It triggered a wave of change. Abortion bans were brought in, court cases mounted, clinics closed. Here is what has happened in the seven months since US abortion rights were overturned.
First off, what is Roe v Wade?
Roe v Wade refers to the 1973 Supreme Court case that said the government could not prohibit abortions because the constitutional right to liberty includes the right to decide whether to continue a pregnancy.
Roe refers to Texan woman Norma McCorvey – known by the pseudonym Jane Roe – who challenged the state’s abortion laws after she couldn’t get a termination in 1969 because her life was not in danger. Wade is district attorney Henry Wade, who defended the anti-abortion laws.
The court decision meant every woman in the US had the right to an abortion in the first 12 weeks of pregnancy. Another ruling – Planned Parenthood v Casey in 1982 – built on that by saying states could not have laws that create a “substantial obstacle” to a woman seeking an abortion up to 24 weeks.
More on Abortion
Related Topics:
States ban abortion
In 12 states, there are now near-total bans on abortion. In five of these states, the ban is being challenged in court but remains in effect.
Advertisement
The 12 states are: Alabama, Arkansas, Idaho, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas and West Virginia.
Two further states – North Dakota and Wisconsin – do not have bans in place but abortions are unavailable because clinics have closed.
Georgia has banned abortions past six weeks of pregnancy, severely limiting access to terminations because so many women do not find out they are pregnant – and have time to organise the procedure – before the six-week mark.
According to the Guttmacher Institute, which specialises in reproductive health, these 15 states are home to almost 22 million women aged 15 to 49. That means almost a third of America’s women of reproductive age are living in states where abortion is either unavailable or severely restricted.
More states could follow
A further nine states have introduced restrictions to abortion that would have been unconstitutional under Roe v Wade, have bans currently blocked by the court or are likely to introduce bans in the near future.
Arizona and Florida do not allow abortions past 15 weeks, while Utah has an 18-week ban.
In three states – Indiana, Wyoming and Ohio – near-total or early-gestation bans have been blocked by state courts for now, but lawmakers have indicated they intend to fight them.
In Iowa, Montana and Nebraska, anti-abortion policymakers have indicated that they want to ban abortion soon, but abortion care remains available for now.
What’s happened to abortion clinics?
At least 66 abortion clinics have stopped offering abortion care in the 15 states where abortion is banned or severely restricted.
The loss of these clinics is felt nationwide, according to the Guttmacher Institute, as clinics in states where abortion remains legal are inundated with people travelling interstate.
As the institute explains: “These dramatic increases in caseloads mean clinic capacity and staff are stretched to their limits, resulting in longer wait times for appointments even for residents of states where abortion remains legal.”
Astudyfrom the Society of Family Planning estimated legal abortions nationwide fell by more than 10,000 in the two months following the overturning of Roe v Wade, although some women may have sought abortion pills privately.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
3:11
Abortion revolution in the US
Exacerbating inequality
Many of the states that have banned or restricted abortion have high proportions of black, Latina and indigenous women.
Research by the Kaiser Family Foundation revealed how overturning Roe v Wade disproportionately impacts women of colour, as they are more likely to get abortions, have more limited access to health care, and face barriers to travelling out of state for an abortion.
The Guttmacher Institute notes in addition that “people living with low incomes… transmen and nonbinary people, immigrants, adolescents and people living with disabilities are all particularly likely to encounter compounding obstacles to abortion care and be harmed as a result”.
Some states have introduced protections
While the US has seen significant rolling back of abortion rights, there are pockets of good news for pro-choice activists.
Voters in Kansas protected abortion rights in the state’s constitution by rejecting an amendment that would have allowed lawmakers to restrict access to abortions.
New York will provide free abortion pills at four public clinics, making its health department the first in the nation to offer free medication abortion.
In the midterms, voters in five states chose to protect reproductive rights. Vermont, Michigan and California added protections to their state constitutions while voters in Kentucky rejected an amendment that would have removed any protection for abortion rights from the constitution.
In Montana, a bill that could have criminalised doctors for providing abortions was defeated.
Image: Voters in Kansas react with joy after abortion rights vote
Medical abortions
Medical abortions account for the majority of abortions in the US – in 2020, the most recent year for which data is available, abortion pills were used in 53% of cases.
Early evidence suggests they have become even more popular since Roe v Wade was overturned – one studysuggested the number of people seeking medical abortions has increased threefold.
At the beginning of January, the Food and Drug Administration changed its rules to allow retail pharmacies in the US to dispense abortion pills for the first time.
However, abortion pills are now seen as the next frontier in the fight by anti-abortion activists and they are pushing hard to curtail access.
Netflix has agreed a $72bn (£54bn) deal to secure Warner Bros Discovery’s film and TV studios and supercharge its library through rights to top franchises including Harry Potter and Game Of Thrones.
It had been reported that the US streaming giant was in exclusive talks over the deal following a bidding war for the assets.
