The Arc of Conviction: History, Strategy, and Ethical Foundations of the American Pro-Life Movement

The Arc of Conviction: History, Strategy, and Ethical Foundations of the American Pro-Life Movement The pro-life movement in the United States represents one of the most enduring, politically effective, and structurally complex social movements of the last half-century. Tracing its trajectory requires understanding not merely the reaction to key court decisions, but the underlying religious, biological, and political frameworks that allowed it to evolve from a diffuse, multi-partisan cause into a dominant force within American conservatism. Its core mission—to restore legal protection to unborn human life—has been pursued through a meticulous, multi-decade strategy encompassing grassroots mobilization, state-level incremental legislation, and, crucially, a successful long-term campaign to reshape the federal judiciary. The movement’s foundational ethical belief is that human life possesses intrinsic worth from conception, necessitating legal protection as a civil right. I. Foundational Origins and Pre-1973 Context: The Seeds of Restriction The legal and social environment regarding abortion in the United States was historically characterized by pervasive restrictions that predated the 20th century. By the 1880s, every state had enacted laws limiting abortion access, typically only permitting the procedure if a physician determined it was necessary to save the patient's life or health. This landscape solidified such that by 1910, abortion was outright illegal at every stage of pregnancy across the country, with few exceptions. A. The “Century of Criminalization” and Medical Authority The initial drive for criminalization in the mid-19th century was championed by the American Medical Association (AMA), founded in 1847. This male-dominated medical authority embarked on a comprehensive campaign to criminalize abortion and, simultaneously, to target and marginalize female abortion providers. AMA members asserted that they should retain the power to decide when an abortion could be legally performed. This historical mobilization, spearheaded by the medical establishment, provided an institutional and supposedly secular basis for state control over abortion. This framing—where the medical community asserted its authority to define and restrict the practice—would later be leveraged by modern anti-abortion activists to argue that restrictions were historically valid and professionally sanctioned, positioning the eventual Roe v. Wade decision as an anomaly that ignored long-standing legal tradition. Despite legal prohibitions, abortion procedures were common. Estimates suggest that in the 1950s and 1960s, between 200,000 and 1.2 million illegal abortions occurred annually. However, access was heavily stratified by economic status. Women with substantial financial resources could sometimes navigate the system to obtain legal abortions through complicated committee approvals or by traveling long distances to states where legal options were available. For less affluent women, especially those from minority groups, the options were limited to dangerous, illegal procedures. Data from the early 1970s illustrates this tragic disparity: the mortality rate due to illegal abortion for nonwhite women was 12 times that for white women. B. Early Resistance and The Rise of the Organizational Infrastructure The anti-abortion perspective did not materialize suddenly in 1973. Organized resistance began to coalesce as state laws liberalized in the years leading up to the Supreme Court's ruling. Between 1967 and 1973, many states, responding to reform movements, either repealed their bans entirely (four states, including New York and Hawaii) or enacted reforms (13 states) that broadened exceptions to include cases involving rape, incest, fetal abnormalities, or danger to physical or mental health. Indeed, by 1973, abortion reform legislation had been introduced in all but five states, indicating the issue was already undergoing rapid, albeit contentious, legislative movement. The National Right to Life Committee (NRLC), the eventual organizational cornerstone of the movement, was established in 1968, predating Roe v. Wade. Its mission, formally established after the 1973 decision, was to "promote respect for the worth and dignity of all human life, including the life of the unborn child from the moment of conception" and to sponsor legislative measures to protect the defenseless, incompetent, and impaired. The movement’s early leaders, such as Dr. Mildred Jefferson—the first African-American woman to graduate from Harvard Medical School and NRLC president from 1975 to 1978—framed the struggle broadly as a human dignity and civil rights cause. It is important to note that the earliest anti-abortion organizations, particularly those founded by Catholics in the late 1960s, included liberal Democrats who aligned their campaign with the human rights principles of New Deal and Great Society liberalism. The accelerating