The State of the Pro-life Movement in the States

 By John Stonestreet and Timothy D. Padgett - Posted at Breakpoint:

Two years ago, pro-lifers celebrated when Roe v. Wade was finally overturned. Since 1973, this draconian ruling of the Supreme Court had silenced debate, radicalized pro-abortionists, and stripped authority from states to govern themselves. The Dobbs decision declared that there was no constitutional right to abortion and thus returned power to the states to determine policy.

This decision continues to spawn elation and confusion. The pro-life movement had achieved one of its most significant goals, but what would be its impact on a state-by-state basis? And what about the movement’s ultimate goal, to make abortion not only illegal, but unthinkable?

To say we have learned a lot in the last two years is an understatement. Since Dobbs, blue states have doubled down and radicalized abortion laws, while red states have seen mixed results. Currently, 14 states have near total bans, mostly due to “trigger laws,” while nine have no restrictions at all. In state after state, ballot initiatives to limit or prohibit abortion have mostly failed. Politically, Democrats have moved from “safe, legal, and rare” to a “shout your abortion” all-in enthusiasm. And Republicans have become the party of choice, though many politicians remain staunchly pro-life. Across the parties and the nation, the biggest challenge is the now all-but-unregulated abortion pill.

All of which means that there is a lot riding on the ballot initiatives that will be put to voters in 10 states this November. Some blue states, echoing UK laws, are even seeking to punish pro-lifers. A Colorado ballot initiative would, if passed, not only secure taxpayer funding for abortion, but also lay groundwork for future legal repercussions against pro-lifers. As the Denver Post put it:

Initiative 89 would elevate the right to abortion to the Colorado Constitution by prohibiting the government from denying, impeding or discriminating against a person’s ability to exercise that right. The initiative would also clear the way for state-funded insurance, such as Medicaid, to cover abortion services, repealing another provision of the state constitution that prohibits the use of public funds to pay for abortion.

That language of “prohibiting the government from denying, impeding or discriminating against a person’s ability to exercise that right” is so open-ended that a zealous prosecutor could easily drive a truck through it… right over pro-lifers’ First Amendment rights.

Continue here.