Alabama
E and D excluded; lethal-anomaly exclusion; serious physical-health exception. Narrow psychiatric pathway requires additional psychiatrist confirmation and hospital care. §26-23H-3, reproduction ↗.
05 — The law
What does your state allow?
A dated national overview, with closer looks at medical exceptions.
¶ Snapshot: September 2, 2026
Categories from Guttmacher’s dated tracker. Broad bans have exceptions. Early limits are at or before 18 weeks; later limits are after 18 weeks or at viability. No gestational cap does not mean unrestricted availability. This is not a live legal service.
Recent developments
Targeted review · October 2, 2026. Pending proposals do not change the dated map below.
Idaho litigationHearing held · relief unresolved
The Ninth Circuit heard Seyb on September 22. We have not verified the operative post-hearing orders. A hearing is not a ruling, and the earlier St. Luke’s injunction was provider-specific.
Texas emergency careEnacted · June 20, 2025
SB31 says a qualifying threat need not be imminent or irreversible. It still requires a life-threatening physical condition and reasonable medical judgment. We have not located a strong evaluation isolating whether this clarification improved timely care.
Missouri Amendment 3Proposed · November 3, 2026 ballot
The 2026 measure would repeal the 2024 reproductive-rights amendment and allow restrictions with specified exceptions. It has not taken effect. The two measures share a number but have different aims.
Nevada Question 6Proposed · second vote required
The proposal passed once in 2024 and needs approval again in 2026 to enter the constitution. It proposes protection before viability and later for life or health. Current statutory access and the proposed constitutional right are distinct.
Virginia Question 1Proposed · November 3, 2026 ballot
The final proposal permits specified restrictions in the third trimester, with health and non-survival exceptions. “Third trimester” is its wording, not viability. If approved, the amendment takes effect January 1, 2027.
Idaho Proposition OneProposed statute · November 3, 2026 ballot
The Reproductive Freedom & Privacy Act proposes access before viability and an expanded physical-condition emergency exception afterwards. Its proposed effective date is January 1, 2027, if enacted. It is not current law.
The 20-state care screen: what was checked?
We screened the 13 broad-ban and seven early-limit states in the September 2 overview. No categorical ban on ectopic treatment or removal after confirmed spontaneous fetal death was identified. This is not a verified fifty-state opinion. Several rows use statutory reproductions, older text, or incomplete exception checks, as marked.
E = ectopic treatment. D = removal after fetal death. An exclusion puts care outside the offense; an exception permits an otherwise covered abortion subject to conditions. They are not interchangeable.
Arkansas
E and D following spontaneous loss excluded. Life-preservation exception; 2025 amendment excludes psychological/emotional grounds and conditions treatable while sustaining pregnancy. Act 387 ↗.
Idaho
E, molar pregnancy, and D excluded under §18-604; §18-622 generally permits abortion necessary to prevent death, excludes self-harm rationale. Official code fetch failed; 2025 reproduction ↗. See the Idaho comparison below for the September 2026 litigation caveat.
Indiana
D excluded from definition; reviewed ban has life/serious-health exceptions. Dedicated E exclusion not established in this pass, so do not mark it explicitly excluded. Definition ↗, §16-34-2-1 ↗ (reproductions).
Kentucky
2025 exclusions include ectopic/molar treatment and specified miscarriage/emergency interventions. These do not override §311.772. §311.723 ↗, definition ↗.
Louisiana
E expressly includes methotrexate. D and documented unavoidable, untreatable spontaneous loss (including inevitable/incomplete/septic abortion) excluded. Life/organ-impairment provision and medically-futile pathway have conditions. RS14:87.1 ↗.
Mississippi
Total ban's definition excludes D; life preservation exception. The department’s reporting form expressly excludes E. This reporting definition does not establish the scope of every criminal statute. §41-41-45 reproduction ↗, MSDH reporting form and instructions ↗.
North Dakota
E, D following spontaneous abortion, and molar treatment excluded; death/serious-health exception. Chapter12.1-19.1 ↗. Ban restored by November21,2025 decision ↗.
Oklahoma
AG guidance says E and removal of an already-dead fetus after miscarriage are not abortion. Life-preservation standard does not require waiting for crisis. Physician guidance ↗.
South Dakota
2026 enacted law excludes E, miscarriage treatment, D, and accidental/unintentional fetal death during treatment. Life-only exception remains. HB1257 session law ↗.