legislative push for liberalization and the subsequent judicial intervention by the Supreme Court in Roe fundamentally altered this political landscape. The Court’s decision to intervene by nationalizing the right to abortion, rather than allowing the volatile legislative process to continue resolving or escalating the issue state-by-state, concentrated and intensified the political backlash. The outcome of Roe transformed a developing legislative policy conflict into a protracted constitutional crisis that would drive political strategy for the next five decades. II. The Shock of Roe and Political Transformation (1973–1980s) The 1973 decisions in Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton struck down most state laws restricting abortion, declaring that the unborn were not protected by the U.S. Constitution. This declaration was perceived by opponents as a profound legal and moral injury. Activists immediately likened the ruling to the infamous 1857 Dred Scott v. Sandford decision, which had denied citizenship rights to Black Americans. This comparison was strategically vital, positioning the burgeoning anti-abortion movement as a contemporary civil rights struggle for the unborn. A. Organizational Mobilization and the Catholic Infrastructure In the face of the Roe defeat, which led to a massive expansion of legal abortions, exceeding 1 million procedures per year by the end of the 1970s , the countermovement mobilized rapidly. Although the movement lacked a single centralized decision-making body, it drew heavily on the existing institutional resources of the Catholic Church. This structure enabled immediate grassroots mobilization, with local parish priests providing leadership in educational outreach, political lobbying, and direct action against abortion providers. The NRLC, formally organized in June 1973, served as the national coordinating body, dedicated to defending life across its spectrum. B. The Great Partisan Realignment The movement's most significant transformation in the post-Roe era was its decisive shift from a diverse, non-partisan origin to a politically conservative, Republican-aligned force. The initial failure of the early Catholic effort to build a liberal coalition was partly due to the overwhelming perception that abortion rights were inherently a women's rights issue, which was difficult for the initial liberal-rights based pro-life framing to overcome. By the late 1970s, this dynamic was exploited by the Republican Party. Political analysis indicates that the hyper-polarization around abortion became an expression of intentional political strategy, specifically the Republican effort to capture the Catholic vote and consolidate the social conservative coalition. Republicans campaigning for Richard Nixon in 1972 began drawing Catholics and social conservatives away from the Democratic Party by adopting new positions on abortion. The decisive entry of Protestant evangelicals into the movement in the late 1970s further catalyzed this shift. Evangelicals helped broaden the movement’s popular base and rebranded the cause. They reframed the anti-abortion campaign away from the ideology of rights and toward the politics of "moral order" and "family values". This institutional alliance between the Christian Right and the formerly predominantly Catholic movement profoundly impacted national electoral fortunes, moving the pro-life cause firmly into the center of the Republican platform and fracturing the traditional Catholic Democratic bloc. The court decision in Roe had the effect of enabling this party realignment, which then escalated and shaped the ensuing conflict. III. Strategic Pillars: Legislation, Funding, and Incrementalism With the constitutional right to abortion affirmed under Roe v. Wade, the pro-life movement developed and executed a three-pronged strategy to restrict access, challenge the legal framework, and mobilize political capital. A. The Power of the Purse: The Hyde Amendment The first major legislative victory occurred at the federal level with the passage of the Hyde Amendment in 1976. This annual appropriations rider prohibits the use of federal funds to pay for abortions, or to cover the costs of health plans that include abortion coverage, except in narrowly defined circumstances (rape, incest, or danger to the life of the mother). The immediate impact of this strategy was profound and practical. Following the Supreme Court's upholding of the Amendment in 1980, the number of abortions funded by federal Medicaid dollars dropped dramatically from approximately 300,000 per year to only a few thousand. This demonstrated a critical strategic understanding: since Congress controls federal spending, restriction of funding could achieve major practical results even if constitutional legality remained unchanged. This strategy leveraged the power of the purse to effectively create a system of unequal access based on wealth, circumventing Roe’s protection of the procedure itself. This restriction created a system of unequal access based on