The Rise and Fall of a Reproductive Right: Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization
Although the phrase “Post-Roe Era” is still used by those who want to underscore the loss wrought last June by Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, it is only a matter of time before the present state of reproductive constitutionalism solidifies into the more authoritarian “Dobbs Era.” In these early days of transition, states are still figuring out what they want the legal status of abortion to be, ever since Dobbs overruled both Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, thus tossing the issue of abortion’s legality back to the states for resolution. In Justice Alito’s words, “It is time to heed the Constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people’s elected representatives.”
So, should what was formerly regarded as a legal medical procedure remain so? Should it be legal and funded? Or should legal abortion migrate from a state’s health regulations to the criminal code and be illegal? Or illegal with exceptions? Or illegal with extraterritorial reach? And who should bear the burden of the illegality? Pregnant women, their physicians, and anyone who aids or assists them?
Family Law | Health Law and Policy | Law | Women's Health
The Rise and Fall of a Reproductive Right: Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization,
Fam. L. Q.
Available at: https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/faculty_scholarship/3912