Four years after Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization – the Supreme Court decision that overturned nearly 50 years of precedent that established a constitutional right to abortion in the United States (U.S.) – access to abortion has only become more precarious for women of color, with new and compounding attacks and restrictions on reproductive health and bodily autonomy. Anti-abortion lawmakers at the federal and state level have slashed funding for reproductive health clinics and restricted access to medication abortion, while diverting millions in public funding and taxpayer dollars to Anti-Abortion Centers (AACs), also known as Crisis Pregnancy Centers (CPCs).
New analysis from the National Partnership for Women & Families and the National Latina Institute for Reproductive Justice reveals the harmful impact of abortion restrictions on Latinas four years after Dobbs. Latinas are the largest group (6.4 million) of women of color living in states where abortion is banned. Latinas are also more likely than any other group of reproductive-age women to live in states where reproductive health clinics have been forced to close due to the one-year Medicaid funding ban in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA). Together, more than 12 million Latinas live in states with clinic closures, states that have attacked access to medication abortion, or states where abortion is banned.
Latinas hold a diverse set of identities and experiences including ethnicities, nationalities, spoken languages, and immigration statuses – all of which shape how they navigate and are treated by the U.S. healthcare system. They are more likely to be uninsured than white, non-Latinas and to lack the economic means to afford care. These coverage disparities are likely to worsen with recent Medicaid and ACA marketplace coverage cuts and restrictions. Immigrant Latinas have long faced limited access to care due to status exclusions in federal health programs. For example, undocumented immigrants have never qualified for federal coverage options. While many lawfully present immigrants must endure a five-year waiting period before receiving health coverage.
These combined barriers are further exacerbated by the hostility and violence the Trump administration is waging against immigrants, many of whom identify as Latinas. Anti-immigrant policies coupled with state abortion bans, restrictions on medication abortion, and financial cuts to reproductive health clinics, mean Latinas must make impossible choices to obtain reproductive health care.
Reproductive Health Clinic Closures and Their Impact on Latinas
Latinas are vastly overrepresented in states where reproductive health clinics have closed in the last year as a result of OBBBA – nearly 11 million (two-thirds) of Latinas of reproductive age live in these states. Some large groups of Latinas in these closure states are particularly impacted – Gen Z Latinas (5.0 million), Latina moms (4.5 million), Latinas who are economically insecure (3.9 million), and immigrant Latinas (3.5 million).
OBBBA’s one-year “defund Planned Parenthood” provision, which prohibited Medicaid reimbursement for reproductive health clinics that provide abortion, has forced clinic closures and stripped access to critical preventive services like sexually transmitted infections testing and treatment, cancer screenings, and birth control. In addition, last year the Trump administration withheld millions in funding from Title X clinics, including Planned Parenthood clinics. Title X is the only federal program dedicated to providing affordable family planning services and treats patients regardless of immigration status. In rural and health care shortage areas of the country, these clinics are often the sole source of health care for communities. Taken together with the OBBBA funding ban, these decisions have driven the closure of 51 Planned Parenthood clinics, deepening health care shortages.
The impact of these closures is extremely harmful to Latinas, who represent the largest group of people of color served by Planned Parenthood. Clinic closures mean Latinas must drive further for care, which may pose transportation and financial challenges and increase their risk of immigration enforcement under the Trump administration’s mass deportation plan. Under these constraints, some Latinas may be forced to delay or forgo care, increasing their risk of preventable cancers, unwanted pregnancies, and untreated infections.
While anti-abortion extremists defund reproductive health clinics, millions of dollars are being directed towards Anti-Abortion Centers (AACs), expanding their harmful reach and misinformation campaign. AACs are nonmedical organizations that pose as sources of health care, using signs, names, and building styles that mimic abortion-providing clinics to confuse individuals from seeking abortion care. In many areas, they outnumber reproductive health clinics. Since the Dobbs decision, 21 states have directed almost half a billion in taxpayer dollars to AACs, while at least eight states have redirected millions to AACs from the federal Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program – money intended to support poor families in covering their basic needs like food and housing.