socioeconomic status. The Hyde Amendment disproportionately affects low-income Americans enrolled in public health programs like Medicaid. Women in states without Medicaid coverage were found to be significantly more likely to pay for their procedures out of pocket or rely on financial assistance from third-party abortion funds. B. State-Level Incrementalism and Regulation The second pillar involved the systematic passage of state laws designed to regulate abortion access, placing burdens on providers and patients to test the limits of the constitutional right. After the 1992 Planned Parenthood v. Casey decision established the "undue burden" standard, the movement focused heavily on targeted measures such as mandatory waiting periods, informed consent requirements, and parental involvement (PI) laws for minors. These laws were not merely attempts at restriction; they served as legal wedges. Studies on parental involvement laws, which require parental consent or notification for minors, suggest an association with decreased abortion rates. These laws were also observed to sometimes increase pregnancy and birth rates or force minors to travel out of state for procedures. By pushing these regulatory limits, the movement forced the judiciary to repeatedly adjudicate and refine the constitutional standard of undue burden. This prolonged legal engagement created an extensive evidentiary and legal record used to argue that the judicial standards themselves—especially the viability line—were arbitrary and unworkable. C. The Judicial Long Game The recognition that constitutional reform requires judicial change led to the third, and ultimately most successful, pillar of the strategy: controlling judicial appointments. The movement dedicated itself to ensuring that presidents nominate, and the Senate confirms, federal judges and Supreme Court justices who were ideologically inclined to revisit Roe. This focused, long-term political mobilization turned Supreme Court appointments into deeply partisan and contentious battles, ultimately creating the necessary ideological majority to achieve the long-sought goal of reversal. IV. The Long Game: Judicial Strategy and the Overturning of Roe (1990s–2022) The pro-life movement’s persistent legal strategy targeted the core constitutional weaknesses it perceived in the Roe framework, particularly the arbitrary nature of the viability standard. A. Challenging the Viability Standard From the movement’s perspective, the viability standard (the point at which the fetus can survive outside the womb) was constitutionally unsound because it relied on fluid, changing factors. Justice Alito, during oral arguments in the Dobbs case, noted that "viability is dependent on medical technology and medical practice. It has changed. It may continue to change". The arbitrary nature of the viability line was repeatedly challenged as unsuitable for defining a fundamental constitutional right. The legal arguments underpinning the push for reversal were well-established in the original dissents to Roe. Justice William Rehnquist's dissent in 1973, for instance, provided the historical and originalist blueprint, concluding that state restrictions on abortion were consistent with the 14th Amendment's meaning at the time of its adoption, arguing that its drafters could not have intended to create rights that conflicted with those existing laws. B. Dobbs v. Jackson: The Strategy’s Culmination The culmination of the movement’s judicial strategy arrived with Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, which challenged Mississippi’s ban on abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy. This case presented the Supreme Court with the opportunity to directly address the question of "[w]hether all previability prohibitions on elective abortions are unconstitutional". Mississippi’s argument was centered on federalism and democratic legitimacy, asserting that the Constitution trusts the people to resolve hard moral issues like abortion, and since the Constitution is silent on the matter, authority must be returned to the states (federalism). By framing Roe as an unconstitutional fabrication and a severe historical error, the movement successfully persuaded the conservative judicial majority that the doctrine of stare decisis (respect for precedent) should be abandoned in this case. Justice Alito, writing for the majority, emphasized that Roe and Casey "must be overruled" because the Constitution "makes no reference to abortion," and no such right is implicitly protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. The Dobbs decision in June 2022 achieved the movement’s primary goal: it dismantled the federal constitutional right to abortion and explicitly returned the authority to regulate or prohibit abortion to the states. This marked the successful conclusion of the judicial long game and necessitated a complete shift in the movement’s political focus from Washington, D.C., to state capitals. The table below summarizes the critical milestones of the judicial and political