On June 24, the Supreme Court held in Dobbs v. Jackson that there was no constitutional right to an abortion, allowing individual states to restrict or ban abortions entirely and putting the reproductive health of millions in jeopardy.
The decision was not unexpected. On May 3, Politico published a leaked draft opinion written by Justice Samuel Alito, which was broadly similar to the final text of the Court’s decision. Nevertheless, Dobbs immediately provoked mass protests across the nation, including in Eugene, where 10 protesters were arrested Friday outside of Dove Medical Center, a pro-life pregnancy clinic that does not offer abortion services or referrals.
Dobbs overturned nearly five decades of precedent first established by Roe v. Wade in 1973, which asserted that the implicit constitutional right to privacy offered pregnant people substantial freedom over their own reproductive health decisions. Writing for the majority, Alito argued that abortion destroys “potential life,” thus making it different from other privacy rights.
The decision has sparked fears that other civil rights could be potentially jeopardized by the conservative court. In a concurring opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas argued that other Supreme Court decisions staked on similar legal precedents to Roe ought to be contested as well, including bans on anti-sodomy laws established in Lawrence v. Texas, the right to contraceptives established in Griswold v. Connecticut and the right to same-sex marriage established in Obergefell v. Hodges.
The Court’s decision largely leaves control of abortion policy to the individual states. This will likely lead to a patchwork set of laws where abortion would be legal in some states and illegal or heavily restricted in others. Eleven states have already banned or severely limited abortion, while twelve more appear poised to do so in the coming weeks, according to NPR. Gubernatorial and legislative races in the November midterm elections could prove decisive in determining whether closely divided states will enact abortion bans –– and Democrats and Republicans are already fundraising off of the decision’s political implications.
Oregon has a liberal record on abortion rights. 65 percent of Oregon voters opted to maintain public funding for abortion in a 2018 referendum, and the right to abortion is enshrined in state law. Public bodies in Oregon cannot interfere with abortions or abortion-related services sought out by consenting individuals.
This doesn’t mean that Oregon won’t be impacted, however. According to the Guttmacher Institute, Oregon is expected to see a 234% increase in out-of-state patients seeking abortion services, particularly from neighboring Idaho. Likewise, Oregon’s competitive gubernatoriala race could prove crucial –– Republican candidate Christine Drazan praised the ruling in a June 24 statement, promising to “stand up for life” by vetoing pro-choice legislation.
When Roe v. Wade was decided, the Supreme Court claimed that “[w]e need not resolve the difficult question of when life begins.” Dobbs, on the other hand, argues that abortion “destroys… the life of a potential human being.” Nearly five decades later, the Court seems to have changed its mind.