AACs push abstinence-only sex education, seek to dissuade pregnant people from obtaining abortion care, and lack patient health privacy protections. AACs are not legally required to comply with HIPAA, meaning they can freely disclose and sell personal and medical information, such as pregnancy history and outcomes, with law enforcement and third party organizations – exposing clients to criminalization and data breaches. Latinas are especially at risk of falling prey to AACs’ deceptive tactics. AACs have been known to advertise in Spanish, use Black and Brown models in advertisements to seem familiar and inclusive, and lure in clients by offering free ultrasounds and material supports like diapers and strollers – items that would otherwise be too costly for some families. Preying on the economic, cultural, and linguistic needs of Latinas, AACs present themselves as an affordable “care” option in an increasingly stretched and limited care landscape. With fewer care options and more status exclusions to care, Latinas are left vulnerable to these harmful centers.
Attacks on Access to Medication Abortion
More than one-third (36 percent) of Latinas live in states that have seen attacks on medication abortion. However, rural Latinas are especially impacted, with 40 percent of them living in states that have attacked access to medication abortion. Rural communities already face unique challenges to accessing reproductive health care, including a shortage of obstetricians and the need to travel longer distances for care. These existing challenges, combined with status restrictions and the risk of exposure to immigration officials with travel, mean restrictions on medication abortion especially impact access for rural Latinas.
Medication abortion has been crucial in expanding access to abortion care in states with abortion bans (“restrictive states”). For Latinas, medication abortion can be a safer and more affordable option, reducing the need to travel long distances and therefore minimizing the added cost of a hotel stay, child care, and loss of wages associated with traveling across state lines for care. It can also decrease exposure to immigration officials, allowing Latinas to manage an abortion from the safety and comfort of their home. It can be especially beneficial for Latinas in rural areas where there is already a shortage of providers and care options.
“I was desperate when I learned I was pregnant. When I looked for help I was surprised to find that it was not so easy to obtain this service that would help me. Thanks to the help of one person I was able to get in contact with an organization that sent me pills with instructions.”
– Latina Institute Texas storyteller.
However, states are restricting access to medication abortion by banning telehealth and pharmacy access to mifepristone, challenging out-of-state shield laws that protect providers mailing pills to patients in restricted states, imposing in-person visitation requirements that create travel challenges, and pressuring the FDA to revoke its approval of mifepristone, one of two medicines commonly used in medication abortion. These attacks disproportionately impact women in states with abortion bans, chipping away at the safe, common abortion options that still remain. For Latinas, many of whom already navigate language barriers, economic insecurity, and coverage restrictions to care, these attacks represent yet another restriction of their reproductive options and choices.
State Level Analysis
Restrictive States with Compounded Attacks: Clinic Closures, Attacks on Medication Abortion, and State Bans
Some states have a partial or total ban on abortion, have enforced restrictions on telehealth and medication abortion, and face reproductive health clinic closures. Under these compounding attacks, Latinas are forced to travel further for care, posing significant financial challenges and criminalization risks. Texas and Florida are two examples of such restrictive states that are home to a large share of Latinas, accounting for 4.6 million (28 percent) of all Latinas of reproductive age in the nation combined.
- Texas is home to 3.1 million Latinas of reproductive age – 19 percent of all Latinas of reproductive age in the country. Of these Latinas, 1.4 million are mothers, 1.2 million are economically insecure, nearly 890,000 are immigrants, 1.4 million are Gen Z Latinas and more than 450,000 rely on Medicaid. They are all harmed by Texas’s draconian abortion laws, which prevent abortion at all stages of pregnancy, except for life-threatening medical emergencies, and allow private citizens to file civil lawsuits against anyone manufacturing, mailing, distributing or providing medication abortion to someone in Texas.