campaign leading up to the Dobbs decision: Table 1: Key Milestones in Pro-Life Legal and Political Strategy (1973–2022) Era/Period Key Strategic Focus Landmark Achievement/Event Significance Pre-Roe (Late 1960s) Early Mobilization and Rights Framing Founding of National Right to Life (1968); Dr. Mildred Jefferson's leadership Established the organizational backbone and early focus on human dignity/civil rights framework. Immediate Post-Roe (1973–1980) Organizational Consolidation & Access Restriction NRLC formalization (1973); Passage of the Hyde Amendment (1976/1980) Defined the movement's goal (life from conception); immediately restricted access for low-income women, circumventing Roe. Political Realignment (1970s–1980s) Partisan Shift & Electoral Power Evangelical entry; Integration into the Republican "Family Values" platform Transitioned from a Democratic/Catholic movement to a conservative political force, securing long-term judicial strategy support. Incrementalism & Judicial Pressure (1980s–2021) State Restrictions and Judicial Appointments Proliferation of Parental Involvement (PI) Laws and Waiting Periods; Focus on Supreme Court nominations Tested the Roe/Casey "undue burden" standard and positioned conservative judges for future reversal. Strategy Culmination (2022) Overruling Constitutional Right to Abortion Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization Returned regulatory authority to state legislatures, ending the federal constitutional right to abortion. C. The Next Legal Frontier: Personhood While Dobbs achieved the massive goal of overturning the constitutional right to abortion, it deliberately avoided defining the legal status of the unborn. As noted by proponents of the movement, Dobbs "left unresolved the vital question of personhood" under the U.S. Constitution, which itself does not define the word "person". The legal objective moving forward is to use legislative and constitutional means to affirm the unborn child as a "person" under the 14th Amendment, thereby ensuring their right to life is legally recognized and protected. Legislative proposals, such as the Life at Conception Act, seek to explicitly fill this gap left by Dobbs by declaring that unborn children are persons entitled to equal protection under the law from the moment of conception, recognizing that science confirms a unique human life begins at fertilization. This pivot highlights that the movement's legal campaign has shifted from overturning an existing right to affirmatively establishing a new one. V. The Non-Legal Pillar: The Culture of Life Movement (Post-Dobbs Era) The pro-life movement has long recognized that legal restrictions alone are insufficient to achieve a "culture of life." This parallel commitment involves establishing a robust network of non-legal, social support systems focused on alternatives to abortion and long-term care for mothers and children. A. Crisis Pregnancy Centers (CPCs) and Direct Aid The institutional manifestation of the non-legal pillar is the widespread network of Crisis Pregnancy Centers (CPCs), or Pregnancy Resource Centers (PRCs). These non-profit organizations, many with religious affiliations, seek to intercept women with unintended pregnancies who are considering abortion, encouraging them toward parenting or adoption. The CPC movement began with Catholic activism but expanded significantly after 1973, integrating strongly with evangelical Christian networks through umbrella organizations like Heartbeat International and Care Net. PRCs strive to provide comprehensive support free of charge and confidentially. Services commonly offered include free pregnancy tests, counseling, medical and social service referrals, housing assistance, material goods (clothing and supplies for mother and baby), and ongoing support. Crucially, many PRCs are licensed adoption agencies, specializing in open adoption and advocating a "birthmother first" approach for women not prepared to parent. Grassroots initiatives like Sidewalk Advocates for Life provide prayerful support and attempt to connect women with PRC resources outside abortion facilities. B. Post-Dobbs Investment and Legislative Expansion The extensive and visible funding of maternal and child support services is a critical strategic imperative in the post-Dobbs environment. This commitment directly addresses the long-standing political criticism that the movement is only "pro-birth" and neglects life after birth. By institutionalizing tangible support, the movement strengthens its moral authority and political legitimacy as it pursues further legislative bans. In the two years following Dobbs, states that enacted life-protecting laws have concurrently passed measures to expand support for pregnant and new mothers. These efforts include improving maternal healthcare, providing state support for PRCs, and advocating for pro-family tax policies. Faith-based organizations play a major role in funding this expansion. For instance, the Knights of Columbus launched the ASAP Program (Aid and Support After