Last week, the Supreme Court heard arguments concerning a Mississippi law that bars abortions after fifteen weeks of pregnancy, in direct defiance of the landmark abortion-rights case Roe v. Wade. At least five of the six conservative Justices on the Court appeared ready to uphold the law and dispense with Roe entirely, allowing states to outlaw abortions to whatever extent they wish. The Court is simultaneously considering a Texas law that prohibits abortion after six weeks, and allows citizens to sue anyone who performs or “aids and abets” an abortion that violates this restriction.

With the pro-life movement on the cusp of achieving its long-held goal of defeating Roe, I spoke by phone with Marjorie Dannenfelser, the president of the Susan B. Anthony List, a nonprofit supporting pro-life politicians. Dannenfelser, who has led the organization since 1993, has placed a particular emphasis on portraying the pro-life movement as supportive of women. Though initially skeptical of Donald Trump, she supported his campaigns in 2016 and 2020, and served last year as his Pro-Life Coalition leader. During our conversation, which has been edited for length and clarity, we discussed her expectations for the Mississippi ruling, the prospect of a national abortion ban if Republicans regain power, and the pro-life movement’s plans to support people who, in many states, may no longer be able to access abortions.

What did you think of the oral arguments last week?

I went in cautiously optimistic, and I went out very hopeful—based on the questions asked, based on what I think were relatively thin arguments coming from the Democrat-appointed Justices. It’s possible that the Mississippi law could be upheld by a 6–3 or 5–4 decision. The reason I’m hopeful is that, if that is the case, they’ve answered the question “Is any pre-viability abortion limit constitutional?” with an answer of yes. That changes the face of abortion law for the first time in forty-eight years, which is something we’ve been working for quite some time.

How would you view the Mississippi law simply being upheld without a more formal or clear statement about Roe?

I know there is much discussion about a middle way—a new test, which is hard to imagine, but I’m not a jurist. If fifteen weeks is upheld and then we’re having to deal with some other new rule for other states, we would of course consider it exactly what it is: a partial success. Either way, whether it’s a partial success or a full overturn, we have our work cut out for us in states all over the country. Every single state, in fact, could have a fifteen-week limit. Now, we’re not going to honestly go to fifty states immediately, because you have to do triage. There are at least thirty states that could conceivably pass a fifteen-week limit, and that would save many lives, and there’ll be many women in need, and who need our help.