Supreme Court would overturn Roe v.
Wade according to leak to Politico 7:02
(CNN) --
The United States Supreme Court appears poised to end its 49-year legal precedent protecting abortion rights nationwide if a majority of justices sign on to a draft opinion obtained and released. by Politico on Monday.
The disclosure of the draft ruling does not have an immediate effect on access to abortion.
If the apparent majority willing to overturn the landmark Roe v.
Wade is adamant, the precedent will not be overturned until the formal publication of the court's ruling, which is likely to come in June.
But the anticipated ruling in the draft written by Judge Samuel Alito would radically change access to abortion by giving states the ability to decide how aggressively they can restrict access to the procedure.
This is what you should know.
What is the draft opinion of the Court on abortion?
Politico obtained and published what it described as a draft Supreme Court majority opinion to overturn Roe v.
Wade.
It was written by conservative Justice Samuel Alito and circulated among the justices in February.
Notably, the opinion is a draft and the court's votes are not final until the formal opinions are officially published.
Drafts are often modified and changed based on input from the other judges.
In some cases, justices have switched sides before an opinion is issued, such as when Chief Justice John Roberts flipped and saved Obamacare in 2012.
advertising
The opinion in the case at hand, Dobbs v.
Jackson Women's Health Organization is challenging Mississippi's 15-week abortion ban.
The state had asked the justices to use the case to reverse Roe v.
Wade in 1973, and Planned Parenthood v.
Casey in 1992 defending Roe, who together guarantee the right to abortion before the fetus is viable.
Roe vs.
Wade: the case that decriminalized abortion in the United States
The Supreme Court would annul the right to abortion in the US 0:54
What does the draft immediately mean for abortion rights in the country?
Until a final opinion is issued, Roe v.
Wade is still the law in the country.
Judges can, and have in the past, change their votes after initial draft opinions are circulated.
But the revelation of where the court is likely headed will no doubt fuel what have been contentious fights in state legislatures over how to prepare for a ruling to overturn Roe.
Wade and put abortion at the forefront of national political discourse as the country awaits the final ruling.
What does the draft indicate where the court is headed on abortion?
The draft indicates that there were at least five votes to overturn Roe vs.
Wade when the justices met privately after oral arguments in the case, which were held in December 2021.
Under normal procedures, at the end of that week, the judges would have met in their private conference for a preliminary vote on the issue.
They would have gone around the table in order of seniority discussing their views on the case.
Roberts, as Chief Justice, would have gone first.
After that initial count, if the president was in the majority, he would assign the majority opinion.
Otherwise, the highest-ranking magistrate would have that responsibility.
After that, the drafts go between the judges' chambers.
In the past, justices have changed their votes, and sometimes a majority opinion eventually turns into a dissent.
It appears, based on the Politico report, that five justices were set to vote to overturn Roe vs.
Wade.
Roberts did not want to completely nullify Roe vs.
Wade, sources told CNN.
At the same time, he wants to uphold Mississippi law.
That would leave the four judges willing to join in an Alito opinion that overturns Roe entirely to be judges Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett.
'We need to stop tiptoeing around the word abortion': Human rights group says key to access is open dialogue
Guide to understanding US abortion law 4:31
What will happen to access to abortion if the court overturns Roe v.
Wade?
Access to abortion would depend on the state of the country in which you live.
In the draft opinion, Alito writes that the "Constitution makes no reference to abortion and no such right is implicitly protected by any constitutional provision."
And he added: "It is time to heed the Constitution and return the issue of abortion to the representatives of the people."
That would mean state legislatures could choose for themselves how much to restrict access to abortion.
Several states are prepared to implement extreme limits or outright bans on the procedure.
Some states have so-called trigger bans on their books, which would put abortion bans into effect as long as the Supreme Court issues a formal opinion overturning Roe.
Activity around the passage of restrictive laws in Republican states increased after the Dobbs case was reviewed and after oral arguments suggested the conservative wing may have had five voters to overturn Roe v.
Wade.
For example, Kentucky and other states passed 15-week abortion bans like the Mississippi law before the Supreme Court, while other state legislatures sought to ban abortion in the early stages of pregnancy.
At the other end of the spectrum, Democratic-led states are considering proposals to strengthen abortion rights.
The Connecticut legislature recently passed legislation to make abortions more readily available in the state and that would protect your abortion provider from other states' anti-abortion laws.
Similar proposals are being considered in New York, California and elsewhere.
Some purple states could take a middle-of-the-road approach, stopping short of banning abortion outright, but limiting earlier in pregnancy what was previously allowed below the line current precedent sets on viability, a point around 23 weeks of pregnancy. pregnancy.
US Supreme Court lets Texas abortion law continue, but says abortion-rights advocates can sue
Supreme Court upholds anti-abortion law in Texas 2:17
What would this mean for those seeking an abortion?
According to an analysis by a think tank that favors abortion rights, many people seeking an abortion would have to travel hundreds of miles.
The analysis, conducted last year by the Guttmacher Institute, which assumed 26 states would ultimately ban the procedure, anticipated that states where abortion access is maintained would host the closest clinics for millions of women who would see the procedure. prohibited in their states.
Those distances would mean that access to abortion could also depend on a person's socioeconomic status, given the costs that include not only the procedure itself, but also travel logistics, time off from work, childcare, and other costs. considerations.
There could also be collateral consequences, at least in the short term, for people seeking an abortion in more liberal states whose clinics see an increase in out-of-state patients.
The fallout from Texas' six-week ban, which the Supreme Court refused to block due to its novel enforcement mechanism, is a preview of the potential impacts.
Clinics in neighboring states saw waits for abortion appointments increase by days and weeks due to the rush of patients from Texas.
Another complicating factor is how the use of medical abortion has grown.
That method, a two-pill regimen, now accounts for more than half of the abortions obtained nationwide.
Many Republican state lawmakers are already exploring ways to limit access to medical abortion, but are still weighing how to go against abortion pills obtained from unregulated international sources.
-- CNN's Joan Biskupic and Ariane de Vogue contributed to this report.
AbortionSupreme Court