In the wake of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, Utah legislators are referencing legislation from the late 1800s to support their perspective on abortion.
In a recent Supreme Court brief involving three Utah representatives, reference was made to the Comstock Act of 1873 to justify the banning of the distribution of mifepristone. The progesterone blocker is often used in softening the cervix for various procedures, miscarriage management and chemical abortion. The act criminalizes the mailing or distribution of any “article or thing designed, adapted or intended for producing abortion, or for any indecent or immoral use.” This definition is broad and could result in fines of up to $2,000 or five years in jail for a first offense.
Anthony Comstock was a prominent anti-vice activist in the late 1800s who eventually found himself in New York post-Civil War. There, he was scandalized by the amount of female autonomy. Funded by the YMCA, he presented an anti-vice bill that later became known as the Comstock Act. It effectively outlawed all practices and items that he deemed obscene and immoral, including the mailing and distribution of abortion medication and contraceptive devices.
The Comstock Act laid dormant for the nearly 50 year reign of Roe v. Wade, but since the overturning of the case many anti-abortion representatives have revived the act in attempts to justify bans that limit access to medications and other healthcare that addresses women’s issues and reproductive health.
Despite numerous advancements in women’s health, fertility and rights over the past 151 years, the Utah Legislature has stepped backwards into the 19th century when discussing laws that affect 21st century women and their rights to safe, reliable, and effective health care.
Alexia Anderson, Lehi
