An amendment to the Alabama Constitution, which was enacted in 2018, declares that “it is the public policy of this state to recognize and support the sanctity of unborn life and the rights of unborn children, including the right to life,” and “to ensure the protection of the rights of the unborn child in all manners and measures lawful and appropriate.” The provision also states that “[n]othing in this constitution secures or protects a right to abortion or requires the funding of an abortion.”

A statute that pre-dates Roe prohibits abortion except when necessary to preserve the mother’s life or health. Ala. Code § 13A-13-7. In 2019, Alabama enacted the Human Life Protection Act, which makes it illegal to provide abortions except “to prevent a serious health risk to the unborn child’s mother.” Ala. Code § 26-23H-4. This statute is enforceable in light of Dobbs.

In 2024 the Alabama Supreme Court expanded the definition of what is considered a child under the Human Life Protection Act to include frozen embryos created through IVF. LePage v. Ctr. for Reprod. Med., P.C., No. SC-2022-0515, 2024 Ala. LEXIS 60 (Ala., Feb. 16, 2024).

The Alaska Supreme Court has ruled that the right to an abortion is a fundamental right protected by the Alaska Constitution. Valley Hosp. Ass’n v. Mat-Su Coalition for Choice, 948 P.2d 963, 968-69 (Alaska 1997). There is no gestational limit on abortion in Alaska. Alaska Stat. § 18.16.010. Abortion rights will continue in Alaska, absent the enactment of a state constitutional amendment stating there is no abortion right.

In August 2025, the Alaska Medical Board released a statement encouraging Alaskans to lobby for restricting abortion and disavowing late-term abortions.

A statute that pre-dates Roe prohibits abortion except to save the mother’s life. Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-3603 (formerly Ariz. Rev. Stat. para. 243-44 (1901)). This statute was held unconstitutional in light of Roe. Nelson v. Planned Parenthood Ctr., 19 Ariz. App. 142, 505 P.2d 580 (Ct. App., Div. Two 1973). The statute is once again before the court. The ACLJ has submitted an amicus brief requesting the court reverse its former judgment and lift the injunction from the statute so it can be enforced. Planned Parenthood Arizona, Inc., v. Mayes. 

A statute enacted in 2012 that bans abortion of a fetus of at least 20 weeks of age, except in a medical emergency, has been enjoined. Isaacson v. Horne, 716 F.3d 1213 (9th Cir. 2013). 

Effective September 2022, Arizona enacted a new ban on most abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy. A.R.S. § 36-2322. 

In April 2024 the Arizona Supreme Court determined that the plain language of Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 36-2322 was ambiguous as to whether it repealed or restricted Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-3603 and looking at the legislative history and intent behind Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 36-2322, including the construction provision, the Court concluded that the legislature did not intend to create an independent statutory right to abortion or to repeal the abortion ban in Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-3603. The Court also held that there was no federal constitutional abortion right overriding the state ban, and Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-3603 is now enforceable. Planned Parenthood Ariz., Inc. v. Mayes, 545 P.3d 892 (Ariz. 2024).

A pro-abortion ballot initiative in 2024 enshrined a right to abortion under the Arizona Constitution. Abortion is legal until fetal viability, after which it is permitted only if “necessary to protect the life or health of the mother.”

In February, a Maricopa County court blocked laws that would ban abortions for genetic abnormalities, using telemedicine for medication abortions, and a 24-hour waiting period and informed consent (reciting state-mandated information and requiring an ultrasound). The court blocked it under the 2024 constitutional amendment.

Amendment 68, § 2 of the Arkansas Constitution, enacted in 1988, states that “[t]he policy of Arkansas is to protect the life of every unborn child from conception until birth, to the extent permitted by the Federal Constitution.” Arkansas’ pre-Roe broad prohibition of abortion (Ark. Code Ann. § 5-61-102) is still on the books but has been enjoined from being enforced against physicians. Smith v. Bentley, 493 F. Supp. 916 (W.D. Ark. 1980). The state can seek to have the injunction lifted in light of Dobbs.

In 2019, Arkansas enacted the Human Life Protection Act, which bans abortion “except to save the life of a pregnant woman in a medical emergency.” Ark. Code Ann. §§ 5-61-301 et seq. The Act has taken effect in light of the Dobbs decision. 2019 Ark. Acts 180, § 2.

In California, there is a statutory right and, as of the November 2022 election, a constitutional right to an abortion. The state will not deny or interfere with that right except in limited circumstances, such as after viability or when the abortion is performed by someone who is not an authorized health care provider. Abortion is permitted when necessary to protect the life or health of the woman. Calif. Health & Safety Code § 123462. The right to an abortion will remain in California, absent legislative changes. 

In September 2022, California enacted AB 2223. This law prevents coroners from investigating deaths “related to or following known or suspected self-induced or criminal abortion,” including deaths of babies during the “perinatal” period – which is up to 28 days after birth. Effectively, this law legalizes some forms of infanticide.

In September 2025, California laws went into effect shielding attorneys promoting abortion in other states from discipline by the State Bar (AB 1525) and allowing health insurance coverage and anonymous prescription of abortion pills (AB 260). 

In Colorado, legislation passed in 2022 sets forth a statutory right to an abortion through all nine months of pregnancy. A ballot initiative (Number 56) to prohibit most abortions in Colorado did not collect enough signatures. 

Attempts by the state to pass legislation (SB23-190) subjecting health care providers to discipline for unprofessional conduct in prescribing medication with the intent to reverse a chemical abortion were permanently blocked, with Colorado paying $700,000 in attorneys’ fees following the ruling. The existing statutory abortion right in Colorado will remain, absent legislative changes.

A pro-abortion ballot initiative passed in 2024 enumerated a right to abortion in the Colorado Constitution and repealed a previous constitutional amendment that prohibited the use of state funds to provide abortion coverage.

