Advocates Persist and Work to Advance Abortion Access Year After Dobbs Ruling

Advocates Persist and Work to Advance Abortion Access Year After Dobbs Ruling

The National Health Law Program’s Cat Duffy, PHD, released the following statement on the abortion landscape in the United States one year after the Dobbs decision.

“Over the last year, abortion access has been under constant assault in the United States, with at least 14 states banning all or nearly all abortion access. While many have been shocked and frightened by the rapid onset of extreme abortion bans following the ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, advocates have long known that the protections of Roe v. Wade were never enough for the millions who lived in states where the right to abortion existed in name only. Barriers to care, often rooted in systemic inequities, have made abortion inaccessible for millions, particularly people with low incomes, people in rural communities, Black, Indigenous, and People of color, LGBTQ folks, and people with disabilities.

“Despite the relentless attacks, there have been notable victories in states across the country as passionate advocates strive to safeguard and enhance the availability of abortion. Throughout the past year, numerous states have addressed abortion coverage in their legislative sessions, recognizing its pivotal role in ensuring fair and equal access. To achieve that, these states have taken significant steps, such as implementing new coverage requirements and reducing financial barriers. We cheer these states for prioritizing policies that enhance accessibility, with the ultimate goal of creating an inclusive abortion environment where individuals can seek care regardless of their geographical location or financial means.”

The National Health Law Program works at every level to protect access to the full range of essential health services, including abortion, in Medicaid, the Affordable Care Act (ACA) Marketplaces, and private insurance. NHeLP’s Cat Duffy is an expert on abortion laws and policy and can provide keen insights into the legal, policy, and social impacts of the Dobbs ruling. 

Related Content