Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/21pdf/19-1392_6j37.pdf/19-1392_6j37.pdf
Page Number: 183.0

36  DOBBS v. JACKSON WOMEN’S HEALTH ORGANIZATION 

BREYER, SOTOMAYOR, and KAGAN, JJ., dissenting 

her to incur, before the Fourteenth Amendment’s protection
of life kicks in?  Suppose a patient with pulmonary hyper-
tension  has  a  30-to-50  percent  risk  of  dying  with  ongoing 
pregnancy; is that enough?  And short of death, how much 
illness  or  injury  can  the  State  require  her  to  accept,  con-
sistent  with  the  Amendment’s  protection  of  liberty  and
equality?  Further, the Court may face questions about the
application  of  abortion  regulations  to  medical  care  most
people view as quite different from abortion.  What about 
the morning-after pill?  IUDs?  In vitro fertilization?  And 
how about the use of dilation and evacuation or medication 
for  miscarriage  management?  See  generally  L.  Harris, 
Navigating  Loss  of  Abortion  Services—A  Large  Academic 
Medical Center Prepares for the Overturn of Roe v. Wade, 
386 New England J. Med. 2061 (2022).12 

Finally, the majority’s ruling today invites a host of ques-
tions about interstate conflicts.  See supra, at 3; see gener-
ally D. Cohen, G. Donley, & R. Rebouché, The New Abortion
Battleground,  123  Colum.  L. Rev.  (forthcoming  2023), 
https://ssrn.com/abstract=4032931.  Can a State bar women 
from traveling to another State to obtain an abortion?  Can 
a State prohibit advertising out-of-state abortions or help-
ing women get to out-of-state providers?  Can a State inter-

—————— 

12 To take just the last, most  medical treatments for miscarriage are 
identical to those used in abortions.  See Kaiser Family Foundation (Kai-
ser),  G.  Weigel,  L.  Sobel,  &  A.  Salganicoff,  Understanding  Pregnancy
Loss  in  the  Context  of  Abortion  Restrictions  and  Fetal  Harm  Laws 
(Dec.  4,  2019),  https://www.kff.org/womens-health-policy/issue-brief/
understanding-pregnancy-loss-in-the-context-of-abortion-restrictions-and-
fetal-harm-laws/.    Blanket  restrictions  on  “abortion”  procedures  and 
medications therefore may be understood to deprive women of effective 
treatment for miscarriages, which occur in about 10 to 30 percent of preg-
nancies.    See  Health  Affairs,  J.  Strasser,  C.  Chen,  S.  Rosenbaum,  E.  
Schenk, & E. Dewhurst, Penalizing Abortion Providers Will Have Ripple
Effects Across Pregnancy Care (May 3, 2022), https://www.healthaffairs.
org/do/10.1377/forefront.20220503.129912/.