In Connecticut, state law provides that “[t]he decision to terminate a pregnancy prior to the viability of the fetus shall be solely that of the pregnant woman in consultation with her physician,” and “[n]o abortion may be performed upon a pregnant woman after viability of the fetus except when necessary to preserve the life or health of the pregnant woman.” Conn. Gen. Stat. § 19a602(a)-(b). The right to an abortion will remain in Connecticut, absent legislative changes.

In 2025, Connecticut passed legislation to provide contraceptives and other “pregnancy-related care” without parental consent. SJR 35 was also introduced in 2025 to propose a state constitutional amendment to include within sex discrimination any discrimination “based on pregnancy, including preventing, initiating, continuing, or terminating a pregnancy . . . .”

In Delaware, there is a statutory right to an abortion before viability, which will continue, absent legislative changes. Del. Code, Title 24, § 1790(a). After viability, abortion is prohibited unless necessary for the health or life of the mother “or in the event of a fetal anomaly for which there is not a reasonable likelihood of the fetus’s sustained survival outside the uterus without extraordinary medical measures.”

In March 2025, S.B. 5 passed the Delaware Senate. This bill would amend Article I of the Delaware Constitution to include “a fundamental right to reproductive freedom.”

In the District of Columbia, there is a statutory right to abortion, and that right is not limited to pre-viability. D.C. Code § 2-1401.06. The District of Columbia is unique, as it is federal land and, thus, subject to the oversight of the federal government. As such, abortion within the District of Columbia can be regulated by Congress. U.S. Const. art. I, § 8, cl. 17.

The Supreme Court of Florida has held that the right of privacy contained in Article I, Section 23 of the state constitution is implicated by abortion restrictions, and such restrictions are subject to strict scrutiny and are presumptively unconstitutional. Gainesville Woman Care, LLC v. State, 210 So. 3d 1243 (Fla. 2017); N. Fla. Women’s Health & Counseling Servs., Inc. v. Florida, 866 So. 2d 612 (Fla. 2003); In re T.W., 551 So. 2d 1186 (Fla. 1989).

In 2022, Florida enacted a ban on abortions after 15 weeks (with a few exceptions), which was scheduled to take effect in July 2022. Fla. Stat. § 390.0111. Challenges to the 15-week ban have been accepted for review by Florida’s Supreme Court. In April 2023, Florida also enacted the Heartbeat Protection Act, which is more restrictive, prohibiting abortions beyond 6 weeks. In April 2024 the Florida Supreme Court held that both the 15-week and 6-week abortion bans could take effect. Planned Parenthood v. State, 384 So. 3d 67 (Fla. 2024).

A 2024 ballot initiative to create a right to abortion up to and after viability when necessary to safeguard pregnant women’s health was rejected by Florida voters. In January 2026, the Florida House of Representatives passed House Bill 289 (2026), expanding the Wrongful Death Act to encompass fetuses.

Other abortion bills proposed include House Bill 663 (2026), which would allow families to sue over the performance over abortions; House Bill 681 (2026), which would shift the ban on abortions from 6 weeks to only taking effect in a pregnancy’s third trimester; and House Bill 1151 (2026), which would attempt to invalidate all previous pro-life legislation immediately upon passage.

In 2019, a Georgia statute was enacted that bans abortion after there is a detectable fetal heartbeat, except in a few specific circumstances. Ga. Code Ann. § 16-12-141. Enforcement of these provisions was enjoined. SisterSong Women of Color Reproductive Justice Collective v. Kemp, 472 F. Supp. 3d 1297 (N.D. Ga. 2020).

In October 2023, the Georgia Supreme Court reversed the lower court injunction and allowed Ga. Code Ann. § 16-12-141, which bans abortion after a fetal heartbeat is detected, to take effect. State v. SisterSong Women of Color Reprod. Just. Collective, 894 S.E.2d 1 (Ga. 2023). In 2025, the Georgia Supreme Court vacated the trial court’s order and remanded the case to the trial court for reconsideration.

In Hawaii, there is a statutory right to an abortion before viability and at any time to protect the life or health of the mother. Haw. Rev. Stat. § 453-16(c). The state decriminalized abortion before Roe. In 2025, a federal district court judge in Hawaii ruled that FDA restrictions on access to abortion medication violated the law.

In 2020, Idaho enacted a statute that bans abortions with a few exceptions. Idaho Code § 18-622. The statute will take effect 30 days after the issuance of the judgment in Dobbs. Idaho enacted a ban on abortions where a fetal heartbeat is detected, with certain exceptions (S.B. 1309). 

The state’s abortion restrictions withstood three challenges, as Idaho’s Supreme Court upheld the laws in January 2023.

In April 2023, the state passed legislation making it illegal to help a minor get an out-of-state abortion. Although a preliminary injunction in late 2023 temporarily blocked the law from taking effect, a subsequent ruling from the Ninth Circuit reversed and allowed enforcement of most of the statute.

The Biden Administration sued Idaho to allow abortions in emergency cases, and the Supreme Court, on June 27, 2024, dismissed the appeal from Idaho and reinstated the lower court’s ruling that paused the state’s abortion ban until a final judgment is made. In 2025, the case was dismissed by the Ninth Circuit.

In February 2026, a federal judge denied the Idaho Board of Medicine’s motion for summary judgment in a lawsuit against Idaho’s abortion ban in Seyb v. Members of the Idaho Bd. of Med., 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 29489 *30 (D. Idaho Feb. 9, 2026).

In 2013, the Supreme Court of Illinois held that there is a constitutional right to abortion. Hope Clinic for Women, Ltd. v. Flores, 991 N.E.2d 745, 760 (Ill. 2013).

