TWBA Pt 2 (Rough Draft)

 

DECLARTION OF PURPOSE

ON the 22^nd of January 1973 the Supreme Court of the United States of America issued a 7-2 decision in favor of Roe v. Wade, with Justice Harry Blackmun writing the majority opinion, in which it was held that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment protects a woman’s qualified right to terminate a pregnancy. (Roe v. Wade, 1973)

The Court even emphasized that balancing a woman’s rights to privacy with the interest of the state’s is essential for maternal health and fetal life. 

In 1992, the court would reaffirm the central holdings of Roe v. Wade in the case of Planned Parenthood v. Casey replacing the trimester framework with the “undue burden” standard, which gave states more leeway in terms of authority before fetal viability. (Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 1992) Furthermore, in the 2007 court case of Gonzales v. Carhart (Gonzales v. Carhart, 2007) and the 2016 case of Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt the court upheld certain federal and state restrictions while striking down others that imposed substantial obstacles. (WHOLE WOMAN'S HEALTH et al. v. HELLERSTEDT, 2016)

54 years later, in the 2022 court case of Dobbs v. Jackson Woman’s Health Organization The United States Supreme Court in a 6-3 decision, ruled that the constitution does not confer a right to abortion. Hence sending the authority to regulate abortion to individual states, creating a patchwork of access across the United States.  The majority opinion arguing abortion was not “deeply rooted in the nation's history and tradition” and therefore not considered a protected right.  (Supreme Court of The United States, 2022)

For in the wake of Dobbs, the consequences of this return to state authority have not been theoretical; they have been lived, documented, and severe.

Yet we must answer another question: Are we doing what’s best for a more perfect union? Or is the human male benefiting itself without consequence or fear?

As of March 11, 2026, eleven states have implemented complete abortion bans. Of these eleven, eight enforce bans with no exceptions for rape or incest, creating some of the strictest reproductive restrictions in the nation.

In the state of South Carolina, lawmakers have accelerated efforts toward a near—total ban. Senate Bill 1095 titled “Unborn Child Protection Act” (South Carolina State Reps Cash, 2026), propose replacing the state’s current 6 – week ban with a near- total ban once pregnancy is clinically diagnosable (~3 - 4 weeks).

The bill eliminates all exceptions for rape, incest, and fatal fetal anomalies. The only remaining exception being a medical emergency to prevent death or irreversible impairment.

Under this proposal, physicians who provide abortion care could face felony charges carrying penalties of up to twenty years in prison. Pregnant women themselves could face up to two years of incarceration. At the same time, medications such mifepristone and misoprostol have been reclassified as Schedule IV controlled substances, further restricting access to standard reproductive and miscarriage care.

Supporters of the bill have framed these measures as protecting “the right to life,” even as the legislation expands criminal penalties and narrows medical discretion.

In the state of North Carolina, lawmakers have introduced House Bill 1232 titled “Life at Fertilization” (Kidwell, 2026) a constitutional amendment.

Under the proposed bill it declares a fertilized egg as a “full legal person” and grants legal protection from the moment of fertilization to the moment of natural death.

It, furthermore, criminalizes abortion or any act that attempts to “destroy” the life of a fertilized egg as attempted or first- degree murder and authorizes deadly force to defend the “life” of a fertilized egg.

In the State of Idaho, they adopted a 6-week Texas style ban (Idaho, 2022) with civil penalties. But in the wake of this bill adoption, it has left many of its citizens seeking out of state care, some even crossing state lines to Oregon.

Where clinics saw a surge of out of state patients even before the Dobbs decision all the while as Oregon Abortion Advocates braced for the fallout following Idaho’s Ban. (Zielinski, 2022)

Nationally, the consequences have extended beyond state borders, as a 2026 economic inquiry study has found that states with total bans saw a 1.6% increase in birth rates (2023).

Along with WIC participation rising to 4.3% among postpartum women and a 2.1% increase among formula – fed infants which resulted in $6.9 million in WIC costs in 2023. (Wiley, 2026)

Yet Dobbs has lit the distress signals of the nation’s healthcare infrastructure, as Clinicians in ban states report double the moral distress of peers elsewhere.  All the while patients experience; Fear of Pregnancy, Requests of Sterilization, and Avoidance of medical care.

Their also has been a 6% increase in suicide rates among women in correlation to Abortion Restrictions.

It is only in Alabama where a psychiatric exemption is included in its total ban. (Attride, 2026)