Paramount Skydance and Comcast, the ultimate owner of Sky News, were the rival suitors for the bulk of WBD that also includes HBO, the HBO Max streaming platform and DC Studios.
While Netflix has agreed a $27.75 per share price with WBD, which equates to the $72bn purchase figure, the deal gives the assets a total value of $82.7bn.
It will see WBD come under Netflix ownership once its remaining Discovery Global division, mostly legacy cable networks including CNN and the TNT sports channels, is separated.
However, the agreement is set to attract scrutiny from competition regulators, particularly in the United States and Europe.
More from Money
Both WBD and Netflix do not see the prospect of the deal being completed until late 2026 or 2027.
The main stumbling block is likely to be the fact that Netflix, which has hits including Stranger Things and Squid Game, is already the world’s biggest streaming service.
Image: Stranger Things is one of Netflix’s biggest hits. Pic: Netflix
Further drama could come in the form of a complaint by Paramount, which had previously made a bid for the whole company.
CNBC reported this week that Paramount had claimed the auction process was biased in favour of Netflix.
Entertainment news provider Variety has also reported that major studios fear an institutional crisis for Hollywood unless the move is blocked.
Ted Sarandos, the co-chief executive of Netflix, said: “By combining Warner Bros’ incredible library of shows and movies – from timeless classics like Casablanca and Citizen Kane to modern favourites like Harry Potter and Friends – with our culture-defining titles like Stranger Things, KPop Demon Hunters and Squid Game, we’ll be able to do that even better.
“Together, we can give audiences more of what they love and help define the next century of storytelling.”
Netflix shares were trading down more than 3% in pre-market deals but recovered much of that loss when Wall Street opened. Those for WBD were up by more than 2%.
David O’Hara, managing director at the advisory firm MKI Global Partners, said of the proposed deal: “The 12-18 month timeline signals a long antitrust review, but despite the overlap between Netflix and HBO Max, there is a path to approval through possible HBO divestment.
“Netflix would not accept a $5.8bn break fee if it didn’t see at least a small chance of the deal closing.”
Four people have been killed in the latest US strike on an alleged drug boat amid growing unease at the legality of the attacks.
The small vessel, which was hit in the eastern Pacific Ocean on Thursday, is the 22nd destroyed by the US military on suspicion of drug trafficking.
It is the first such attack after a pause of nearly three weeks.
At least 87 people have now been killed during Donald Trump‘s “war” with drug cartels, which has also seen vessels targeted in the Caribbean Sea, including near Venezuela.
Image: The vessel explodes in flames. Pic: Reuters
Video of the strike shows a small boat moving across the water before it is suddenly hit by a large explosion.
The boat is then seen engulfed in flames and billowing smoke as the camera zooms out.
On X, formerly known as Twitter, US Southern Command described those killed as “four male narco-terrorists“.
More on Donald Trump
Related Topics:
“Intelligence confirmed that the vessel was carrying illicit narcotics and transiting along a known narco-trafficking route in the Eastern Pacific,” the post said.
The Trump administration has been weighing options to combat what it has portrayed as Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro‘s role in supplying illegal drugs that have killed Americans.
The socialist leader has denied having any links to the illegal drug trade.
Venezuela has said the boat attacks amount to murder – and that President Trump’s true motivation is to oust Mr Maduro and access its oil.
X
This content is provided by X, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable X cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to X cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow X cookies for this session only.
It comes as an investigation in Washington DC has started looking into the very first strike on an alleged drug boat on 2 September in international waters near Venezuela.
On that occasion, US navy admiral Frank “Mitch” Bradley is accused of ordering a follow-up strike to kill the survivors.
This reportedly followed demands from defence secretary Pete Hegseth that the navy “kill them all”.
The admiral briefed politicians in a series of closed-door briefings at the US Capitol on Thursday, and denied there was any such order from Mr Hegseth.
Image: Admiral Frank ‘Mitch’ Bradley arrives at the US Capitol for a classified briefing on Thursday. Pic: Reuters
Mr Hegseth said the admiral “made the correct decision to ultimately sink the boat and eliminate the threat”.
But speaking on Air Force One last Sunday, the president said he was unaware of the second strike and would not have wanted it, though he backed Mr Hegseth.
A video of the 2 September strike, which killed 11 people, has been shown to politicians, but accounts of its contents split along party lines.
Republican Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas said the survivors were “trying to flip a boat loaded with drugs bound for United States back over so they could stay in the fight”.
Image: Donald Trump and Pete Hegseth during a cabinet meeting at the White House on 2 December. Pic: Reuters
His party colleague, representative Rick Crawford of Arkansas, issued a statement saying the strikes were legal.
But representative Jim Himes of Connecticut, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, said: “What I saw in that room was one of the most troubling things I’ve seen in my time in public service.
“You have two individuals in clear distress, without any means of locomotion, with a destroyed vessel.”
