After the Supreme Court's decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, a common rallying cry for pro-choice advocates has been the endangerment of women with ectopic pregnancies who would now be barred in some states banning or severely limiting abortion services.
Reps. Judy Chu, D-Calif., and Jan Schakowsky, D-Ill., and others have insisted that women with such pregnancies are now without protection. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., even used the issue to justify hounding and harassing justices eating in public: "Poor guy. He left before his soufflé because he decided half the country should risk death if they have an ectopic pregnancy within the wrong state lines." These views have been amplified by academics like Harvard Professor Laurence Tribe.
It is a great talking point, but it just happens to be untrue as both a legal and medical matter. Worse yet, this common claim could be putting women at risk by suggesting that they might be legally at risk if they seek such treatment.
ABORTION RULING IS OPPORTUNITY TO EXPAND PRO-LIFE PROTECTIONS FOR MOTHER AND CHILD
There are obviously good-faith objections to the Dobbs decisions on the underlying constitutional interpretation. However, critics have created a parade of horribles that extend beyond that opinion, including arguments expressly rejected by the court. That includes President Biden, who repeatedly suggests that contraceptives and travel for women could be now curtailed under the decision.
The...
You don't have permission to access "http://biz.chosun.com/en/en-policy/2026/05/13/2HN2WQNDIBDIHAYG2WCLNSLBYU/" on this server. Reference #18.9e033817.1778664023.2326d3f https://errors.edgesuite.n...