From Mayo to lawmakers, local voices react to reversal of Roe v. Wade and the future of abortion in Minnesota

Jordan Shearer, Post-Bulletin, Rochester, Minn.
·4 min read

Jun. 25—ROCHESTER — As soon as the U.S. Supreme Court released its historic decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, opinions on either side of the issue came flooding in from every corner of the state and country.

The court's decision reverses a nearly 50-year old decision that allowed abortions to be legal throughout the nation. With the reversal, individual states now will decide the issue for themselves.

It's unlikely that abortion access will change in Minnesota, at least in the near term. But, that doesn't mean local advocates of either side are impartial on the topic.

The Mayo Clinic released a brief statement on the issue: "Health care for pregnant people is complex and personal. As with any medical concern, decisions regarding a pregnant person's health are best discussed between the patient and health care provider."

Planned Parenthood, a provider of abortions, held a press conference Friday to talk about all the ramifications of the decision. According to Sarah Stoesz, CEO of Planned Parenthood North Central States, Minnesota could see an influx of women seeking abortions from other states, including the Dakotas and Wisconsin.

Sarag Traxler, chief medical officer for Planned Parenthood North Central States, described being the physician for the last abortion in South Dakota before the organization wrapped up operations because of a trigger ban that kicked in.

"The story was very similar to most patients I see," Traxler said about the last abortion in the state. "She was a young mother. She already had children. She was struggling to make ends meet and couldn't imagine bringing another child into that circumstance. And so thankfully, she was able to make decisions about her life and her family that were right for her."

Meanwhile, there were also those praising the Court's decision. The Catholic Bishops of Minnesota signed a letter, describing the resources available to help women with unwanted pregnancies. It spoke of crisis pregnancy centers, which offer resources and supplies for mothers in need.

"Our direct assistance to women in crisis pregnancies through charitable and philanthropic efforts is fundamental in our endeavor to build an authentic culture of life. But we also commit to working in our state Legislature to ensure that every child is welcomed in life and respected by the law," the letter from the bishops said.

Local conservative politicians also praised the ruling. Minnesota Sen. Jeremy Miller, R-Winona, the Senate majority leader, released a statement supporting the U.S. Supreme Court's decision. Miller declined a request for any additional comments beyond the statement itself, which read: "Today is a victory for every unborn child, affirming their life has value and is worth protecting. Senate Republicans are committed to working together to find consensus on protections for babies, and support for moms and families who choose life."

Gov. Tim Walz and Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan re-emphasized that abortion will remain legal in Minnesota. Even without the support of the governor, abortion access in Minnesota was reaffirmed by a 1995 state supreme court case, Doe v. Gomez.

State Rep. Steve Drazkowski, R-Mazeppa, clarified that although he is pro-life, nothing will change in Minnesota's near future.

"The people of Minnesota will get a say in what happens going forward, and that's the right way for this to be positioned," Drazkowski said. "They'll have that say through their legislature and governor in the future whether it's next year or whether it's 10 years from now, or 20 years from now."

Although abortion is expected to remain legal in Minnesota for the time being, multiple people say it is a constant battleground for both sides. Both Minnesota Reps. Liz Boldon and Tina Liebling referenced how abortion rights could change depending on the political climate.

"If the Legislature were to suddenly be all Republican, if the governor was Republican, we could be Texas in a year," Liebling said.

Nor is the battleground exclusively about abortion. In his concurrence opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas indicated the court could re-evaluate other previously established opinions, such as those governing contraceptives and same-sex relationships.

"I just think we have to have eyes wide open about what is happening here, and the direction the Supreme Court is going," Boldon said. "It's not hyperbole to say that other rights are on the line, such as the right to contraception, the right to same-sex marriage. We will be seeing more to come."