In Illinois, there is a statutory right to an abortion, 775 Ill. Comp. Stat. 55/1-15(b), which will remain in effect, absent legislative changes. Moreover, “[a] fertilized egg, embryo, or fetus does not have independent rights under the laws of [Illinois].” 775 Ill. Comp. Stat. 55/1-15(c). After viability, abortion is allowed only if “the abortion is necessary to protect the life or health of the patient.” 775 Ill. Comp. Stat. 55/1-25 (a)

At the beginning of 2023, H.B. 4664 was signed into law to expand access to abortion and protect abortion providers. In August of 2025, H.B. 3637 expanded protection for the abortion pill, even in the event that the FDA revokes its approval of such drugs.

Illinois legislators have introduced a heartbeat bill that would repeal the Reproductive Health Act after viability, which includes a detection of fetal heartbeat, H.B. 1333, and the Abolish Abortion Illinois Act, S.B. 3572. Both of these have been referred to the Rules and Assignments Committees, respectively.

In August 2022, Indiana enacted a near-total abortion ban – the first abortion ban enacted since the Dobbs decision overturned Roe. Abortion would be allowed in cases of rape and incest, fatal fetal anomalies, and to protect the life and physical health of the mother.

Challenges to the state’s abortion restrictions were brought by both Planned Parenthood and the Satanic Temple upon claims that the prohibitions are a violation of religious liberty.

In 2023 the Supreme Court of Indiana held that the state constitution “protects a woman’s right to an abortion that is necessary to protect her life or to protect her from a serious health risk.” Members of the Med. Licensing Bd. of Ind. v. Planned Parenthood Great Nw., 211 N.E.3d 957 (Ind. 2023). There is currently ongoing litigation seeking to define a serious health risk.

In January 2026, the Seventh Circuit dismissed the Satanic Temple’s religious freedom challenge to abortion due to a lack of a concrete injury, and therefore a lack of standing to sue. 

In March 2026, the Marion Superior Court denied the state of Indiana’s motion for summary judgment and granted the plaintiffs – two anonymous women, a certified class, and the organization Hoosier Jews for Choice. The order permanently enjoins the State and its officers from enforcing Ind. Code § 16-34-2 (S.E.A. 1) against just the plaintiffs and certified class “to the extent that prohibiting them from receiving abortions would substantially burden their religious exercise as permitted by Indiana’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act.”

In 2018, the Supreme Court of Iowa held that the Iowa Constitution’s protection of liberty includes decisions on whether to have an abortion, and state restrictions on abortion are subject to strict scrutiny. Planned Parenthood of the Heartland v. Reynolds ex re. State, 915 N.W.2d 206 (Iowa 2018). In light of this precedent, a state court struck down a statutory ban on abortions after a fetal heartbeat is detected. In a recent decision, however, the Supreme Court of Iowa overruled its 2018 decision and held that there is no fundamental right to an abortion in the Iowa Constitution. Planned Parenthood of the Heartland, Inc. v. Reynolds, No. 21-0856 (Iowa June 17, 2022). The governor asked the state’s Supreme Court to reinstate the heartbeat law, but in June 2023, the court issued a 3-3 decision that will keep the law unenforceable while allowing abortion up to 20 weeks. Iowa Code § 146B.2(2)(a). As of February 2026, the Iowa Senate has introduced a bill to restrict abortion pills, including their availability via mail-order, and the Iowa House has introduced a bill to prohibit abortion entirely.

In February 2026, a subcommittee hearing for House File 2332 was canceled. HF 2332 would ban elective abortion, with the exception of preserving the life of the mother.

Kansas statutes prohibit (with exceptions) an abortion of “an unborn child having reached the gestational age of 22 weeks or more.” Kans. Stat. Ann. §§ 65-6723, 65-6724(a). In 2019, however, the Supreme Court of Kansas held that the state constitution’s Bill of Rights includes protection of the right to have an abortion, and abortion restrictions are subject to strict scrutiny. Hodes & Nauser, MDs, P.A. v. Schmidt, 440 P.3d 461 (Kan. 2019).

The state legislature enacted two laws requiring that doctors care for infants born alive after an attempted abortion and that abortion providers disclose that, under certain circumstances, measures can be taken in an attempt to reverse a chemical abortion.

In 2024, the Kansas Supreme Court ruled that the 2015 ban on dilation and evacuation abortions was not enforceable in light of the 2019 Schmidt case.

In March 2026, Senate Concurrent Resolution 1623 was introduced to protect the equal rights of life “from conception.”

In 2019, Kentucky enacted a trigger ban that placed a broad ban on abortion – with minimal exceptions – which has taken effect in light of the reversal of Roe. Ky. Rev. Stat. § 311.772.

A Kentucky statute prohibits abortion after viability “except when necessary to preserve the life or health of the woman.” Ky. Rev. Stat. § 311.780, which, in June 2023, was upheld as enforceable. Ky. Rev. Stat. § 311.781-783. In 2019, Kentucky passed a heartbeat bill, which is currently being challenged, but the Kentucky Supreme Court has allowed it to take effect during the course of litigation. Ky. Rev. Stat. § 311.7705.

The challenge to the Heartbeat Law was ultimately dismissed. The abortion ban was left in place as a result.

Three Jewish women have brought a lawsuit against the state, claiming that abortion restrictions violate their religious liberty. Two of the women lack standing, although the case of the third is continuing in the Court of Appeals.

In January 2026, H.B. 476 was introduced in the Kentucky House of Representatives to create a new section in the Kentucky Constitution to establish individual rights to reproductive freedom.

In 2006, Louisiana enacted a broad ban on abortion – with minimal exceptions – that has taken effect in light of the reversal of Roe. La. Rev. Stat. § 40:1061. Another Louisiana law prohibits most abortions post-viability. La. Rev. Stat. § 40:1061.13. In 2019, a statute that bans most abortions after a fetal heartbeat is detected took effect. La. Rev. Stat. § 40:1061.1.3.

