOW, DESERTS, REPRODUCTIVE HEALTHCARE DESERTS FOR SOME TIME, BUT THAT'S STILL A WORK IN PROGRESS.

SECOND, WE COULD DO SOME THINGS IN OUR STATE LAWS TO MAKE IT MORE DIFFICULT FOR PEOPLE FROM THESE STATES THAT ALLOW PRIVATE CITIZENS TO SUE AND TO TRACK YOU ACROSS THE COUNTRY IF YOU ARE SEEKING ABORTION RIGHTS.

WE NEED TO AMEND OUR STATUTES HERE TO MAKE OUR COURTS INHOSPITABLE TO THOSE CLAIMS, TO TRY TO PROTECT OUR CITIZENS AND HEALTHCARE PROVIDERS.

SO THAT IS ONE CONCRETE THING THAT THE STATE LEGISLATURE AND THE GOVERNOR COULD DO TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CONTINUE OF ACCESS HERE AND ARE ABLE TO HELP PEOPLE FROM OTHER STATES WHO WANT TO TRAVEL HERE AND RECEIVE SERVICES.

THE SUPREME COURT, YOU KNOW, IVAÁN TALKED ABOUT RELIANCE INTERESTS AND BEING ABLE TO RELY ON THE CERTAINTY OF THE LAW.

THE SUPREME COURT, IN THE ALITO DRAFT OPINION, HE SAID, WELL, YOU KNOW, ROE KIND OF UNSETTLED THE LELANDSCAPE AND HAS CAUSED CONTROVERSY.

THEY DON'T EVEN UNDERSTAND WHAT CONTROVERSY THEY'VE UNLEASHED BECAUSE THERE WILL BE ALL OF THIS LITIGATION ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THE INTERSECTION BETWEEN DIFFERENT STATE LAWS AND FOLLOWING PEOPLE, IF SOMEONE SENDS, YOU KNOW, ABORTION MEDICATION INTO A STATE, IS THE COMMERCE CLAUSE, THE FEDERAL POWER, PREEMPTIVE POWER OF FEDERAL LAW GOING TO CONTROL, OR ARE WE GOING TO SAY, OH, WELL, THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT POWER STOPS AT THAT STATE BORDER?

WE DON'T KNOW THE ANSWERS TO THOSE QUESTIONS, AND IT PUTS PEOPLE'S HEALTH AND THEIR LEGAL RIGHT AT EXTREME PERIL.

AND THE FINAL THING I WILL SAY IS THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE'S BEEN A WHOLE LOT OF CONTROVERSY RECENTLY ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SOME OF THESE STATES WITH THESE DRACONIAN IDEAS ABOUT REGULATING PEOPLE'S PRIVATE LIVES AND THE REGULATIONS OF THE CORPORATIONS THAT EMPLOY PEOPLE.

AND THE CORPORATIONS ARE GOING TO HAVE TO DEAL WITH THESE ISSUES AS WELL BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, WHAT KINDS OF HEALTH INSURANCE PROGRAMS CAN THEY OFFER.

WHAT KINDS OF ADDITIONAL SUPPORT CAN THEY GIVE TO EMPLOYEES FROM SOME OF THESE STATES?

AND THEN THE FINAL THING I WILL SAY IS -- ON THIS ACCESS TO HEALTHCARE SERVICES, IT COULD GO ONE OF TWO WAYS -- YOU KNOW, IF I'M IN MEDICAL SCHOOL NOW AND I'M THINKING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, DO I WANT TO BE AN OBSTETRICIAN/GYNECOLOGIST, OR DO I WANT TO DO SOMETHING ELSE, AND WHERE WOULD I LIKE TO LIVE, RIGHT?

SO WHY WOULD I SENTER THIS FIELD -- WHY WOULD I ENTER THIS FIELD WHICH IS SO FRAUGHT?

YOU'VE SPENT HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLAR ON YOUR EDUCATION, AND ONE, YOU KNOW, DISAGREEMENT ABOUT YOUR INTERPRETATION OF THE HEALTH NECESSITY OF A MEDICAL PROCEDURE COULD SUBJECT YOU TO CRIMINAL LIABILITY AND YOU COULD LOSE YOUR LICENSE.

SO WHY GO INTO THAT FIELD, ON THE ONE HAND, AND THEN, SECOND, WHY WOULD YOU LOCATE TO ONE OF THESE STATES THAT'S GOING TO REGULATE PROCEDURES IN THIS WAY?

THIS IS GOING TO BE TERRIBLY UNDERMINING OF THE AVAILABILITY OF REPRODUCTIVE HEALTHCARE SERVICES ACROSS THE BOARD.

AND AS IVAÁN POINTED OUT, THEY'RE ALREADY INADEQUATE.

>> Crossley: CHASTITY, YOU SPOKE ABOUT THIS A LITTLE BIT BEFORE, BUT I JUST WANTED TO RECOGNIZE THAT YOU HAD MENTIONED THERE'S 240 BILLS ALREADY IN PROCESS IN MASSACHUSETTS THAT CHALLENGE TRANS PEOPLE AS IT IS, SO, NOW, WITH THIS ON TOP OF IT, DOES THAT ACCELERATE THAT BILL?

I MEAN, WOULD YOU AGREE WITH IVAÁN THAT, YOU KNOW, MAYBE THERE'S SOME GUARDRAILS, BUT MASSACHUSETTS IS NO PANACEA AT THIS MOMENT?

>> YES, CALLIE.

SO IT'S ACTUALLY 240 BILLS ACROSS THE UNITED STATES.

>> Crossley: OKAY, THANK YOU.

NOT JUST IN MASSACHUSETTS.