Pregnancy), which has donated over $10 million to PRCs and maternity homes since the Dobbs decision. Collaborative networks, such as Her PLAN, organize medical, social, and material assistance providers to ensure mothers and children receive the comprehensive care needed to thrive. The shift of the regulatory battleground to the states requires the pro-life movement to balance its legislative goals with its commitment to social support. This dual focus defines the new "Culture of Life" strategy, recognizing that the successful defense of life requires both legal protection for the unborn and tangible care for the vulnerable mother and child. Table 3 summarizes the strategic components of the Culture of Life movement in the current regulatory environment: Table 3: Culture of Life Strategy Components (Post-Dobbs Era) Strategy Component Primary Function Examples of Support/Initiative Direct Intervention/Support Intercepting women considering abortion and providing tangible alternatives. Crisis Pregnancy Centers (CPCs/PRCs); offering counseling, ultrasounds, and material supplies. Comprehensive Maternal Welfare Establishing a support ecosystem for pregnant individuals and new mothers. Her PLAN Network (medical, housing, mentorship); Knights of Columbus ASAP Program donations. Legislative/Policy Expansion Utilizing state power post-Dobbs to establish robust governmental support structures. Improving maternal healthcare; supporting PRCs with state funding; advocating for pro-family tax policies. VI. Synthesis of the Ethical Imperative: Life from Conception The core conviction driving the pro-life movement is that protecting human life from conception constitutes the most ethical choice for society. This position is grounded in biological facts, a belief in inherent human worth, and a specific philosophical argument concerning potentiality. A. The Biological and Scientific Claim The foundational premise is biological: human life begins at fertilization. The movement cites a strong consensus among scientists, physicians, and embryologists globally who affirm that conception marks the beginning of a unique human being. The binding of the sperm and egg results in a single, hybrid cell known as a zygote or one-cell embryo, which is genetically distinct and alive. Experts in human embryology universally state that the life of the new individual human being begins at fertilization. Proponents stress that this is a matter of settled human embryological fact, independent of religious faith. This biological starting point establishes the object of concern as a member of the human species. From this, the movement derives the concept of inherent worth. B. Inherent Worth and the Sanctity of Life The movement posits that the value of any human being is intrinsic, stemming solely from its membership in the human species, regardless of location (in or out of the womb), age, appearance, or level of dependence. This perspective rejects philosophical criteria for personhood that rely on "thick" attributes such as consciousness, moral agency, or rationality. Instead, it adopts a biological conception of life, arguing that because the preborn are human, they possess inherent worth and are thus among the most vulnerable members of society, deserving of full legal protection. ### C. The Pro-Potentialist Thesis and Moral Rights Philosophically, the pro-life stance is often articulated through the "pro-potentialist" thesis, which argues that the status of the human fetus as a potential innocent person is sufficient to extend to it a full moral right to life. The traditional moral argument is structured to establish the fetus's right to life: All innocent persons have a moral right to life. Therefore, all potential innocent persons also have a moral right to life. The human fetus is a potential innocent person. Conclusion: The human fetus has a moral right to life. The crucial second premise—that potentiality confers a right—is justified by arguing that a moral right to life constitutes a benefit for a potential person, and its denial is a significant harm. This perspective holds that protection of the potential person's welfare interest in continued development helps the moral community. The movement contends that society already extends protections to individuals who are rudimentary in their capacity, such as the potentially sick who receive a moral right to health care, in order to secure their welfare interest in continued health and development. D. Ethical Conclusion The resulting ethical conclusion is that the human fetus possesses a right to life that must be secured by the moral community. Because the pregnancy is understood to involve a separate, vulnerable human life with inherent worth and a moral right to continued development, the intentional termination of that life is deemed ethically impermissible, regardless of the burden or infringement on individual bodily autonomy. In the framework of the pro-life movement, the protection of this vulnerable, developing life from conception is paramount, solidifying the