In 2020, Louisiana’s voters approved an amendment to the Louisiana Constitution’s Declaration of Rights that states, “To protect human life, nothing in this constitution shall be construed to secure or protect a right to abortion or require the funding of abortion.” Art. I, § 20.1.

In Maine, there is a statutory right to an abortion before viability and after viability when necessary to preserve the life or health of the mother. Maine Rev. Stat. § 1598(1). Maine will continue to have a right to an abortion, absent legislative changes.

In 2024 the governor signed a “shield law” that will prevent action from being taken against abortion providers by other states. This was augmented in 2025 by a law allowing abortion-pill prescribers to keep their names off labels and use the clinic name instead.

In Maryland, there is a statutory right to an abortion before viability and at any time when necessary to protect the life or health of the mother or in cases where the unborn child has a genetic anomaly or serious physical deformity. Maryland Health-General § 20-209(b). Maryland passed a law in 2022 increasing those allowed to perform abortions from doctors to other medical professionals and licensed midwives. H.B. 937. 

A state constitutional right to abortion was signed into law in 2025. 

In Moe v. Secretary of Administrative & Finance, 417 N.E.2d 387, 398 (Mass. 1981), the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court held that the rights announced in Roe, which include the right to an abortion, are an integral part of Massachusetts state jurisprudence. Statutory law also broadly protects abortion before 24 weeks and permits abortion after 24 weeks in several circumstances (such as to preserve the mother’s physical or mental health).

Since Dobbs, Massachusetts has enacted a law to prevent abortion providers from out-of-state legal action and gives the sued provider the ability to file their own suit to recover actual damages from the out-of-state party attempting to sue. H.B. 5090. The governor also signed an executive order restricting cooperation with out-of-state investigations into abortion practices. Mass. Exec. Order No. 2022-600 (June 24, 2022). 

On June 24, 2024, the governor issued Executive Order No. 633 “Protecting Access to Emergency Abortion Care in Massachusetts.”

In 2025, the governor passed HB0930, allowing the use of ACA-derived insurance surcharges to help fund abortion programs.

Post-viability abortions are generally prohibited in Michigan. Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.323; Larkin v. Wayne Prosecutor, 389 Mich. 533, 208 N.W.2d 176 (1973). The 1931 statute banning abortion except when necessary to preserve the mother’s life was repealed by the legislature and signed by the governor in April 2023. Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.14.

A 1997 court of appeals decision held that the Michigan Constitution does not guarantee a right to have an abortion. Mahaffey v. Attorney Gen., 222 Mich. App. 325, 564 N.W.2d 104 (1997). In a pair of recently filed lawsuits, however, the plaintiffs seek rulings from Michigan courts that declare the existence of such a right.

In November 2022, voters approved amending the state’s constitution to provide for a right to abortion up to fetal viability. Post-viability abortion can be regulated as long as there are exceptions to preserve the life and health of the pregnant woman. A Michigan trial court subsequently blocked the statutory mandatory 24-hour waiting period, the mandatory uniform informed consent, and the ban on APCs providing abortion care in light of the constitutional amendment.

The Minnesota Supreme Court held in Women of the State of Minnesota v. Gomez, 542 N.W.2d 17, 27, 31 (Minn. 1995) that there was a right to an abortion in the state constitution, and legislation may not violate that fundamental right. Minnesota has a statutory ban on abortion after viability, but this statute was held unconstitutional in Hodgson v. Lawson, 542 F.2d 1350 (8th Cir. 1976). The reversal of Roe may not have any practical effect on the enforceability of this legislation in light of the Gomez decision. A broad abortion right will remain in Minnesota, absent a constitutional amendment or a reversal of Gomez.

Minnesota is vigorously pursuing its abortion agenda. In the summer of 2022, a district court held the 24-hour waiting period and the parental notification requirements for minors to be unconstitutional. In January 2023, the legislature passed a bill stating there is a fundamental right to abortion. At the close of its session in May, additional legislation was passed removing language from the code that mandates doctors care for infants born alive after an abortion and cutting funds to Pregnancy Resource Centers. 

In the 2023 legislative session, many of Minnesota’s abortion statutes and regulations changed. Most of these changes were included in three significant reproductive health care-related bills. All changes are in effect as of April 28, 2023.

Section 145.409 of the Minnesota Statutes, also known as the “Protect Reproductive Options Act” (PRO Act), codifies an individual’s right to control their own reproductive health. It also plainly states that the Minnesota Constitution protects the “fundamental right to reproductive freedom.” Finally, the statute prohibits local units of government from imposing any additional restrictions on access to reproductive health services.

The Health and Human Services Omnibus Bill repeals Minnesota laws that required patients seeking abortions to wait 24 hours after receiving a statutory informed-consent process; required extensive reporting of abortions by providers; and criminalized abortions under specific circumstances.

While the PRO Act and Health and Human Services Omnibus Bill codify patients’ rights to reproductive health within Minnesota, the Reproductive Freedom Defense Act protects providers and patients alike from civil and criminal penalties imposed by states other than Minnesota.

In 2007, Mississippi banned abortion “except in the case where necessary for the preservation of the mother’s life or where the pregnancy was caused by rape.” Miss. Code Ann. § 41-41-45. “As of July 7[, 2022], abortions are allowed only if the woman’s life is endangered by the pregnancy or if the pregnancy was caused by a rape that was reported to law enforcement.” A lawsuit was filed in November 2022 claiming the 1998 case Pro-Choice Mississippi v. Fordice grants a constitutional right to abortion, trumping the 2007 abortion ban. On July 19, 2022, plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed their case without prejudice, stating that as a result of the abortion bans, Jackson Women’s Health Organization had decided to close and sell the building. As a result, they were no longer in a position to move forward with the case. The case is closed.

Meanwhile, the state has passed eight new bills to aid those having children.