Tennessee
E/molar/D excluded; serious bodily-function exception. Text specifically lists PPROM and inevitable abortion as conditions that may qualify; mental-health grounds excluded. §39-15-213 reproduction ↗. Needs official amendment-history crosscheck.
Texas
E and D after spontaneous loss excluded/expressly recognized; serious bodily-function pathway under SB31. See the Texas comparison below. SB31 ↗.
West Virginia
Miscarriage (including incomplete loss), fetal demise/stillbirth excluded; E is an exception to prohibition under §16-2R-3. Serious physical emergency criterion excludes psychological grounds. Definitions ↗, exclusions ↗, full article ↗.
Florida (6w)
D excluded; ectopic treatment excluded under AHCA reporting and hospital-records rules, effective November 19, 2024. Serious physical-health exception, with certification requirements. Chapter390 ↗, reporting rule §59A-9.034(5) ↗, hospital-records rule §59A-3.282(3) ↗. These reproductions were checked against official adoption metadata, not the current official Word files.
Georgia (6w)
E and removal after spontaneous death excluded; medical-emergency exception. §16-12-141 reproduction ↗. Older reproduction: update check remains.
Iowa (6w)
Effective July1,2026, definition expressly excludes miscarriage treatment, removal after incomplete/inevitable loss, and E; D already excluded. HF2788 enrolled ↗, signed/effective-date history ↗.
Nebraska (12w)
E and removal of dead remains excluded; physical medical-emergency exception. §71-6914 ↗, §71-6915 ↗.
North Carolina (12w)
E and D from natural causes, trauma, or assault excluded from surgical/medical abortion definitions; emergency physical-health exception. §90-21.81 ↗.
South Carolina (6w)
D excluded. E is a presumed qualifying medical condition, alongside miscarriage and others, under §44-41-640; not simply an explicit E definition exclusion. Chapter44-41 ↗.
Utah (18w)
E and D excluded. §76-7-301 reproduction ↗. Official current-code and exception/litigation audit incomplete.
Reviewed September 20, 2026. The screen does not certify every method, gestational limit, court order, institution, or later-gestation state. Permission does not establish timely availability.
Read the legal disagreement: Dobbs majority and dissent
The controlling majority: the federal Constitution does not confer a right to abortion; protecting prenatal life is a legitimate interest supporting regulation under rational-basis review. The opinion did not decide when prenatal life has the rights of a born person.
The joint dissent: liberty, equality, and precedent protect the decision whether to continue a pregnancy; government-compelled continuation imposes profound burdens. This is an opposing judicial argument, not current controlling law.
State constitutional protections and later statutes and orders still require their own review.
Compare jurisdictions
Select a tile to change the first jurisdiction. Use the second menu to compare.
Texas
Legal framework
Broad prohibition with a medical exception.
Medical care
For a qualifying life-threatening physical condition, the 2025 Act allows physicians to address a risk of death or serious risk of substantial impairment of a major bodily function before harm occurs; the risk need not be imminent. It also addresses ectopic pregnancy and removal after spontaneous fetal death.
Limits & qualifications
This clarification is not a general exception for rape or fetal diagnosis. Chapter 170A exempts the pregnant patient from liability under that chapter.
The policy question
Does clarification change real clinical access, hospital protocols, and delays?
Oklahoma
Legal framework
Broad prohibition, with a life-preserving constitutional right recognized by the state Supreme Court.
Medical care
The 2023 court held that a physician may act when continuation endangers life to a reasonable degree of medical certainty or probability. The patient need not wait for an imminent emergency.
Limits & qualifications
That ruling did not establish general access for every health concern, rape, or fetal diagnosis.
The policy question
Can clinicians apply the life-preserving standard promptly, without waiting for deterioration?
The comparison panels give closer looks at Texas, Oklahoma, Florida, Colorado, South Dakota, and Idaho’s litigation limits. The expandable 20-state screen adds a narrower check of emergency-care provisions; other comparison panels remain overview-only. Laws, injunctions, facility policies, and access can change independently. Consult current primary law and qualified counsel for a legal decision.
How to evaluate an exception
Threshold
Life, physical health, or broader health? Must harm be imminent?
Decision-maker
One clinician, multiple certifications, or another process?
Enforcement
Who faces liability, under what standard, with what defense?
Practical access
Is timely care actually available, and are refusals documented?