During his previous term, former president Donald Trump supported a House bill for a national abortion ban at 20 weeks, prohibited Title X grantees from providing or referring patients for abortions and nominated three anti-abortion justices to the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) who later overturned Roe V. Wade. After he secured the 47th presidency on Nov. 5, political analysts and advocates for abortion have speculated as to what a second Trump term means for abortion access in the United States. Abortion access should receive federal protection, and Trump’s flippant stance on the matter poses a critical threat to women’s reproductive rights.
Women will have abortions whether they are legally protected or not. According to the National Institute of Health, 40% of American women seek abortions due to financial limitations. Other reasons include the pregnancy as the result of rape or incest, posing a threat to the mother’s health and domestic issues, among others. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists estimates that before Roe V. Wade, approximately 1.2 million American women got illegal abortions every year, with as many as 5,000 women dying due to complications from illegal abortions. Prohibiting abortion will not make it stop, but legal protection helps ensure the safety of women who will inevitably seek them out.
Many Americans support abortion rights, even in red states. A 2024 Pew Research public opinion poll found that 63% of Americans believe abortion should be legal. The poll also found that two thirds of Americans were opposed to the Dobbs v. Jackson decision which overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022. This election cycle, Arizona, Missouri, Montana and Nevada, voted to pass measures that restored, protected, or expanded rights to abortion access in their states, despite their electoral votes going to Trump.
Still, 21 states have either banned or posed restrictions on reproductive services following the overturn of Roe v. Wade. Texas, for example, enacted some of the strictest abortion laws in the country, prohibiting abortion from the moment of fertilization unless the patient has “a life-threatening physical condition aggravated by, caused by, or arising from a pregnancy” with no exceptions for rape or incest.
The Texas legislation classifies performing an abortion as a first or second degree felony, punishable by a minimum $100,000 fine, and the revocation of a medical license. Consequently, NBC reported that two Texas women have died after receiving delayed miscarriage care due to the state’s abortion ban. In addition to penalizing the doctors who perform abortions, Trump has voiced support for punitive actions to be taken for those who receive abortion care. When asked what should happen to women who seek out illegal abortions during an MSNBC Town Hall, Trump said “there has to be some form of punishment.”
On Oct. 1, Trump wrote on X, “I would not support a federal abortion ban, under any circumstances, and would, in fact, veto it because it is up to the states.” However, in a Mar. 19 WBAC interview, Trump said that he was not opposed to a federal abortion ban at fifteen weeks. “The number of weeks now, people are agreeing on fifteen, and I’m thinking in terms of that, and it’ll come out to something that’s very reasonable,” he said. His ever changing stance on the matter makes it difficult to discern how concrete the threat of a national abortion ban is, but lawmakers on a state level in places like Texas and Florida are less inconsistent.
In addition to limiting abortion care, a second Trump presidency will likely hinder access to contraception. Like his stance on abortion, Trump’s remarks on contraception have been conflicting. On the same day, in two different interviews, he said that he was “looking at” contraception restrictions. Hours later, he said he would “never advocate” for banning birth control. Clearly though, actions speak louder than his words. During the first year of his presidency, federal agencies weakened the Affordable Care Act’s contraceptive mandate, which allowed employers to deny birth control coverage to employees on the basis of religious or moral objection.
Access to reproductive services, whether in the form of contraception or abortion, should be managed at the federal level in order to ensure consistency in healthcare access across the country. The current legality and lack of accessibility for these services forces women in red states to travel long distances to be able to access reproductive healthcare, which serves to disproportionately impact low income individuals who do not have the ability to take the time off of work or the resources to travel. It also instills fear of punishment or retaliation. Making reproductive rights a federal issue is necessary in order to ensure equitable access to reproductive services for all women, regardless of their geographic location, and ensure that their reproductive rights are not dependent on state borders or shifting political climates.
Editor-in-Chief: Jordan Premmer, Chief Copy Editor: Sophia McCrackin, Managing Editor: Jordan DelFiugo, Opinion Editor: Dakota Duran, Scene Editor: Elina Graham