In 2019, Missouri enacted a ban on abortion, except in cases of medical emergencies, which has taken effect in light of Dobbs. Mo. Rev. Stat. § 188.017. A Missouri statute bans post-viability abortions (with exceptions). Mo. Rev. Stat. § 188.030.

In 2024, abortion was made a constitutional right through Amendment 3 to the state constitution. Nearly immediately after the amendment took effect, Planned Parenthood sued to challenge Missouri’s laws restricting abortions, and that litigation is ongoing. 

In November 2026, voters will decide on another proposed constitutional amendment – Missouri Amendment 3, Prohibit Abortion and Gender Transition Procedures for Minors Amendment (2026). This amendment will repeal the 2024 constitutional right to abortion and prohibit abortion after 12 weeks, except in cases of rape or incest. 

The Supreme Court of Montana has held that the Montana Constitution’s protection of the right of privacy includes the right to access abortion, and abortion restrictions are subject to strict scrutiny. Armstrong v. State, 1999 MT 261, 989 P.2d 364 (1999). Montana statutes restricting abortion will remain subject to strict scrutiny, absent a constitutional amendment or a reversal of Armstrong.

A statute with broad language prohibiting most abortions has been held to only apply when an unborn child is capable of feeling pain or is viable, with an exception to protect the life of the mother. Mont. Code Ann. § 50-20-109. A ban on most abortions after 20 weeks, enacted in 2021 (Mont. Code Ann. § 50-20-603), has been enjoined. 

The state remains in a slew of legal battles pertaining to existing and new legislation. In February 2024, a Montana trial judge struck down three statutes restricting abortion as “incompatible with the text of the Montana Constitution and values it recognizes.” Among the laws voided by the trial court are Mont. Code Ann. § 50-20-603, which bans most abortions after 20 weeks; Mont. Code Ann. § 50-20-113, which requires providers to offer patients an opportunity to view an ultrasound or listen to the fetal heart tone; and Mont. Code Ann. § 50-20-707, which provides for a 24-hour waiting period after a patient has given informed consent. The state of Montana has said it plans to appeal the trial court’s ruling. 

Additionally, Planned Parenthood preemptively brought suit against Montana over H.B. 721, a ban on dismemberment abortions. The bill has now been signed and remains under litigation. Four other pro-life bills were concurrently signed, notably S.B. 154, which declares there is no constitutional right to abortion, in contrast with the 1999 Armstrong ruling. In a prior case, the state of Montana had already asked the state Supreme Court to overturn the Armstrong decision. While S.B.154 may be instrumental in overturning Armstrong, in May 2023, the Montana Supreme Court declared legislation restricting abortion to physicians and physician assistants unconstitutional, affirming Armstrong.

In June 2024, an abortion advocacy group secured enough signatures to place a constitutional amendment on Montana’s November ballot seeking to establish an explicit right to abortion under the state constitution.

By June 2025, the Montana Supreme Court had relied on that evolving legal landscape to strike down several pro-life protections enacted by the state legislature, including a prohibition on abortions after 20 weeks of gestation. Those protections—passed in 2021—had been blocked for years under a preliminary injunction while litigation was ongoing.

While the case remained pending, Montana voters approved a ballot initiative embedding abortion rights into the state constitution. That amendment significantly altered the legal framework governing abortion in the state and became central to the court’s analysis.

In its decision, the Montana Supreme Court interpreted the state constitution’s “right to be left alone” as encompassing a right to obtain an abortion. The court further held that this state constitutional protection is unaffected by the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which returned primary authority over abortion regulation to the states.

As a result of the ruling, multiple safeguards were invalidated, including restrictions on the use of telehealth to prescribe abortion drugs, a 24-hour waiting period following informed consent, and requirements that women be offered the opportunity to view an ultrasound or listen to the fetal heartbeat prior to the procedure. These provisions had been challenged by Planned Parenthood of Montana.

A Nebraska statute prohibits abortion after “the unborn child clearly appears to have reached viability, except when necessary to preserve the life or health of the mother.” Rev. Stat. Nebr. § 28-329. A bill that would have made most abortions illegal in Nebraska in the event that Roe is overturned was narrowly defeated. Nebraska can enforce its existing abortion restrictions and enact additional restrictions.

In May 2023, the state legislature passed a 12-week abortion ban. In August 2023, a Nebraska district court judge granted the Nebraska Attorney General’s Office motion to dismiss a lawsuit by Planned Parenthood challenging the ban. The case is now before the Nebraska Supreme Court on appeal.

On July 26, 2024, a decision from the Nebraska Supreme Court meant that the state’s 12-week abortion ban and restrictions on young transgender Nebraskans’ medical care would remain in effect.

In a 2024 opinion, a majority of the Court’s Justices held that Nebraska state Senators were within constitutional bounds when they combined the 12-week abortion ban and anti-transgender medical care restrictions into a single bill.

In Nevada, there is a statutory right to an abortion “[w]ithin 24 weeks after the commencement of the pregnancy” and “[a]fter the 24th week of pregnancy only if the physician has reasonable cause to believe that an abortion currently is necessary to preserve the life or health of the pregnant woman.” Nev. Rev. Stat. § 442.250(1). 

In 2022 the governor issued an Executive order restricting cooperation with out-of-state investigations pertaining to abortion and prohibiting licensing boards from disciplining licensees for performing abortions. Nev. Exec. Order No. 2022-08 (Jun. 28, 2022). The Nevada legislature passed Senate Joint Resolution 7, a step toward amending the state’s constitution to state there is a right to abortion. The resolution must once again pass both legislative bodies in the 2025 session before it can be sent to the people in the 2026 general election. 

