The 1973 Supreme Court decision which has underpinned abortion law in the US since might be under threat.
Over the past 48 years, women in the US have married later, attained higher education and joined the workforce in record numbers. Could a conservative Supreme Court turn it all back?
A year since the law was changed, women were still not getting access to abortion services.
South Australia this week has passed a bill to decriminalise abortion, the last Australian jurisdiction to do so. Yet people seeking an abortion still face a variety of challenges.
English and Welsh governments are consulting the public about whether they should revoke temporary abortion rules.
People who object to the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling legalizing abortion have fought it for years. A recent Supreme Court decision makes the fight much easier.
Inventors in states with more socially liberal laws on the books end up with more diverse collaborators – and more higher-impact patents.
Abortions are expensive and, for many women, difficult to access. These challenges are only heightened during the coronavirus pandemic.
Ireland’s new abortion law is a progressive one. But the resulting abortion service erects serious barriers for some people seeking abortions in Ireland.
Those who claim that Scheer’s positions on a woman’s right to choose and a same-sex couple’s right to marry are irrelevant so long as he refuses to reopen debate are missing the point.
Doctors who won’t perform abortions on religious grounds may have stronger legal protection and may not be compelled to refer women to an alternative provider. Here’s why that’s bad news for women.
States that have restrictive abortion laws don’t just have worse health measures for women. A new study suggests that everyone is harmed.
Young, poor, single and a mother of two: This is the profile of most women in the US and Northern Ireland who seek financial assistance to help pay for an abortion.
Abortion has been a huge political issue in the US for the last 50 years. But the abortion debate is not new. It began at least a century before landmark abortions rights decision Roe v. Wade.
At best, this ‘debate’ is a distraction from political action that could truly make a difference. At worst, it actively reproduces some of the conditions it seeks to disrupt.
The court’s decision should reassure the South Australian and Western Australian governments that there is no constitutional impediment to enacting safe access zone legislation.
Her latest English translation, Happening, has come to be seen as one of the great pieces of writing about abortion.
With Brett Kavanaugh on the Supreme Court, many predict that the court will move to the right on issues from abortion to gun rights. But Supreme Court rulings are often not the last word on a matter.
Some careful reasoning shows that comparing abortion with contract murder equates two acts that are far from obviously morally equivalent.
The broader nature of today’s pro-choice movements show that a specific injustice can be a vehicle for highlighting wider social inequalities.