They “were killed by the United States”, he said.
Representative Adam Smith of Washington, the top Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, echoed his account.
Image: Democrat representative Adam Smith of Washington (L) leaving the briefing. Pic: AP
He said the survivors were “basically two shirtless people clinging to the bow of a capsized and inoperable boat, drifting in the water – until the missiles come and kill them”.
Likewise, Senator Jack Reed of Rhode Island, the top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, said he was “deeply disturbed” by the video, and called for it to be made public.
“This briefing confirmed my worst fears about the nature of the Trump Administration’s military activities,” he said in a statement.
Spotify
This content is provided by Spotify, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spotify cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spotify cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spotify cookies for this session only.
Even if the campaign against the suspected drug-trafficking boats had been authorised by Congress, ex-military lawyers said the strike against survivors would be a war crime if the military knowingly killed survivors.
Attacks on combatants who are incapacitated, unconscious or shipwrecked are forbidden by the defence department’s law of war manual – provided the survivors abstain from hostilities and do not attempt to escape.
Firing upon shipwreck survivors is cited as an example of a “clearly illegal” order that should be refused.
The boss of world football’s governing body was back in the White House this week, and sport wasn’t even on the agenda.
And yet it still came back to football and today’s World Cup draw – even after the signing of a peace deal between Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
Mr Infantino was picked out in the audience as Mr Trump diverted from trumpeting ending another conflict to boasting about World Cup ticket sales.
Image: Donald Trump and FIFA President Gianni Infantino stand next to the FIFA Club World Cup trophy. Pic: Reuters
“A great leader in sports and a great gentleman,” the US president said.
So it’s certainly not just Mr Infantino dishing out the flattery. But there is plenty of that, aligning himself with the MAGA agenda going back into the first term.
More on Fifa
Related Topics:
“Together we will make not only America great again,” he said in January, “but also the entire world”.
There is often bemusement when Mr Infantino pops up wherever Mr Trump is – from a Saudi-backed financial conference in Miami to an official visit to Saudi Arabia and the Gaza peace summit in Egypt.
There isn’t a non-American with such prominent proximity to the presidency. And it’s being used to shortcut decision-making for the World Cup, with direct access to the most powerful man on Earth to help smooth the tournament’s delivery.
Mr Infantino knows how to chime with Mr Trump’s talking points, recently telling critics to lay off the president because he has a mandate from winning the 2024 election.
“We should all support what he is doing because I think he is doing pretty good,” Mr Infantino said.
Image: Pic: AP
For a man who was largely known a decade ago for drawing balls for the Champions League, the ascent to the peak of power has been rapid and only made possible by scandals knocking out presumptive leaders.
It will be a draw on Friday that cements this unlikeliest of bonds when the World Cup schedule is determined at the Kennedy Center in Washington DC.
So much has been done to flatter Mr Trump, to pander to his passions.
The one thing he craves more than anything is a peace prize.
And after missing out on the foremost, illustrious Nobel version – despite an endorsement from Mr Infantino – FIFA created its own to hand out on Friday without any announced process for nominations or selection.
And if there is one song to indulge Mr Trump with it is the unlikely YMCA. The 1970s disco group Village People have been hired for the draw ceremony.
Expect the Trump dance. Expect the unexpected. Expect uneasy moments as Mr Trump takes centre stage alongside Mr Infantino.
How freewheeling will the presidential address become?
And is it all too political, even for a football organisation rarely untouched by politics?
Image: Pic: AP
It has created awkward moments when Mr Trump has been disparaging towards Democrat-run cities attacked for not being safe.
“Gianni, can I say we will move (matches)?” Mr Trump asked on live TV in the Oval Office.
“I don’t think you’re going to have this problem. But we’re going to move the event to some place where it’s going to be appreciated and safe.”
Usually FIFA dismisses questions about moving World Cup venues this late on, but Mr Infantino responded in part: “Safety and security is the number one priority.”
Usually, FIFA would be working to ensure all fans can attend its tournament, but the governing body is not dissenting against the block on visitors from Iran and Haiti.
The rhetoric of Mr Trump – framed around security – collides with FIFA’s idealism about uniting the world through football, with everyone being welcome.
And this is not just about the US. For the first time this is a World Cup being co-hosted by three nations, even if Mr Infantino has paid more visits to just one of them.
Spotify
This content is provided by Spotify, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spotify cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spotify cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spotify cookies for this session only.
But the leaders of Canada and Mexico are due at the draw here in DC.
They’ll hope the football ceremony provides some respite from Mr Trump’s threats of a military strike on Mexico over drugs or deepening the trade war with Canada.
There is a peace prize to award, after all.
A celebration of all things Donald Trump.
And at some point, the teams will discover they will be drawn to play at the tournament next summer.
Because with Gianni Infantino it has to come back to football, the whole purpose of his role.
Even if his political alliances can seem more prominent than what happens on the pitch.