The state also has a citizen-initiated ballot measure that would establish a fundamental right to abortion until fetal viability or when necessary to protect the life or health of the pregnant woman. This initiative has submitted the required signatures for review and approval. The measure was approved on the 2024 ballot. That year, Nevada voters approved the amendment to the state constitution to create the fundamental right to abortion until viability; however, this amendment requires a second vote in 2026 before it is effective.

In New Hampshire, abortion is legal up to the 24th week of pregnancy. After 24 weeks abortion is legal only in the case of a medical emergency or a fetal abnormality incompatible with life. A medical emergency occurs when the abortion is necessary to save the life of the pregnant woman or to prevent a serious risk of substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function. The regulations will continue, absent legislative changes. In November 2022, New Hampshire voted no on holding a state constitutional convention, at which abortion rights likely would have been a topic of debate. 

In early 2026, two abortion-related bills, aimed at protecting conscientious objectors and criminalizing the trafficking of minors for abortions, respectively, passed in the New Hampshire House.

In New Jersey, not only is there a statutory right to an abortion, but the New Jersey Supreme Court determined that abortion is a fundamental right under the state constitution. Right to Choose v. Byrne, 450 A.2d 925, 934 (N.J. 1982). Abortion will remain a right in New Jersey, absent constitutional and statutory changes.

In New Mexico, the pre-Roe abortion ban was repealed in 2021. N.M. Stat. Ann. §§ 30-5-1 through 30-5-3, repealed by S.B. 10, 55th Leg., Reg. Sess. (N.M. 2021). New Mexico does ban partial-birth abortions. N.M. Stat. Ann. § 30-5A-3. An abortion right will continue in New Mexico, absent legislative changes.

A lawsuit has been filed in a dispute over the Comstock Act (which prohibits mailing items pertaining to abortion), a DOJ memo, and a new local ordinance in the city of Eunice. City of Eunice v. Torrez, D-506-CV-2023-00407.

Now the state has passed a bill that restricts what local ordinances can do to regulate abortion, voiding the ordinance in the city of Eunice.

On January 10, 2025, the New Mexico Supreme Court ruled against several local ordinances in the state that aim to restrict the distribution of the abortion pill.

In a unanimous opinion, the Court said the ordinances invaded the legislature’s authority to regulate reproductive care.

In New York, there is a statutory right to an abortion up to 24 weeks from the start of a pregnancy. After 24 weeks abortion is allowed only if there is an absence of fetal viability or if the abortion is necessary to protect the life or health of the mother, including mental health. N.Y. Pub. Health Law §§ 2599-aa, 2599-bb. The right to an abortion will remain in New York, absent legislative changes.

In 2024 voters approved the Equality Amendment to the New York Constitution to prohibit discrimination based on pregnancy outcomes and reproductive healthcare and autonomy. 

A North Carolina statute permits abortion prior to 20 weeks and after that in the case of medical emergencies. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-45.1. Another statute that pre-dates Roe broadly prohibits abortion, N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-44, but is enjoined. Abortion is legal in North Carolina through 12 weeks, through 20 weeks in cases of rape or incest, and through 24 weeks if physicians detect a life-limiting anomaly. Thereafter, abortion is legal only in cases of a medical emergency. This law is under litigation, but it has taken effect while the case is pending.

In June 2024 the U.S. District Court in Greensboro struck down a portion of the law dealing with abortion pills and abortions using medications. The ruling allows midwives, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants to prescribe mifepristone and provide medication abortions in addition to medical doctors. The ruling also struck down the requirement imposed by the N.C. General Assembly, which states that patients must schedule an additional in-person follow-up visit when obtaining a medication abortion.

A North Dakota statute that prohibits most abortions is under litigation due to claims it violates the state’s constitution. N.D. Cent. Code § 12.1-31-12. Other statutes prohibit most abortions post-viability (N.D. Cent. Code § 14-02.1-04(3)) and after 20 weeks (N.D. Cent. Code § 14-02.1-05.3(3)). Enforcement of statutory provisions that limit abortion after a heartbeat is detected (N.D. Cent. Code §§ 14- 02.1-05.1 & 14-02.1-05.2) has been enjoined, MKB Mgmt. Corp. v. Stenehjem, 795 F.3d 768 (8th Cir. 2015), but the state can seek to have the injunction lifted in light of Dobbs.

In April 2023 North Dakota passed a new law banning abortion with minimal exceptions limited to rape or incest, ectopic or molar pregnancies, or the imminent death of the mother. A lawsuit challenging the law was filed, but the law was ultimately deemed constitutional by the North Dakota Supreme Court. 

North Dakota does not have a constitutional right to abortion. On the contrary, N.D. Cent. Code § 14-02.3-01(1) states that “[b]etween normal childbirth and abortion, it is the policy of the state of North Dakota that normal childbirth is to be given preference, encouragement, and support by law and by state action, it being in the best interests of the well-being and common good of North Dakota citizens.”

In November 2025, the North Dakota Supreme Court upheld North Dakota Century Code § 12.1-19.1, which makes it a class C felony to perform an abortion. There are exceptions for “abortion[s] to terminate a pregnancy that based on reasonable medical judgment resulted from gross sexual imposition, sexual imposition, sexual abuse of a ward, or incest . . . if the probable gestational age of the unborn child is six weeks or less” and for individuals assisting in performing an abortion within their professions but who did not know they were violating the law.

The Ohio Constitution includes a right to abortion. Ohio Const. art I, § 22. However, abortion may be regulated after fetal viability, which the Ohio Constitution defines as when “the fetus has a significant likelihood of survival outside the uterus with reasonable measures.” Id. § 22(C)(1). The abortion of a viable fetus may be prohibited except in cases where the physician determines that there is a risk to the mother’s life or health. Id. § 22(B)(2). Before the amendment enshrining abortion rights was passed, Ohio had a six-week heartbeat ban on abortions. The heartbeat ban was permanently enjoined, but the other provisions of the bill are being reevaluated for severability and enforcement.