- Florida is home to 1.5 million Latinas of reproductive age – 9 percent of all Latinas of reproductive age in the country. Of these Latinas, more than 620,000 are mothers, more than 490,000 are economically insecure, more than 680,000 are immigrants, more than 600,000 are Gen Z Latinas and more than 240,000 rely on Medicaid. All of these individuals are harmed by Florida’s abortion ban, which strictly prohibits an abortion after six weeks, before many people know they are pregnant, and with few exceptions, only in the case of a medical emergency or a pregnancy resulting from rape, incest, or human trafficking.
“The situation in Texas is really very sad because the laws do not favor us. On the contrary, they are introducing new laws that are directly affecting us as Latinos and as women.”
— Latina Institute Texas storyteller.
“My own story shaped how I think about care and choice. I’m a child of adoption. When I became pregnant at 20, the hormonal and emotional toll was too much. Ending the pregnancy was the best decision for my mental and emotional health. It was painful, but I don’t regret it. It’s one part of my life experience, not the whole of me.”
— Latina Institute Florida storyteller.
“Florida used to be a safe place…now I watch clinics disappear and wonder how long we’ll have access at all.”
— Latina Institute Florida storyteller.
Protective States with Federal Attacks
In some states abortion is legal, but federal attacks like OBBBA are restricting access and undermining state autonomy. Over 90 percent of Planned Parenthood clinics at risk of closure are located in these protective states. Layered with Medicaid cuts that are already forcing hospital closures nationwide, the loss of a Planned Parenthood clinic is irreplaceable – leaving Latinas at serious health risk and more susceptible to Anti-Abortion Centers. New York and California are two examples of protective states at risk of clinic closures, and account for 5.1 million (31 percent) of all Latinas of reproductive age in the nation.
- New York is home to nearly 980,000 Latinas of reproductive age – six percent of all Latinas of reproductive age in the country. Of these Latinas, more than 380,000 are mothers, nearly 360,000 are economically insecure, more than 370,000 are immigrants, nearly 430,000 are Gen Z Latinas and nearly 410,000 rely on Medicaid. These Latinas have protected access to abortion up to 24 weeks of pregnancy and can use Medicaid to cover the cost of an abortion. After 24 weeks, with some exceptions for medical emergencies or health risks, pregnant people may need to travel out of state to obtain a later term abortion. Despite New York’s protected abortion rights and access, OBBBA’s one-year Medicaid funding ban has forced clinics to close, restricting provider choice and options for Latinas in the state.
- California is home to 4.1 million Latinas of reproductive age – 25 percent of all Latinas of reproductive age in the country. Of these Latinas, 1.7 million are mothers, 1.4 million are economically insecure, 1.2 million are immigrants, 1.9 million are Gen Z Latinas and 1.5 million rely on Medicaid. Latinas in California can obtain abortion care up to “fetal viability,” generally 24–26 weeks of pregnancy, with some exceptions. Medicaid may also be used to cover the cost of an abortion. However, OBBBA’s funding ban is challenging the state’s Medicaid program and its broad coverage of sexual and reproductive health, putting Latinas’ health at severe risk.
“Access to abortion services is a human right. I’ve witnessed the people in my life face barriers like inability to pay for a wanted abortion, traveling over an hour on the train to get to an appointment, inability to get timely appointments, and having to hear protesters on the way to the clinic.”
— Latina Institute New York storyteller.
Conclusion
Latinas deserve to live in communities free from fear and state-sanctioned violence – including anti-immigrant policies and abortion bans and restrictions – where they have full autonomy over their bodies and the resources to access comprehensive reproductive health care. Now more than ever, we need lawmakers to fund care and invest in the safety and dignity of all.
Lastly, organizations serving Latinas must make abortion access a policy priority. Access to abortion is critical for Latinas and their families to thrive, not just survive. Latinas deserve for their reproductive health and futures to be valued and prioritized, and reproductive justice demands they have the power to make their own decisions about their health, sexuality, and families.
