Dobbs and the Impact on Abortion Worldwide

The Dobbs Decision: A Turning Point for Life

Three years ago, in June, a monumental decision was handed down by the U.S. Supreme Court that profoundly reshaped the landscape of abortion law in the United States and continues to reverberate globally. This decision, Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, marked the third anniversary of its issuance in the summer of 2025. It represents a pivotal moment for the cause of life, fundamentally altering how abortion is addressed in individual states and influencing the international outlook on the issue.

For nearly five decades, the United States operated under the precedent set by Roe v. Wade, a federal ruling that effectively granted a right to abortion for almost any reason across the nation. While not explicitly worded to permit abortion for “pretty much any reason,” the language of Roe provided sufficient latitude for advocates of abortion rights to justify the procedure broadly. In contrast, the Dobbs decision directly addressed the constitutionality of Mississippi’s Gestational Age Act, a state law banning abortion after 15 weeks of gestation. The Supreme Court, in a 6-3 split decision, upheld Mississippi’s law, thereby paving the way for a deeper re-evaluation of Roe v. Wade. Ultimately, in a narrower 5-4 decision, Dobbs overturned nearly 50 years of precedent that had effectively legalized abortion on demand nationwide.

The overturning of Roe v. Wade by Dobbs three years ago did not, however, eliminate abortion in the United States. Instead, it fundamentally transformed the legal battle over the sanctity of human life from a federal mandate into a conflict waged across 50 individual states. This shift effectively returned the power to the people, allowing state-level elected officials and the outcomes of elections to determine abortion policies within their respective jurisdictions. Pro-life advocates recognized immediately that this milestone, while profoundly significant, merely changed the nature of the battle rather than ending it.

Judicial Clarity: Dobbs Versus Roe

A striking contrast exists between the judicial philosophies and clarity of the Roe v. Wade and Dobbs decisions. Roe v. Wade has been described as a “convoluted, difficult to understand” ruling, possibly intentionally so, as it sought to locate a right to abortion within a document—the Constitution—that contains no explicit mention of abortion or related concepts. It was argued that Roe found this right in the “spirit” or “penumbra” of the Constitution, employing highly academic and elevated language to persuade the public of its existence, even when it was not explicitly there.

Conversely, the Dobbs decision is characterized by its clarity and logical appeal. It is described as appealing to logic, reason, and history, and it acknowledges the existing help and resources available to women in crisis pregnancies through centers nationwide. The Dobbs ruling, in its straightforward language, is seen as striving for moral clarity, contrasting sharply with Roe‘s perceived attempt to obscure it. This stark difference suggests that those who argued for a constitutional right to abortion under Roe may have been engaging in a form of “sleight of hand”.

The State-Level Battleground: Post-Dobbs America

In the three years since Dobbs, the battle for abortion rights has indeed shifted to the state level. As of the summer of 2025, 16 states have introduced ballot measures for their November elections to decide on abortion policies. The outcomes have largely favored abortion access; 13 of these states have either upheld existing abortion rights or enacted more liberal laws. For the pro-life movement, this has amounted to 13 losses at the state level. Only three states—Florida, Nebraska, and South Dakota—as of November 2024 elections, have seen ballot initiatives where the people voted to restrict abortion access or prevent it from being enshrined in their state constitutions. While not a complete shutout, these statistics indicate a challenging legal landscape for those advocating for life protection.

The Church’s Role: A Call for Accountability

This challenging outcome at the state level has led to a critical assessment of the role of the church and its leadership. The current situation is viewed by some as a “condemnation” of the contemporary church and its shepherds, particularly their perceived silence on what is fundamentally a biblical moral issue. Historically, movements like the abolitionist cause and the civil rights movement were deeply rooted in a Christian worldview emphasizing the inherent value and equal dignity of human life. The silence of many churches today is seen as a significant factor in the losses incurred in these battles, for which accountability is needed. There is a concern that pastors, who once readily invited discussions on pro-life issues when Roe v. Wade seemed immutable, now hesitate because the battle is real, and their stance could directly impact whether children live or die. This reluctance is attributed by some to fear and cowardice, a reluctance to take a definitive stand and face accusations of being “political” when the true aim is to defend the innocent as Scripture commands.