claim that this position represents the superior ethical choice. Table 2 synthesizes the ethical and biological premises that form the foundation of the movement's mission: Table 2: The Pro-Life Movement’s Core Ethical and Biological Premises Premise/Claim Core Statement Basis (Scientific/Philosophical) Ethical Conclusion Biological Start of Life A unique human being is created at the moment of fertilization (conception). Genetic and embryological consensus: the zygote is alive and human, possessing distinct DNA. The intentional termination of this life is morally wrong, regardless of gestational age. Inherent Worth The value of a human being is intrinsic, stemming from species membership, not functional capacity. Rejection of "thick" definitions of personhood (consciousness/agency); emphasis on biological status. The preborn child, however vulnerable, possesses the same inherent worth as any born human. Potentiality Argument The fetus, as a potential innocent person, is entitled to a full moral right to life. Philosophical claim: denying a right to life constitutes harm to a being whose welfare interest is continued development. The right to life of the potential person outweighs the competing interest of bodily autonomy (pro-potentialist thesis). Legal Goal (Personhood) The unborn child must be legally recognized as a "person" under the 14th Amendment. Legislative intent (Life at Conception Act) to ensure equal protection under the law for all human beings. This recognition is required to rectify the perceived injustice of Roe and enforce absolute protection. Conclusions The history of the American pro-life movement is a remarkable case study in how a social cause, initially dispersed and marginalized by a landmark judicial decision, successfully navigated the political and legal landscape for fifty years to achieve its primary objective. Tracing its development reveals key strategic decisions that underpinned its evolution into a major political and social force. The movement did not begin as a monolithic conservative entity, but rather transitioned from a loose collection of activists, including liberal Catholics concerned with human rights, into a central, powerful component of the Republican coalition. This was largely driven by the calculated political recruitment of evangelical Protestants following Roe, enabling the strategic partisan realignment essential to securing the political and institutional support needed to wage a long-term campaign against judicial precedent. The movement’s operational success rested on a sophisticated multi-track strategy: first, establishing pragmatic restrictions on funding through federal policy like the Hyde Amendment to limit physical access for low-income women; and second, deploying state-level incremental regulations to continually challenge and weaken the constitutional framework established by Roe and Casey. The culmination of this strategy was the successful long-term campaign to populate the federal judiciary with constitutional originalists, resulting in the judicial dismantling of Roe v. Wade in Dobbs v. Jackson. In the post-Dobbs era, the movement faces new complexities. The legal focus has shifted from overturning precedent to proactively defining the unborn as legal persons under the Constitution. Simultaneously, the movement’s commitment to building a "Culture of Life" through Crisis Pregnancy Centers and state-funded maternal support programs is critical. This investment is not only a moral extension of their philosophy—that protection must extend past birth—but also a political necessity, strengthening the legitimacy of state bans by demonstrating a comprehensive commitment to vulnerable mothers and children. The ongoing conflict will now play out across fifty state legislatures, fundamentally shaping the future intersection of moral conviction and public policy in the United States. Works cited 1. Historical Abortion Law Timeline: 1850 to Today - Planned Parenthood Action Fund, https://www.plannedparenthoodaction.org/issues/abortion/abortion-central-history-reproductive-health-care-america/historical-abortion-law-timeline-1850-today 2. Lessons from Before Roe: Will Past be Prologue? - Guttmacher Institute, https://www.guttmacher.org/gpr/2003/03/lessons-roe-will-past-be-prologue 3. Learn - National Right to Life, https://kyrighttolife.org/learn/ 4. Media, politics, and the National Right to Life Committee (Chapter 4) - Abortion Politics, Mass Media, and Social Movements in America - Cambridge University Press, https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/abortion-politics-mass-media-and-social-movements-in-america/media-politics-and-the-national-right-to-life-committee/3A9A69DB772CD434B42733EDF848A04D 5. The Partisan Trajectory of the American Pro-Life Movement: How a Liberal Catholic Campaign Became a Conservative Evangelical Cause - MDPI, https://www.mdpi.com/2077-1444/6/2/451 6. Before (and After) Roe v. Wade: New Questions About Bacdash, https://law.yale.edu/sites/default/files/documents/pdf/Faculty/Siegel_BeforeAndAfterRoeVWadeNewQuestionsAboutBacklash.pdf 