This report was created as a collaboration between The National Latina Institute for Reproductive Justice and the National Partnerships for Women & Families. Special thanks to Salen Andrews, Lorena Bonet Velazquez, Ashley Kurzweil, Llenda Jackson-Leslie, Mettabel Law, Erin Mackay, Rosann Mariappuram, Anabel Masaschi, Katherine Olivera, Katherine Gallagher Robbins, and Yamila Ruiz for their contributions. We would also like to express our heartfelt gratitude to the anonymous Latina Institute storytellers who shared with us their experiences seeking abortion care.
Methods note
In our analysis, a state in which abortion is banned meets at least one of the following criteria: (1) it has a “trigger” ban or total abortion ban in effect, or (2) it has gestational limits in effect banning abortion between six and twenty weeks. As of the publication date of this analysis, these states are Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Nebraska, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, and West Virginia. See After Roe Fell: Abortion Laws by State. Additionally, in our analysis, states in which clinics have closed as of Spring 2026 due to the One Big Beautiful Bill Act are California, Colorado, Florida, Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana, Michigan, Missouri, New York, Ohio, Tennessee, and Texas. See The “Defund” Disaster: How The Republican Attack on Planned Parenthood Is Hurting Patients and Raising Americans’ Health Care Costs. Finally, in our analysis, states that have attacked access to medication abortion include states that have enacted prohibitions on telehealth abortion, bans on mailing or distributing medication abortion, or laws that classify medication abortion pills as controlled substances, or states that have brought lawsuits targeting mifepristone and telehealth abortion. As of the publication date of this analysis, these states are Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, West Virginia, and Wisconsin. State of Telehealth Medication Abortion, Mifepristone Related Litigation, and independent National Partnership for Women & Families legislative and legal research informed this analysis.
This impact analysis uses the 2020-2024 American Community Survey accessed via IPUMS USA, University of Minnesota. While people of many ages can become pregnant, in this analysis we use ages 15-49 through this analysis to align with the Guttmacher Institute, the World Health Organization, and others. Women who are “Gen Z” in this analysis are ages 15 through 29. How race and ethnicity data are gathered and reported is foundational to understanding health and health care disparities. These categories have a problematic history, having been imposed on communities by government entities, often in direct conflict with how those communities identified themselves. Such categories have also evolved over time, both in how communities self-identify and in how governments standardize data collection. Immigrant women are foreign-born women who are not the children of U.S. parents. People born in U.S. territories and possessions are born in the U.S. Immigrants include naturalized citizens and non-citizens (legal permanent residents (i.e. green card holders), asylees, refugees, temporary protected status holders, and undocumented individuals, among others). People are identified as having a disability in this analysis if they responded that they have difficulty in one or more of the following six realms: vision, hearing, cognitive, ambulatory, self-care, and independent living. People may have multiple disabilities. This is a limited definition of disability that excludes a portion of disabled people. For more information on how disability is measured in the American Community Survey please see the U.S. Census Bureau’s report How Disability Data are Collected from The American Community Survey. While people across the income spectrum may have difficulty making ends meet, in this analysis we define “economically insecure” as living in a family below 200 percent of the federal poverty line. Women are defined as living in “rural” areas if they live outside of metropolitan areas. Latinas with limited English proficiency do not speak English at home and report not speaking English well or at all. This analysis defines “mother” as having at least one child (including step, adopted, or biological) under the age of 18 in the household. Due to data limitations, there are mothers who are not included in this definition, including those who have non-resident or older children or those whose children have passed away. Not all women of reproductive age have the potential to become pregnant – many of them may not be able to for medical reasons or they may not participate in sexual activities that could result in pregnancy.
Due to data limitations, this analysis does not include people who do not identify as women but may become pregnant, including transgender men and nonbinary people. The 2.8 million transgender people 13 and older and 1.2 million LGBTQ nonbinary people age 18-60 in the U.S. are deeply impacted by Dobbs. Many transgender and nonbinary people can become pregnant and are directly impacted by Dobbs. The harms are more severe for transgender and nonbinary people of color, those who are disabled, and others who are members of multiple marginalized communities. The transgender and nonbinary communities are not mutually exclusive.