Pro-Abortion Groups Are Freaking Out Ahead of Historic SCOTUS Ruling

Katie Pavlich | November 30, 2021 4:00 PM

As we await a ruling from the Supreme Court on Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, which will determine the future of abortion accessibility in America by challenging Roe v. Wade, pro-abortion groups are sending out panicked statements to supporters.

"The constitutional right to abortion faces a terrifying and unprecedented threat. This moment of crisis is the culmination of the anti-choice movement's decades-long efforts to undermine the will of the overwhelming majority of people in this country who support the legal right to abortion," NARAL Pro-Choice America President Mini Timmaraju released in a statement Tuesday. "Make no mistake: The future of reproductive freedom is in grave danger, and the time to take bold action to protect it is now. It is absolutely critical that our leaders in the Senate pass the Women's Health Protection Act immediately to safeguard the right to abortion throughout our country."

On 12/1 , #SCOTUS will hear a case that directly challenges Roe v. Wade and could open the floodgates for abortion bans across the country, causing havoc and harm like the recent ban in TX. Say it loud: #AbortionIsEssential pic.twitter.com/SeIyNnzD7w
— EMILY's List (@emilyslist) November 30, 2021

Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization was filed to challenge Mississippi's 15-week abortion ban.

Meanwhile, pro-life organizations and activists are hopeful about how the Supreme Court will rule. "The law's clear focus is on protecting unborn children from abortion. But if abortion is the only context in which a state attempts to protect unborn children, it weakens the argument that protecting a right to life is the state's actual motive. Fortunately, that isn't the case in Mississippi," Andy Puzder writes in the Wall Street Journal. "The court has declined plenty of cases that offered the opportunity to review Roe and Casey. The justices might have been waiting for the right case—one that unequivocally focused on the child. We don't know how the court will rule. But as in 1989, this time feels different."