Use these links to jump to different sections:
- Would the Supreme Court Overturn Roe v. Wade?
- What Happens if Roe is Overturned?
- Cases That Upheld Roe
- Does a "Conservative Majority" Put Roe in Jeopardy?
- Is Roe v. Wade Unconstitutional?
Roe v. Wade is arguably one of the most famous Supreme Court cases of all time. It established a woman's right to abortion as a matter of privacy and has remained at the forefront of American politics for decades. Supporters of the decision hold it up as a beacon for women's independence and equality. Critics view it as an overreach by the Supreme Court. As states continue passing restrictions on abortion, many wonder: Could Roe v. Wade be overturned?
Like most things in the law, the answer to this question isn't exactly a simple one.
The Court cannot return to the same case and change its mind. And the legal doctrine of stare decisis — Latin for "let the decision stand"— means later members of the Court are reluctant to specifically overturn prior rulings. That said, the principles of stare decisis are not legally binding or uniformly enforced. This is illustrated by the fact that recent cases on reproductive rights have chipped away at the rights recognized in Roe.
A complete overturn of Roe v. Wade is unlikely because of stare decisis. But abortion rights could be diminished through subsequent decisions. That's why so many states have continued to pass laws that contradict Roe. If those laws are challenged all the way up to the Supreme Court, it will have to revisit the issue and decide how far the privacy rights established in Roe can extend.
In March 2020, the Court heard arguments in June Medical Services v. Gee, a Louisiana case that examined a similar law to that of Whole Women's Health v. Hellerstedt (discussion below). It is unlikely that June Medical Services will lead to an overturn of Roe. But it could narrow Roe's protections by preventing abortion providers from filing lawsuits on behalf of their patients. The Court's opinion is expected by summer.
Before 1973, abortion laws across the country varied widely. Some states had banned all abortions, while others had legalized them in certain circumstances. In determining that a Texas abortion statute violated the Constitution, Roe v. Wade established a legal framework for abortion regulations at the federal level. So, without Roe, it could once again be up to the states to decide how to regulate abortion.
If June Medical Services overturns Roe in 2020, eight states have "trigger laws" in place that would immediately ban all or nearly all abortions: Arkansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, North Dakota, Tennessee, and South Dakota.
Abortion would be legal and generally available in 13 states:
- New York
- Rhode Island
Eight states have abortion bans that haven't been enforced since the 1973 decision - but they could start applying them again in the absence of Roe:
- New Mexico
- West Virginia
A handful of states passed restrictions post-Roe that are currently considered unconstitutional. How they would hold up depends on what new framework the Supreme Court established to replace Roe. Others have expressed an intent to restrict abortion to the maximum extent permitted by any new Supreme Court rulings on the subject.
Meanwhile, five states and the District of Columbia do not have their own rules on abortion. All of this to say: if Roe is overturned, abortion regulation in the United States will likely become even more complex than they are now.
Roe v. Wade was previously upheld in two prominent cases: Planned Parenthood v. Casey and Whole Women's Health v. Herllerstedt.
In 1992, the Court in Planned Parenthood v. Casey affirmed the abortion right established by Roe as well as the states' right to restrict abortions after a certain point in pregnancy. The justices found that while states have a "legitimate interest" in ensuring abortion services are safe, they cannot place a "substantial obstacle" in the path of someone seeking those services.
The Court also reinforced the idea that "the ability of women to participate equally in the economic and social life" of the United States has been increased by the ability to control their reproductive lives established in Roe.
In 2016, the Supreme Court once again left the rights established by Roe in place when it decided Whole Women's Health v. Hellerstedt. In this case, a Texas abortion statute required doctors who provided abortions to have admitting privileges at a hospital no more than 30 miles away from the clinic. In other words, they needed to be able to have their patients admitted to the hospital without approval from another doctor. The law also required abortion clinics to meet the same standards as same-day surgery centers.
After the admitting privileges requirement went into effect, the number of facilities able to provide abortion services in the state dropped from around 40 to around 20.
The Supreme Court found that both provisions of the Texas law at issue placed "substantial obstacles" in the way of women seeking an abortion. And therefore, they violated the Constitution.
Many people became especially concerned about the fate of Roe v. Wade when Justice Brett Kavanaugh was confirmed to the Supreme Court in 2018. On the surface, Kavanaugh's confirmation shifted the Court's political makeup more to the conservative side. Plus, President Donald Trump repeatedly said he nominated Kavanaugh because he thought he would overturn Roe. But, statements by Kavanaugh suggest otherwise.
During his confirmation hearings, Justice Kavanaugh reportedly told Senator Susan Collins that the Supreme Court's decisions "become part of our legal framework with the passage of time." He also said honoring prior Supreme Court decisions is essential to maintaining public confidence in the Court.
President Trump is also not the first Commander-In-Chief to want Roe v. Wade challenged. Other presidents have tried to undermine the case for decades by nominating Supreme Court Justices they thought might disagree with it. But, so far, Roe has withstood these challenges. For example, Justices Sandra Day O'Connor, David Souter, and Anthony Kennedy were all nominated by Republican presidents. And all three voted to uphold Roe in Planned Parenthood v. Casey.
To answer this question, first, we have to take a quick look at the history of the Supreme Court. The Constitution established the Supreme Court but didn't explicitly grant the power to determine whether state and federal laws are constitutional. That power came about in 1803 when the Supreme Court decided Marbury v. Madison. That case was the first time the Supreme Court found an act of Congress violated the Constitution.
Ever since, it's been up to the Supreme Court to decide what is or isn't constitutional.
Can the Supreme Court get things wrong? Sure. Several decisions from the Court's early history would not hold up in today's society. But the Supreme Court doesn't generally invalidate its own decisions - it just makes new ones.
A recent poll showed that the issue is much more complicated than the loudest voices in the debate make it seem: 77% of those surveyed were against an overturn of Roe v. Wade. But, within that, there are still a lot of caveats. Some wish to see abortion remain legal but be regulated differently. Others want the Roe framework to stay as-is.
Although a complete overturn of Roe v. Wade is unlikely, abortion regulation in the United States is by no means settled at this point. Those opposed to abortion will continue to challenge Roe, and some of those challenges will find their way to the Supreme Court. FindLaw's Supreme Court blog provides up-to-date coverage on new cases headed for the Supreme Court, as well as the Court's decisions.