Passing certain amendments in Arizona, Florida, Missouri, Nebraska and South Dakota likely would lead to undoing bans or restrictions that currently block varying levels of abortion access to more than 7 million women of childbearing age who live in those states.

The future legality and availability of abortion hinges not only on ballot measures, as policies could shift depending on who controls Congress and the presidency. Same with state governments — including legislatures that pursue new laws, state supreme courts that determine the laws’ constitutionality, attorneys general who decide whether to defend them and district attorneys who enforce them.

If all the abortion rights measures pass, “it’s a sign of how much of a juggernaut support for reproductive rights has become,” said Mary Ziegler, a professor at the University of California Davis School of Law and an expert on the history of reproductive rights in the U.S.

“If some of them fail,” she added, “then you’re going to see some conservatives looking for guidance to see what the magic ingredient was that made it possible for conservatives to stem the tide.”

Voters have been supporting abortion rights

Abortion rights advocates have prevailed on all seven measures that have appeared since 2022, when the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade and ended the nationwide right to abortion. That decision opened the door to bans or restrictions in most GOP-controlled states — and protections of access in most of those controlled by Democrats.

The abortion rights campaigns have a big fundraising advantage this year. Their opponents’ efforts are focused on portraying the amendments as too extreme rather than abortion as immoral.

Currently, 13 states are enforcing bans at all stages of pregnancy, with some exceptions. Four more bar abortion in most cases after about six weeks of pregnancy — before women often realize they’re pregnant. Despite the bans, the number of monthly abortions in the U.S. has risen slightly, because of the growing use of abortion pills and organized efforts to help women travel for abortion. Still, advocates say the bans have reduced access, especially for lower-income and minority residents of the states with bans.

The bans also are part of a key argument in the presidential race. Vice President Kamala Harris calls them “Trump abortion bans,” noting former President Donald Trump’s role in overturning Roe v. Wade. Harris, meanwhile, has portrayed herself as a direct, consistent advocate for reproductive health and rights, including Black maternal health.

Trump has struggled to thread a divide between his own base of anti-abortion supporters and the majority of Americans who support abortion rights, leaning on his catch-all response that abortion rights should be left up to individual states.

His shifting stances on reproductive rights include vowing in October to veto a national abortion ban, just weeks after the presidential debate when he repeatedly declined to say. Trump also has regularly taken credit for appointing three Supreme Court justices who helped overturn Roe v. Wade.

Trump’s attempt to find a more cautious stance on abortion echoes the efforts of many Republican congressional candidates as the issue has emerged as a major vulnerability for the GOP. In competitive congressional races from coast to coast, Republicans distanced themselves from more aggressive anti-abortion policies coming from their party and its allies, despite their records on the issue and previous statements opposing abortion rights.

The measures could roll back bans in five states

While the ballot questions have similar aims, each one occupies its own political circumstances.

There’s an added obstacle to passing protections in reliably Republican Florida: Supporters of the amendment must get at least 60% of the vote.

Passing it there and rolling back a 6-week ban that took effect in May would be a blow to Gov. Ron DeSantis, a Republican with a national profile, who has steered state GOP funds to the cause and whose administration has weighed in, too, with a campaign against the measure, investigators questioning people who signed petitions to add it to the ballot and threats to TV stations that aired one commercial supporting it.

Nebraska has competing ballot measures. One would allow abortion further into pregnancy. The other would enshrine in the constitution the state’s current law, which bars most abortions after 12 weeks — but would allow for further restrictions.

In South Dakota, the measure would allow some regulations related to the health of the woman after 12 weeks. Because of that wrinkle, most national abortion-rights groups are not supporting it.

In some states, notably Missouri, passing amendments may not expand access immediately. Courts would be asked to invalidate the bans; and there could be legal battles over that. Clinics would need to staff up and get licenses. And some restrictions could remain in effect.

Arizona, a battleground in the presidential election, bans abortion after the first 15 weeks of pregnancy.

The ballot measure there gained momentum after a state Supreme Court ruling in April found that the state could enforce a strict abortion ban adopted in 1864. Some GOP lawmakers joined with Democrats to repeal the law before it could be enforced.

The measures would enshrine current access laws elsewhere

In the Democratic-controlled Colorado and Maryland, the ballot measures would largely put existing policies into the state constitutions, though Colorado’s version could also remove financial barriers to abortion. It would take 55% of the vote to pass there.

Measures maintaining access also are on the ballot in Montana, where a U.S. Senate race could help determine control of the chamber, and Nevada, a battleground in the presidential election.

In Nevada, where control of the state government is divided, the ballot measure would have to be passed this year and again in 2026 to take effect.

New York also has a measure on the ballot that its supporters say would bolster abortion rights. It doesn’t contain the word “abortion” but rather bans discrimination on the basis of “pregnancy outcomes, and reproductive healthcare and autonomy.”