Northeastern University School of Law, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2022 Oct;159(1):324-329. doi: 10.1002/ijgo.14392. Epub 2022 Aug 17.
In Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization (2022), the US Supreme Court reversed longstanding court precedents that protected abortion as a fundamental right. Without that federal baseline, many states are passing restrictive laws that threaten providers and complicate patient care. The legal issues raised by these state restrictions are complex, including questions such as the exterritorial application of state restrictions and federal authority to regulate access to medication abortion. Meanwhile, providers who risk criminal or civil penalties for violating these laws may be deterred from providing services to those seeking care, including for ectopic pregnancies and miscarriages. State variations are dramatic, with some states taking steps to strengthen their abortion protections while others are eliminating abortion access even in situations of rape or incest. As dire as these developments are, it is hoped that they can serve as a wake-up call heard worldwide, to avoid complacency and maintain vigilance to protect abortion rights.
在多布斯诉杰克逊妇女健康组织案（2022 年）中，美国最高法院推翻了长期以来保护堕胎为基本权利的法院先例。没有联邦的这一底线，许多州正在通过限制堕胎的法律，这威胁到了堕胎提供者，并使患者的护理变得复杂。这些州的限制所引发的法律问题很复杂，包括州限制的治外法权和联邦监管药物流产准入的权力等问题。与此同时，那些因违反这些法律而面临刑事或民事处罚的提供者可能会被阻止为那些寻求护理的人提供服务，包括宫外孕和流产。各州之间的差异非常大，一些州采取措施加强对堕胎的保护，而另一些州甚至在强奸或乱伦的情况下也取消了堕胎机会。尽管这些事态发展令人担忧，但人们希望它们能敲响警钟，让全世界都能听到，避免自满，并保持警惕，以保护堕胎权利。