Prior to Dobbs, Ohio had a heartbeat bill. Following the passage of Amendment I, enshrining abortion rights in the Ohio Constitution, it was permanently enjoined from enforcement and struck down.

Two bills to help prevent abortions were introduced during the 2026 session of the Ohio legislature – H.B. 410, which would prohibit state medicaid funding to certain abortion providers, and S.B. 309, which would require disclosures by prescribers of medical abortions so patients could sue those providers in the event of adverse effects.

Currently, Planned Parenthood is challenging various laws that limit the use of medical abortion, as well as a law involving the disposal of fetal remains after a surgical abortion.

Oklahoma bans all abortions except in cases where it is necessary to preserve the life of the mother. Okla. Stat. tit. 21 § 861-62. This law pre-dates Roe and went into effect after the Dobbs decision. The Oklahoma Supreme Court upheld it as constitutional in Oklahoma Call v. Drummond, 526 P.3d 1123 (Okla. 2023).

In Oregon, there is a statutory right to an abortion. Or. Rev. Stat. § 659.880. Additionally, Oregon’s Right to Healthcare Amendment, which declares that cost-effective, clinically appropriate, and affordable health care is a fundamental right, may effectively make taxpayer-funded abortion a state constitutional right in Oregon. 

Progressive groups have begun collecting signatures for a ballot initiative on the 2026 ballot that would make abortion a constitutional right in Oregon. 

In Pennsylvania, abortion is allowed during the first 24 weeks of pregnancy or to avert the death or substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function of the mother. 18 Pa. Consol. Stat. § 3211(a)-(b). The legislature has stated its intent, however, “to protect the life and health of the child subject to abortion,” and, as such, “[i]n every relevant civil or criminal proceeding in which it is possible to do so without violating the Federal Constitution, the common and statutory law of Pennsylvania shall be construed so as to extend to the unborn the equal protection of the laws and to further the public policy of this commonwealth encouraging childbirth over abortion.” 18 Pa. Consol. Stat. § 3202(a), (c). Accordingly, it has placed restrictions on insurance coverage provided by state funds. These restrictions are currently being challenged. 

In 2025 the Pennsylvania legislature advanced seven abortion bills that would significantly expand abortion and amend the Pennsylvania Constitution to enumerate a right to abortion.

In Rhode Island, there is a statutory right to an abortion before viability and after viability to protect the life or health of the mother. R.I. Gen. Law § 23-4.13-2. However, the Rhode Island Constitution specifically does not guarantee a right to abortion: “Nothing in this section shall be construed to grant or secure any right relating to abortion or the funding thereof.” Art. 1, § 2.

The governor issued an Executive order restricting cooperation with out-of-state investigations pertaining to abortion and to protect licensees from out-of-state sanctions for performing abortions. R.I. Exec. Order, No. 22-28. Additionally, in 2024, Rhode Island passed a Healthcare Provider Shield Bill to “prevent[] civil or criminal action against Rhode Island providers by other states or people” “for helping people seek access to . . . reproductive healthcare services.” 

While the South Carolina Supreme Court has held that the “constitutional right to privacy, as guaranteed in article I, section 10 of the South Carolina Constitution” provides a right to abortion in South Carolina, it also has held that “this right is not absolute, and must be balanced against the State’s interest in protecting unborn life[.]” Planned Parenthood S. Atl. v. State, 882 S.E. 2d 770, 774 (S.C. 2023). Accordingly, in South Carolina, abortion is prohibited after the detection of a fetal heartbeat, except in cases of rape or incest. S. Car. Code § 44-41-630(B); 44-41-650.

The law was upheld by the South Carolina Supreme Court in May 2025.

In 2005 South Dakota passed a trigger law, which has now gone into effect, that outlaws abortion except to preserve the life of the mother. S.D. Codified Laws § 22-17-5.1. In addition, no abortion provider may schedule a woman for an abortion before an initial consultation, and the abortion provider cannot take a woman’s consent for the abortion before the pregnant woman receives counseling from a third-party non-abortion agency. S.D. Codified Laws §§ 34-23A-53 to -62. This requirement is aimed at preventing women from being pressured or railroaded into abortions they do not want. Planned Parenthood challenged the statutory provisions in federal court and obtained a preliminary injunction, but on appeal (where we represented the state defendants), the Eighth Circuit vacated that injunction, allowing the law to take effect. 

In February 2024 the legislature approved the creation of a video outlining the state’s abortion laws. This video was issued by the Department of Health later that year. 

A challenge to South Dakota’s pro-life laws appeared on the 2024 ballot and was soundly defeated. 

The Tennessee Constitution provides: “Nothing in this Constitution secures or protects a right to abortion or requires the funding of an abortion. The people retain the right through their elected state representatives and state senators to enact, amend, or repeal statutes regarding abortion, including, but not limited to, circumstances of pregnancy resulting from rape or incest or when necessary to save the life of the mother.” Tenn. Const. art. I, § 36.

Because of a trigger law that went into effect shortly after the Dobbs decision, Tennessee currently outlaws abortions at all stages. Tenn. Code § 39-15-213. The only exceptions are to save the life of the mother or prevent serious injury or impairment to her vital functions. In 2020 a law (H.B. 2263) was enacted that “ban[s] abortions after a fetal heartbeat is detected or if a person seeking an abortion did so based on race, sex, or Down syndrome diagnosis of a fetus.” On July 1, 2024, a new law took effect, criminalizing the actions of adults who take minors out of state to get an abortion. A violation of this law is a Class A Misdemeanor. A lawsuit challenging this law has been filed. 

Before the Supreme Court overturned Roe, Texas passed a trigger law that would ban abortions if the federal constitutional right was ended. That law, which went into effect in 2022, makes it a felony to commit an abortion that results in the termination of a pregnancy. 

