What Would Happen if States Could Outlaw Abortion?
Are you okay with allowing nearly half of the states in the Union to ban abortion care?
The reason we're asking is that the presumptive Republican presidential nominee brought it up this week.
Anti-choice former Gov. Mitt Romney expressed his desire to see Roe v. Wade overturned:
I would love the Supreme Court to say, "Let's send this back to the states." Rather than having a federal mandate through Roe v. Wade, let the states again consider this issue state by state.
Sen. John McCain made a similar, "let the states decide" argument in 2008. It's an old line from anti-choice politicians.
It's no big deal if the Supreme Court overrules nearly 40 years of jurisprudence that says a woman has a fundamental, constitutional right to choose safe, legal abortion care, these politicians say. The issue would just go to the states.
But what would it mean if states got to consider the issue of a woman's right to choose, "state by state?"
It would mean very bad news for women throughout the nation.
If Roe v. Wade were overturned today, women could lose the right to legal abortion immediately in 17 states.
Based on analysis of current state laws and the hostile legislative landscape, here is how it could happen:
Fifteen states have near-total bans on abortion already on the books that aren't in effect because they are unconstitutional. Bans in the following states may become enforceable if Roe falls: AL, AZ, AR, CO, DE, LA, MA, MI, MS, NM, OK, UT, VT, WV, and WI.
Four states have laws that would impose near-total criminal bans on abortion if the Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade (sometimes known as "trigger" bans): LA, MS, ND, and SD.
That brings the numbers of states where abortion becomes illegal to 17. (Louisiana and Mississippi are included in both groups.)
But we shouldn't stop there. Fifteen states currently have anti-choice legislatures and governors that would likely outlaw abortion if Roe falls: AL, AZ, GA, ID, LA, MI, MS, NE, ND, OH, OK, SD, TX, UT, and WI.
Five of these states, GA, ID, NE, OH, and TX, are not in the two previous categories.
So, in total, there are 22 states where choice is at risk if Roe is overturned.
That's 44 percent of the states.
Put simply, overturning Roe v. Wade would mean that a woman's personal, private medical decisions would be up to guys like the gyno-governors, rather than a woman and her doctor.
Just something to consider the next time you hear Gov. Romney or other anti-choice politicians throw around the "let the states decide" line.
Paid for by NARAL Pro-Choice America, www.ProChoiceAmerica.org, and not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee.
Tags:
Mitt Romney, near-total bans, Roe, Roe v Wade, Supreme Court, Supreme Court of the United States, trigger laws, Wade, who decides,
| Share this post: | Tweet |  |
 |
 |
 |
 |
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: What Would Happen if States Could Outlaw Abortion?.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.blogforchoice.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/4024
Search the Blog
The direction that the right-wing GOP is taking us scares the hell out of me. Why are they trying to undo the progress women's rights have made in the past 40 years. Women and the men that love them need to speak up at the ballot box in November. Republicans need to be voted out of Congress. Obama must be re-elected. We cannot afford to backtrack.
i think that we sould out law abortions because it is wrong and somebody in my family had to go through it and it effects her and the whole family so i would want to outlaw abortion!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I am with you Elaine, this scares the hell out of me. The only thing that bothers me more than all of these old men with no MD after thier name trying to come between me and my doctors are the women who actually suppport this crap. I fear that women in my generation have become complascent since all of these rights were fought for and won before our time and we have taken them for granted. I fear that the outcry will not come till they are taken away.
@ imari david - So, let me get this straight: you want to outlaw half of all american's right to choose whether something so utterly personal is correct for them because YOUR family had a bad experience? Are you serious?!
For Nicole and Elaine...
Yes we want Romney elected and for many more reasons than mentioned here. And yes we want Roe overturned because it was bad law and now that the President is turning flips trying to make everyone pay for your abortion, that law is getting worse. If you can afford recreational sex, then you can afford abortion, at least financially. You'll never be able to afford it mentally, emotionally, or spiritually. Here's novel idea...take responsibility for your actions and/or lack of protection.
@Chris.
