LANSING, Mich. -- Advocates for reproductive care in Michigan are echoing the Department of Justice's call for the U.S. Supreme Court to vacate the ruling, which allows Texas to ban most abortions after six weeks.

The plea comes as another case in Mississippi to be heard on Dec. 1 could be a turning point for abortion access in Michigan and elsewhere in the U.S.

If justices overturn the 1973 landmark Roe v. Wade decision, a pre-Roe ban on abortion in the Great Lakes State could go back into effect.

Angela Vasquez-Giroux, vice president of communications and marketing for Planned Parenthood Advocates of Michigan, noted research shows 2.2 million Michigan women could lose access to abortion.

"That only counts women or people who self identify as women," Vasquez-Giroux pointed out. "So there's certainly more folks who are trans, queer or non-binary who would also be losing access to abortion."

Michigan is one of nine states with these pre-Roe bans, and 12 other states have what are known as "trigger laws," which are laws banning abortions crafted to go into effect if there is a change in court precedent.

Vasquez-Giroux added there are disparities in access to abortion now, and if Roe is overturned, Black, brown and Indigenous residents, low-income Michiganders and trans residents will be disproportionately impacted.

"We also know that, from pre-Roe days, and even from Texas right now, that people who have resources and funding are still able to get the care they need," Vasquez-Giroux noted.

Of the 36 million women nationwide who could lose access without Roe, 5.3 million are Black, 5.7 million are Latino, more than a million are Asian and more than 300,000 are Indigenous.

This story was produced by Ms. Magazine
Broadcast version by Lily Böhlke for Florida News Connection/Public News Service

The leaked draft opinion signaling the Supreme Court's majority decision to overturn Roe v. Wade has sent shock waves across the U.S. When a final decision is issued before the end of the Supreme Court's term (likely in June), it will represent the biggest blow to women's constitutional rights in history.

In 1972, when abortion was still illegal throughout most of the country, 53 well-known U.S. women courageously declared "We Have Had Abortions" in the pages of the preview issue of Ms. magazine.

The Washington Post credited the petition with the "start of a powerful strategy in the U.S. abortion rights movement: ending the secrecy that had kept many women out of the fight." Executive editor Kathy Spillar told the Washington Post in a recent interview, "It made it acceptable to speak about it."

The next year, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that abortion was a fundamental right protected by the U.S. Constitution. This year, the Supreme Court appears poised to reverse this position. In this perilous time, Ms. is relaunching the petition-with the encouragement and support of some of the original 1972 signers. This year alone, the petition has garnered almost 7,000 signatories.

Below is an excerpt from recent Washington Post coverage of the 1972 petition, as well as the 2022 relaunch. It shows the power of activism and journalism, and how they can shape a movement.

    'We have had abortions': 1972 petition changed abortion rights movement

    The first Ms. petition marked the start of a powerful strategy in the U.S. abortion rights movement: ending the secrecy that had kept many women out of the fight.

    The effort has been replicated in recent years for the digital age, including the #ShoutYour Abortion Twitter challenge. Congresswomen have shared their own abortion stories on the House floor.

    But that first Ms. petition circulated when abortion was illegal in most of the country.

    Included in the Ms. issue were coupons for readers to fill out and mail in to add their names to the petition. Hundreds of the coupons poured in. Later that year, in its September issue, Ms. ran the petition again, this time with about 1,425 signatures.

    "It liberated and mobilized an army of women who had been keeping a secret," said [Suzanne Braun Levine], who joined Ms. as editor soon after the petition ran.

Read the full article here.

This story was produced by Ms. Magazine.


get more stories like this via email

Vice President Kamala Harris met with abortion providers from Missouri and other restrictive states Thursday to consider ways the Biden administration can protect and expand access to the full scope of reproductive health care.

Even before the leaked draft opinion indicating the Supreme Court intends to overturn Roe v. Wade, Missouri has had among the most barriers to accessing abortions. For instance, there is only one abortion clinic because of state regulations.

Harris said overturning Roe will be a major step backward for the U.S., and would open the door to further restricting fundamental rights.

"The right to privacy that forms the basis of Roe is the same right to privacy that protects the right to use contraception, and the right to marry the person you love, including a person of the same sex," Harris contended.

Last week Harris presided over the vote in the U.S. Senate on the Women's Reproductive Health Act, which would codify Roe v. Wade, but Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., and all the Republicans in the Chamber voted against it.

Michele Landau, board president of the Missouri Abortion Fund, said because states including Missouri already have been navigating barriers to care, there are some systems in place. She emphasized the National Network of Abortion Funds has more than 90 members across the country, already working to provide financial assistance, transportation, child care and logistical support.

"And we're all part of an ecosystem that we all work together," Landau pointed out. "I would just suggest that folks join their local abortion fund, lift up their local abortion funds and contact them to see how they can best assist in their work."

Landau added states which are more friendly to abortion rights have been making it clear, patients are welcome if they need to come and access care.

Illinois protects the right to abortions but is surrounded by states intending to restrict or ban abortion if and when Roe is overturned. She noted just last week, an abortion clinic in Tennessee, CHOICES, announced it would be opening a location in Carbondale, Illinois, not too far from the Missouri border.

As rhetoric grows about the future of federal abortion protections, new poll results show a majority of Minnesotans don't want the state to impose a ban.

Findings from the statewide poll of more than 800 voters, conducted by Hart Research Associates were issued by regional Planned Parenthood leaders.

Six in 10 registered voters said abortion should be fully legal or accessible in most situations. Another 65% said they would oppose new severe restrictions.

Hart Research analyst Kate Fridley said their outreach represents a range of Minnesotans.

"And this opinion on keeping abortion legal holds true across demographic backgrounds in Minnesota," said Fridley. "Majorities of voters - regardless of gender, age, race and region of the state - want to keep abortion legal, in all or most cases."

The results follow last week's leaked U.S. Supreme Court draft opinion, indicating the federal decision in the case 'Roe v. Wade' would be overturned. The court still has to cast a formal vote on the matter.

Minnesota is considered a safe-haven state. But if Republicans take full control of the Legislature this fall, some have said they would try to get proposed bans on future ballots.

President of Planned Parenthood Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota Action Fund Sarah Stoesz said banning abortion would not only run counter to the views of most Minnesotans - but would affect their candidate priorities when looking at this topic.

She noted majorities of voters polled said they're less likely to vote for a person who prioritizes tougher restrictions.

"We know that we need to act swiftly to elect leaders who will protect those rights," said Stoesz. "And that will also pass legislation that protects Minnesotans' rights and reproductive freedom for generations to come."

In addition to GOP candidates, anti-abortion groups like the Minnesota Family Council have embraced the court's draft opinion.

Should it become final, group leaders say it represents a path toward limiting abortions in the state, and suggest lawmakers who oppose such efforts won't be on the right side of history.