Two Years Since Dobbs: A lawyer explains what we might lose next

Smriti Krishnan, Legislative Counsel at the National Council of Jewish Women, explains what other fundamental rights are under attack from the forces that brought down Roe. As heard on The State of Belief June 22, 2024.
FULL EPISODE: • Faith in Choice: Two Y...
SUBSCRIBE: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast...
TRANSCRIPT:
We had a variety of lawsuits in the decades when Roe was, having that that constitutional right to abortion. So between 1973 and 2022, there were plenty of cases about reproductive health care and access to reproductive health care. But now we are in a different legal landscape. We are what some folks refer to as a post-Roe landscape. I just call it a different landscape because it's just a landscape where there's no longer a federal constitutional right to abortion.
And so when we're thinking about the legal challenges that are being mounted, one, we're seeing constitutional challenges that are rooted in federal in the federal Constitution. We are also seeing challenges rooted in state constitutional challenges and, of course, state laws themselves, as you were mentioning - when there is a civil penalty or when there is a criminal penalty, how does that play out?
So after the Dobbs ruling - we're going to be two years out on June 24th - how is that playing out in the courts? How are the courts deciding in this new landscape where there is no federal constitutional right? What does it look like as states are taking up this jurisprudence and states are defining the scope and contours of abortion access individually, state by state by state. And so when we're talking about the impact of work, it's something to track. It's something to keep in mind.
We're also tracking other policies like fetal personhood. What implication does that have for abortion access work? So there are a variety of policies to track in this new legal landscape. And we're seeing those challenges play out.
So as the stage is being set for the decades of work, we need to be looking out for the arguments that can be challenged. We need to be looking at the successful arguments, and above all, when we're thinking about legal challenges, when we're thinking about how this plays out in a public manner, we should always, always center the people most impacted. Are the plaintiffs in a legal challenge going to be kept safe? Do they want to share their names? Do they want to share their stories with their communities? Because there are real repercussions. You know, it's their story. It's their life. And when you are a plaintiff in a lawsuit, the trajectory of your life can change forever. And so that's something we always want to make sure to do, is center the people most impacted and keep their safety, keep their story, keep their faith, and keep their autonomy at the forefront of our minds.