Nearly overwhelmed by your underwhelming logic. You are reasoning that the President is trying to "make everyone pay for your abortion" - proof, please.
The reason that Roe v. Wade was successfully argued at the Supreme Court is precisely because states had such disparaging laws about abortion - but most were moving towards making abortion legal BECAUSE SO MANY WOMEN WERE DYING.
Mothers, sisters, aunts, daughters.
Take responsibility for your actions? Do you not see that the Republican Congress is trying to limit access to birth control as we write this? What responsibility can a women (and why just the woman?) practice if she isn't even able to use birth control because she can't afford it or doesn't have access to it?
Keep in mind - abortion was not prohibited in the United States until about the turn of the century. From that time until 1973 so many women died that even CLERGY were activists in the movement to get abortion legalized.
Your assertion that if "you can afford recreational sex, then you can afford abortion" not only trivializes the women that would chose to continue with their pregnancies and deliver healthy babies but for tragic and unforeseen complications, it also diminishes the value of the women in YOUR life, because one out of three women in the US have had an abortion, so chances are one of them is related to you.
We're well aware that being anti-choice makes you FEEL GOOD about yourself, morally superior and righteous. You're worshiping at the feet of the idealized fetus - because you have no real connect to those "babies" that you think you're saving.
Remember this always: Abortion is no less prevalent where prohibited, it is merely less safe.
If abortion was made illegal merely to protect the life's of 'unborn children', then why are there half a million children in foster care awaiting adoption? Shouldn't pro lifers be fighting over who gets to adopt these forgotten children?
When folks make the comment to the effect of "women should keep their legs closed" it merely PROVES that they don't give a damn about children, just punishing women for engaging in sex....
Finally just because abortion is illegal, doesn't mean it will cease.... think about that
And what about men's rights.
Shouldnt they have an equal right to abdicate responsibility for a fetus/child if they are not ready to be a father? Or is it ok to force a man into fatherhood?
If Roe V. Wade is overturned, everyone will be forced to kiss their rights to privacy, in addition to the choices they make as they go about their daily lives as humans, goodbye. Not having any level of privacy in one's life is the scariest fear that I have. I do not understand people with "nothing to hide" about thier lives. In fact, I find them downright frightening. I firmly believe it's possible to be honest about yourself and draw a boundary as to what you choose to reveal publicly and what you choose to keep to yourself. Having some forms of privacy in my own personal life keeps me sane. Why are not the privacy advocates more concerned about this matter?
The laws that have passed and are being contemplated regarding contraception and abortion make all women 2nd class citizens.
Why, if I am a 2nd class citizen. should't I only have to pay 1/2 the taxes? Why not start a campaign to have women in states that have passed these laws write the state demanding refunds for overpayment of taxes?
Why not organize/treaten boycotts of statest that pass these laws?
Shannon
Abortion & birth control are private, personal, MEDICAL decisions. The government has NO right getting involved. Banning abortion in some states would be similar to banning heart surgery, dialysis, chemotherapy, etc & other medical procedures. Sadly, the only way to put end the abortion debate would probably be via a civil war, with one side completely eradicating the other.
Nicole Grove: When my grandfather open heart surgery & MY family had a bad experience with that. I think we should ban it. (JOKE) But seriously.....how about a ban on Viagra? Women could place a pseudo-ban on it but simply refusing to have sex with any man who uses it. Likewise for any MAN who is "pro-life".
"make everyone pay for your abortion" So??? And??? It's a medical procedure, moron. So can I choose not to pay for your antibiotics, heart surgery, eye exams, etc? If you can afford a computer for recreational purposes such as this, you should be able to afford your own medical care. I never quite understand how some people who are so utterly clueless, can function in everyday society.
Chris - perhaps you're unaware of this (maybe because you've never had consensual sex w/o money involved?) but "recreational sex" is 100% free. I really don't know how much you've been paying for sex, but a majority of people normally don't pay for it. So your whole basis of "if you can afford recreational sex, you should be able to afford an abortion" is total nonsense. You're commenting out of pure ignorance, on a subject you obviously know nothing @ all about. There is a name for people who do that. They're usually called "Fools".