719 - The Two Major Abortion Cases Coming to the Supreme Court
Public Health On Call
The Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health
4.6 • 644 Ratings
🗓️ 12 February 2024
⏱️ 20 minutes
🧾️ Download transcript
Summary
In the Dobbs decision, the SCOTUS majority hoped to return legal issues around abortion back to the states. But since overturning Roe v. Wade, a flurry of litigation has now put two consequential cases before the Supreme Court. Public health law expert Joanne Rosen talks with Dr. Josh Sharfstein about these two cases and the wide-ranging impacts they could have. They also discuss why abortion health care, largely an issue governed by individual states, keeps finding its way back into conversations about federal oversight.
Transcript
Click on a timestamp to play from that location
| 0:00.0 | Welcome to Public Health On Call, a podcast from the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, |
| 0:05.9 | where we bring evidence, experience, and perspective to make sense of today's leading health challenges. |
| 0:16.3 | If you have questions or ideas for us, please send an email to Public Health Question at jh.h.u.edu. |
| 0:23.8 | That's Public Health Question at jh.u.edu for future podcast episodes. |
| 0:31.9 | This is Lindsay Smith-Rogers, producer of Public Health on Call. |
| 0:36.0 | Today, Joanne Rosen, an attorney and practice professor at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health On Call. Today, Joanne Rosen, an attorney and practice professor |
| 0:39.1 | at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, speaks to Dr. Josh Sharfstein about |
| 0:44.0 | two consequential legal cases about abortion coming to the Supreme Court this term. Let's listen. |
| 0:52.3 | Joanne, Rosen, thank you for joining me again on public health on call to talk about litigation related to abortion. |
| 1:00.2 | We've spoken a few times. |
| 1:01.6 | We certainly spoke right after the Dobbs decision. |
| 1:04.6 | And one of the parts of our discussion and of that case that I remember is that the logic by the justices who |
| 1:13.0 | voted to strike down Roe versus Wade was that it would get the courts to some extent out of |
| 1:19.9 | the abortion issue. It was now headed back to states. Did I remember that right? You do. That's |
| 1:26.5 | correct. What the Dobbs court said very clearly is that they were returning the question of abortion |
| 1:34.3 | regulation to the people through their elected representatives. And states and Congress would then be able to |
| 1:43.4 | regulate abortion in a way that reflected the wishes of its |
| 1:47.6 | residents or citizens. And I think implicit within that, explicit returning it to the states, |
| 1:54.3 | was the expectation that the Supreme Court would be able to be removed from adjudicating all these abortion disputes. |
| 2:03.5 | So that, I think, really was the hope of the majority in Dobbs. |
| 2:08.5 | That's what they were thinking then. How does it look now? |
| 2:12.4 | Abortion was extraordinarily fraught and litigious and controversial for all of the years between Roe and Dobbs, |
... |
Please login to see the full transcript.
Disclaimer: The podcast and artwork embedded on this page are from The Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, and are the property of its owner and not affiliated with or endorsed by Tapesearch.
Generated transcripts are the property of The Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and are distributed freely under the Fair Use doctrine. Transcripts generated by Tapesearch are not guaranteed to be accurate.
Copyright © Tapesearch 2026.