7. United States anti-abortion movement - Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_anti-abortion_movement 8. The Pro-Life Movement: A History | McGrath Institute for Church Life, https://mcgrath.nd.edu/assets/458944/the_pro_life_movement_a_history.pdf 9. Movement and Countermovement Mobilization in the US Abortion Conflict | PS: Political Science & Politics - Cambridge University Press, https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/ps-political-science-and-politics/article/movement-and-countermovement-mobilization-in-the-us-abortion-conflict/CFCD04B2DECD2B7EA4076980B0D07D51 10. Protest and Religion: The U.S. Pro-Life Movement | Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics, https://oxfordre.com/politics/display/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.001.0001/acrefore-9780190228637-e-684?d=%2F10.1093%2Facrefore%2F9780190228637.001.0001%2Facrefore-9780190228637-e-684&p=emailAePdPYyuSHe5o 11. Hyde Amendment - Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyde_Amendment 12. The Hyde Amendment: An Abortion Barrier Hiding in Plain Sight | League of Women Voters, https://www.lwv.org/blog/hyde-amendment-abortion-barrier-hiding-plain-sight 13. Casey at Twenty: Pro-Life Progress Despite a Judicial Setback, https://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2012/07/5918/ 14. The impact of parental involvement laws on minors seeking abortion services: a systematic review - NIH, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10986272/ 15. Pro-Life Legal Analysis of Oral Arguments in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health, https://aul.org/2021/12/06/analysis-of-oral-arguments-in-dobbs-v-jackson-womens-health/ 16. Federal Courts - Planned Parenthood Action Fund, https://www.plannedparenthoodaction.org/issues/federal-courts 17. Term limits—a way to tackle the Supreme Court's crisis of legitimacy - Brookings Institution, https://www.brookings.edu/articles/term-limits-a-way-to-tackle-the-supreme-courts-crisis-of-legitimacy/ 18. Roe v. Wade | 410 U.S. 113 (1973) - Justia U.S. Supreme Court Center, https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/410/113/ 19. Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization (2022) - The National Constitution Center, https://constitutioncenter.org/the-constitution/supreme-court-case-library/dobbs-v-jackson-womens-health-organization 20. Congressman Burlison Introduces the Life at Conception Act, https://burlison.house.gov/media/press-releases/congressman-burlison-introduces-life-conception-act 21. Beyond Abortion: Why the Personhood Movement Implicates Reproductive Choice - MC Law Digital Commons - Mississippi College, https://dc.law.mc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1000&context=faculty-journals 22. Why Crisis Pregnancy Centers Are Legal but Unethical - AMA Journal of Ethics, https://journalofethics.ama-assn.org/article/why-crisis-pregnancy-centers-are-legal-unethical/2018-03 23. Crisis pregnancy center - Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crisis_pregnancy_center 24. Alternatives to Abortion: Pregnancy Resource Centers - Focus on the Family, https://www.focusonthefamily.com/pro-life/alternatives-to-abortion-pregnancy-resource-centers/ 25. Our Center, https://cpotulsa.org/about-us/our-center 26. Pregnancy Crisis Center - PCC Daytona, https://www.pccdaytona.org/ 27. Pro-Life - Office of Life, Justice and Peace - Los Angeles, CA, https://lifejusticeandpeace.lacatholics.org/respect-life 28. Challenges for the Pro-Life Movement in a Post-Roe Era | Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-law-medicine-and-ethics/article/challenges-for-the-prolife-movement-in-a-postroe-era/439BA3E4C9B80A019E0EF4A29165BEE1 29. Abortion and the pro-life movement two years after Dobbs, https://erlc.com/resource/abortion-and-the-pro-life-movement-two-years-after-dobbs/ 30. ASAP (Aid and Support After Pregnancy) | The Knights of Columbus, https://www.kofc.org/en/what-we-do/faith-in-action-programs/life/aid-suppport-after-pregnancy.html 31. Pastoral Care - Catholic Charities of Central Florida, https://cflcc.org/culture-of-life-2/pastoral-care/ 32. Science is clear: Each new human life begins at fertilization, https://www.akleg.gov/basis/get_documents.asp?session=33&docid=31381 33. When Human Life Begins - American College of Pediatricians, https://acpeds.org/when-human-life-begins/ 34. It is worth repeating: “life begins at conception” is a religious, not scientific, concept - PMC, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9532882/ 35. Revisiting the argument from fetal potential - PMC - PubMed Central, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1892780/ 36. Pro-Choice Does Not Mean Pro-Abortion: An Argument for Abortion Rights Featuring the Rev. Carlton Veazey | Pew Research Center, https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2008/09/30/pro-choice-does-not-mean-pro-abortion-an-argument-for-abortion-rights-featuring-the-rev-carlton-veazey/ AI GENERATED (always verify)