THAT WOULD BE A LOT.

BUT WHAT THIS DOES IS IT GIVES THOSE BILLS MORE LIGHT FOR THE PEOPLE WHO PUT THEM IN PLACE.

AND WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT ROE v. WADE, SOMETHING THAT'S BEEN IN EFFECT, YOU KNOW, I GREW UP KNOWING HOW IT GAME IN EFFECT AND WHY IT WAS SO IMPORTANT.

THESE NEW RULINGS THAT HAPPENED OVER THE PAST 20 YEARS ARE OUT OF THE WINDOW, AND, SO, IS I FEEL LIKE MOST OF THESE WILL BE PASSED AND THEY ARE LIMITING LGBTQ YOUTH IN CERTAIN ASPECTS OF THEIR LIVES, WHETHER AT SCHOOL OR THE SPORTS THAT ALLIANCE WITH THEIR GENDER THAT THEY REPRESENT, AND THIS IS JUST THE BEGINNING.

I TRULY FEEL THAT.

LIKE IVAÁN SAID, THERE IS NO CONSISTENCY AMONG THESE STATES.

SO WHY IS IT NOW I COULD HAVE MY GENDER MARKET CHANGED HERE WITHOUT HAVING ANY GENDER AFFIRMING PROCEDURES, BUT IF I GO TO TEXAS, I HAVE TO HAVE EVERY PROCEDURE PERFORMED, DOCUMENTATION FOR EACH PROCEDURE IN ORDER FOR MY GENDER MARKER TO BE CHANGED.

THAT SHOULD BE CONSISTENT ACROSS EVERY STATE.

SO BACK TO WHAT RENEÉE IS SAYING, TRANS PEOPLE HAVE TO DECIDE, WHERE DO I WANT TO LIVE, WILL IT BE SAVE FOR ME AND I HAVE LAWS?

I WOULD NOT BE PROTECTED IN FLORIDA SO I WOULD NEVER MOVE TO FLORIDA EVEN IF A GOOD JOB OPPORTUNITY PRESENTED ITSELF TO ME.

SO I THINK IT MAKES US PIVOT AS PEOPLE OUR OWN WANT AND DREAMS TO LIVE IN THIS COUNTRY.

>> Crossley: RENEÉE GRAHAM, YOU'RE GOING TO GET A LITTLE RUNWAY TO GET THE LAST WORD ON THIS, BECAUSE I SAW YOUR FACE WHEN, AS WE LEARNED TOGETHER, THAT THE RULING HAD COME DOWN, FELT LIKE A GUT PUNCH.

AND, SO, I'D LIKE YOU TO ADDRESS THAT AND, ALSO, JUST SPEAK TO WHETHER YOU SEE -- HOW YOU SEE MASSACHUSETTS AS A LIMITED KIND OF CANADA TO A NEW UNDERGROUND RAILROAD, OR SOMETHING ELSE?

>> WELL, YOU KNOW, I THINK CHASTITY HAS SPOKEN QUITE WELL TO THIS.

PEOPLE IN MASSACHUSETTS CANNOT GET COMFORTABLE.

IT'S NOT LIKE PEOPLE MASSACHUSETTS CAN LOOK AND SAY, WELL, WE'RE NOT TEXAS OR LOUISIANA, WE'RE OKAY.

WE'RE KIND OF OKAY, BUT PROBABLY IN A LIMITED SORT OF WAY BECAUSE THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE SPENT DECADES TRYING TO OVERTURN ROE v. WADE SEE DAYLIGHT NOW.

AND, SO, IT'S NOT JUST GOING TO STOP IN, YOU KNOW, THE RED STATES WITH THE TERRIBLE GOVERNORS, IT'S GOING TO CONTINUE THROUGH THE COUNTRY, THEY'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO AGITATE, TO UNDERMINE RIGHTS IN STATES LIKE MASSACHUSETTS AND NEW JERSEY AND CONNECTICUT AND NEW YORK, WHERE THERE ARE BETTER LAWS ON THE BOOKS, BUT IT ALSO ISN'T PERFECT.

WHAT HAPPENED TODAY IS AN ABSOLUTE CATASTROPHE.

YOU KNOW, I THOUGHT IT WAS VERY INTERESTING THAT IVAÁN BROUGHT UP THE IDEA OF THE FUGITIVE SLAVE ACT AND WHAT THAT MEANS AND THAT EVEN, YOU KNOW, THE IDEA OF HAVING SLAVE STATES AND FREE STATES, BUT, OF COURSE, THE FUGITIVE SLAVE ACT ERASED THE WHOLE LINE BETWEEN THAT AND, IF YOU WERE A RUNAWAY, YOU WERE SUBJECTED TO BEING RETURNED TO A PLANTATION.

I FEEL LIKE WE COULD HEAD IN THAT DIRECTION.

YOU KNOW, IT IS ASTONISHING TO ME THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A LAW THAT WAS ON THE BOOK FOR ALMOST 50 YEARS THAT FIVE PEOPLE DECIDED NEEDED TO BE ELIMINATED, AND IT IS GOING TO HAVE AN ABSOLUTELY CATASTROPHIC EFFECT ON MILLIONS OF PEOPLE, AND NOT JUST WOMEN.

>> Crossley: THANK YOU SO MUCH, RENEÉE.

THAT'S THE END OF OUR BROADCAST AND SHOW.

THANK YOU ALL FOR JOINING US.

STAY WITH US AS WE CONTINUE OUR CONVERSATION ON OUR DIGITAL PLATFORMS, FACEBOOK AND YOUTUBE.

Captioned by Media Access Group at WGBH access.wgbh.org