Is abortion a right for all?

Beyond the discussion on the effective right to abortion for Latina based on their mobility and geographical position, there is also the question of respect for the rights of immigrants, regardless of immigration status. This respect for rights is modulated by the level of mobility; there is a differentiation in the application of the right to abortion among undocumented women living in border areas; living outside the border area; or in custody. This raises the question of undocumented women’s right to abortion. For abortion advocates and undocumented migrant advocacy groups, women’s right to choose when it comes to their reproductive health cannot be challenged on the ground of their migratory status. On the other hand, there is a discourse, particularly among conservative states, which opposes the recognition of undocumented migrants as being full individuals whose rights are protected in the same way as US citizens (No. 17-654, 2017). This discourse impacts (un)documented women in the borderlands but also those in custody. While abortion rights are protected for (un)documented women, there have been cases where (un)documented minors were refused access to abortion while in government custody (Sacchetti, 2017; Garza v. Hargan, 2017a, 2017b,

• 2017c; Schwartz, 2018; Pilkington, 2018). Thus, in addition to the physical, economic, socio-cultural and legislative limitations that arise between (undocumented women and access to abortion, there are legal obstacles that are the source of a debate on the applicability of the right to an abortion for noncitizens. (Un)documented women living in the border area and in detention are not simply restricted in their reproductive rights; they are stripped of their right to abortion and reproductive health because of their migration status.
• * * *

In relation to healthcare, the border is a site of many possibilities, but it also is a site of restrictions, where citizenship status requirements are heightened, where mobility is further controlled and where money matters. While the Supreme Court’s 1973 decision aimed at securing a right to abortion for all, analyzing the application of that right, from geographical disparities to variable levels of body controls, based on immigration status, abortion is, at the periphery of state, a complex matter that must be analyzed through an intersectional geopolitical lens to grasp the scope of restrictions and impacts of how this right is implemented.

Notes

• 1 "When asked directly about the legality of abortion, 56% of U.S. adults say it should be legal in all or most cases, compared with 41% who say it should be illegal all or most of the time.... There is a substantial ideologial divide on abortion, with Democrats much more likely than Republicans to say abortion should be legal in all or most cases”.
• 2 As part of this chapter, the term "anti-choice" will be used to identify those who are against abortion access and supportive of restriction on abortion. The term "pro-life” is used by the group to self-identify, but we believe that being pro-choice does not make you anti-life, and therefore reject the differentiation that using the term “pro-life” would create.
• 3 A medical abortion refers to the combination of Mifrepristone and Misoprotol, a medication combination that allow for a non-surgical abortion within the first ten weeks of pregnancy.