In Texas, abortions are allowed until a fetal heartbeat is detected, and private parties may enforce the statute. Tex. Health & Safety Code § 171.204-12. Texas also bans abortion except to avert the death or substantial impairment of a major bodily function of the mother. Tex. Health & Safety Code § 170A.002.

In May 2024 the Texas Supreme Court refused to clarify exceptions to the state’s abortion bans. Zurawski v. State of Texas. Additionally, the Fifth Circuit ruled in January 2024 that “[f]ederal regulations do not require emergency rooms to perform life-saving abortions.”

A lawsuit challenging Texas’s statute allowing civil suits against abortionists is currently being litigated. 

In 2019 the governor signed into law H.B. 136, which prohibits abortions after 18 weeks. In Utah, an abortion is allowed before 18 weeks gestational age or after in order to protect the life and health of the mother. Utah Code § 76-7-302. Abortions after 18 weeks are allowed in cases of rape or incest. Litigation continues between the state and Planned Parenthood over the constitutionality of the heartbeat ban.

In Vermont, a state constitutional right to abortion is enshrined in Vt. Const. art. 22. Abortion is considered a “fundamental right” and is also statutorily protected. 18 Vt. Stat. Ann. § 9493(b). There are absolutely no limitations to abortion in Vermont, including a prohibition on parental consent in cases of minors seeking abortion. Minors can seek and obtain an abortion without the need for parental consent. 

Vermont passed the first so-called shield law, Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 1, § 150, which protects patients who come from states where abortion is outlawed to Vermont to receive abortions. It also protects Vermont health care providers who perform those procedures from out-of-state prosecution. The law also protects access to abortion pills. 

In Virginia, abortion is allowed by statute through the second trimester, Va. Code §§ 18.2-72 through 18.2- 74.1. 

“Partial birth infanticide” is illegal in Virginia, and abortion after the third trimester is prohibited unless “the continuation of the pregnancy is likely to result in the death of the woman or substantially and irremediably impair the mental or physical health of the woman.”

However, abortion could become a constitutional amendment to the Virginia Constitution, pending a popular vote in 2026. Virginia lawmakers have approved a constitutional amendment that would protect reproductive rights in the Commonwealth. The proposed amendment passed 64-34 in the House of Delegates and 21-18 in the state Senate two days later. This amendment would legalize abortion at all stages of gestation. 

In Washington, there is a statutory right to an abortion, at any age, before viability, or to protect the life and health of the mother. Wash. Rev. Code §§ 9.02.100, et seq. A law passed in 2022 that further protected abortion rights and abortion providers by amending the statute, removing the word “woman” from the statute, and amending language in Wash. Rev. Code §§ 9.02.100, et seq to include “transgender” and other sexual expressions as protected classes.

The governor issued an Executive order barring cooperation with out-of-state investigations pertaining to abortions, which includes both civil and criminal actions. Dir. of the Gov., No. 22-12 (Jun. 30, 2022). Laws were also passed protecting providers and recipients from out-of-state legal consequences. H.B. 1340 and H.B. 1469, 68th Leg., Reg. Sess. (Wa. 2023).

In the Washington Senate, SJR 8204 proposes a constitutional amendment to protect reproductive freedom in Washington state. It has been in committee since 2025.

The West Virginia Constitution specifies: “Nothing in this Constitution secures or protects a right to abortion or requires the funding of abortion.” W. Va. Const. art. VI, § 57. Abortion can be significantly restricted in West Virginia based on its pre-Roe law and its constitution. 

Currently, West Virginia law imposes a near-total ban on abortion under the Unborn Child Protection Act (H.B. 302), signed into law on September 16, 2022. This statute makes it illegal for providers to perform or induce an abortion unless specific conditions are met. The law replaced previous regulations following the U.S. Supreme Court’s Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision, which overturned Roe v. Wade and returned abortion regulation to individual states.

West Virginia had a pre-Roe law from 1849 that prohibited abortion, W. Va. Code § 61-2-8, but that law was held to violate the federal Constitution based on Roe. Doe v. Charleston Area Med. Ctr., 529 F.2d 638, 644-45 (4th Cir. 1975). This law, however, was repealed when the state’s legislature passed, and the governor signed a law that prohibits all abortions except for medical emergencies, rape, and incest. W. Va. Code § 16-2O-1. These exemptions expire at eight weeks for adults and 14 weeks for minors. 

In Wisconsin, abortion is permitted by statute up to 20 weeks post-fertilization, before viability, in the case of a medical emergency, or to avert the death or substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function of the mother. Wis. Stat. §§ 253.107(3), 940.15. Efforts were made to increase the ban to a 14-week abortion ban by a statewide referendum. Abortion is still legal in many circumstances in Wisconsin.

Wisconsin also has a state law, Wis. Stat. § 940.04, that the Wisconsin Supreme Court has construed as a feticide statute. In its 4-3 opinion in Kaul v. Urmanski, the Wisconsin Supreme Court agreed with the Attorney General that the law was obsolete. The Court held “that subsequent abortion regulations had so comprehensively covered the topic of abortion as to replace the 1849 law.”

In Wyoming, an abortion may not be performed after viability except in limited circumstances. Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 35-6-102. In 2022 Wyoming passed a trigger ban on abortion (except in limited circumstances). H.B. 92, 66th Leg. Reg. Sess. (Wyo. 2022), amending Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 35-6-102.

In January 2026, in State v. Johnson, the Wyoming Supreme Court ruled that abortion is a form of health care protected under Article 1, Section 38 of the Wyoming Constitution, which guarantees adults the right to make their own medical decisions. 

Shortly after this decision, in March 2026, Wyoming Governor Mark Gordon signed H.B. 126 (the Human Heartbeat Act) into law. This legislation prohibits abortions on babies with detectable heartbeats, but does not apply to medical emergencies.