Letters to the Editor: How the Supreme Court took away abortion rights without overturning Roe

To the editor: The “post-Roe” world imagined by health officials in California, who are planning for expanded abortion access for women coming from outside the state, is already here.

The U.S. Supreme Court didn’t need to overturn Roe vs. Wade to allow Texas’ six-week abortion ban to go into effect, even temporarily. That was enough to close down more than half the surgical abortion providers in Texas. Those clinics can’t just spring back into existence if the court ends up making a favorable ruling.

This highlights one fact that has always been true of abortion restrictions: Wealthy people will always have access. Laws claiming to restrict abortion access on moral or pseudo-medical grounds only apply to people who cannot afford to travel.

The court hasn’t even issued a ruling, yet the needs of women in Texas are overflowing into neighboring states and causing a butterfly effect across the country. People who need abortions but cannot travel are left without access to a necessary medical procedure that is their legal right.

The Supreme Court won’t save us anytime soon. The damage is already done. Our only solution is to continue to fight for everyone’s right to access reproductive health.

Emiliana Guereca, Los Angeles

The writer is founder of the Women’s March Foundation.

..

To the editor: Asking people, “At how many weeks of pregnancy should abortion be allowed?” is like asking, “After how many heart attacks should a man be allowed to use Viagra?” (“Polls: Most Americans support the right to abortion, but many are also OK with 15-week limit,” Nov. 17)

The question should be: “The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the professional membership organization for OB/GYN doctors, supports Roe vs. Wade and believes abortion should be a decision made by a woman with her doctor. Do you agree or disagree, or are you not sure and need more information?”

Sylvia Hampton, Los Angeles