Student: Robin Perry
Major: Political Science
Advisors: Angie Bos, Bas van Doorn
This I.S. explores the impact of the Supreme Court decisions of Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey on liberal opinion elite rhetoric about abortion in the states of Ohio and Kentucky. The purpose of this study is to determine if there is an increase in use of public health arguments as access to abortion is restricted. The results of my quantitative analysis show that, in both states, public health arguments continue to decrease over time, and the use of rights arguments remains steady over time. Through my qualitative analysis I found the most common arguments around the proposal of the heartbeat bill were public health arguments about AFAB women who had medically necessary abortions. In conclusion, this shows that the Supreme Court has a sustained impact on the rhetoric of liberal opinion elites, since their editorial and opinion articles mirror the language used in Roe.
Robin will be online to field comments on May 8:
2-4pm EDT (PST 11am-1pm, Africa/Europe: evening)