Abortion access, public opinion, direct democracy, and state political institutions in the United States.

Although numerous states have enacted policies banning or limiting abortion since the Dobbs decision in 2022, public opinion in most states remains solidly in favor of abortion access. However, whether public opinion is reflected in the public policy of individual states depends on how political institutions mediate between opinion and policy. Activists on both sides of the abortion issue, therefore, have attempted to locate policymaking regarding abortion access in state institutional systems most congenial to their desired outcomes. In states with direct democracy, even where legislatures and governorships are dominated by conservative Republicans, activists have been successful in harnessing public opinion to protect abortion rights by winning public referenda. In response, Republicans have attempted to curtail the power of these referenda, shifting power back to legislatures more likely to be held by actors opposed to abortion rights. This venue shopping for policymaking advantage ultimately raises vital, difficult, and often uncomfortable questions about how political institutions and citizens negotiate the boundaries of democratic legitimacy in policymaking. Key Points: Since US federal courts overturned Roe vs. Wade and allowed states to ban abortion, public opinion in both Democratic‐ and Republican‐controlled states has been in favor of abortion rights.However, this favorable public opinion is generally only reflected in the state abortion policy in competitive or Republican‐controlled US states when political institutions include direct democracy provisions.Despite supporters of abortion rights succeeding in protecting abortion access through voter initiatives, opponents are attempting to curtail or change those processes to keep abortion policymaking as the province of bodies more likely to be against abortion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]