A Global Crisis: Abortion Beyond U.S. Borders

Beyond the borders of the United States, the scale of the abortion crisis reveals a profound global challenge. Less than 3% of abortions worldwide occur in the United States annually, meaning that 97% of this moral crisis constitutes a “world missions challenge”. The United States remains highly influential globally, and its shift on abortion policy, decentralizing the decision to the states, sends ripples across other nations. It is important to recognize that those who advocate for legal abortion also perceive a “mission field” for their cause.

Analysis of global abortion laws, often conducted by organizations like the Guttmacher Institute, reveals a strategic pattern. Maps show that most existing pro-life laws are concentrated in Africa, parts of the Middle East, and Central and South America. However, these same regions are simultaneously the primary targets for recent efforts to expand and liberalize abortion rights. This is no coincidence; abortion is on the rise in these conservative areas precisely because they are the focus of significant financial and legal pressure from global organizations. The United States, through various organizations, has historically attempted to condition billions of dollars in aid on changes to abortion laws in recipient countries.

Defending Existing Pro-Life Protections

This global reality has directly influenced the mission of organizations like PassionLife. Initially, PassionLife focused on countries where abortion was most concentrated and readily available. However, there has been a realization of the critical need to also support churches in countries with existing pro-life laws, helping them to defend these laws before they are eroded. For example, Honduras, one of the most conservative nations regarding abortion laws, is now considered a key target because it lies directly “in the crosshairs” of global powers seeking to influence Latin American countries perceived as having an “imbalance in the availability of reproductive rights”—a euphemism for insufficient abortion access. This positions Honduras as a place where organizations can partner with local churches to help them “hold the ground” against an incoming “tsunami of pressure”. Without such assistance, it is feared that pro-life protections in Central and South America could be lost rapidly, as has been observed in recent years.

Colombia: A Case Study in Legislative Shift

A compelling case study is that of Colombia. In February 2022, just months before the Dobbs decision in the U.S., Colombia’s Constitutional Court issued a ruling that has been likened to Colombia’s “Roe v. Wade”. This nine-member court, similar to the U.S. Supreme Court, made a 5-4 split decision to decriminalize abortion up to 24 weeks, which is roughly considered the age of viability outside the womb. This “diabolical” decision was framed as decriminalization, a linguistic maneuver to avoid explicitly declaring abortion right or wrong, effectively “neutering” the existing laws by removing punishments and penalties for having an abortion. The result was astounding: Colombia, once among Latin America’s most conservative countries on abortion, quickly became one of its most liberal.

PassionLife had anticipated this shift, having begun work in Colombia in 2019, 2020, and 2021. The urgency was palpable, aiming to train the church, starting with its leaders, to embrace a biblical understanding of the sanctity of human life and the gravity of shedding innocent blood, while also offering forgiveness and freedom from past abortions. The goal was to equip them to answer the scriptural call to rescue the innocent. Despite these efforts, the law was passed before a significant enough alarm could be raised or sufficient discipling of God’s people could occur to effectively push back. The aftermath saw “pro-abortion activists” celebrating in the streets with green umbrellas, powder, and shirts, signaling what they termed a “green wave” spreading throughout Latin America. This “green wave” was so pervasive that PassionLife, whose original logo color was green, had to rebrand its Latin American operations to blue, as green had become synonymous with the pro-abortion movement.

The Church’s Resilient Response and the Power of Pastoral Leadership

The Colombian experience underscored the critical need for pastors worldwide to lead effectively on abortion rather than remain silent. A significant training initiative was undertaken in Colombia’s three largest cities—Bogotá, Medellín, and Cali. Approximately 200 pastors were trained, and they, in turn, committed to training hundreds of thousands more believers within their church networks on biblical ethics, specifically what are termed “the four questions”. This strong pastoral leadership has led to tangible results, including the opening of several pregnancy health centers and the strengthening of other related support works like mothers’ homes for women in crisis pregnancies.

The profound impact was evident when one highly respected pastor wept openly during a training, acknowledging the “blood guilt” shared when intentionally killing an innocent human being or remaining silent about it. This moment sparked a “spirit of repentance” among the attendees, leading to ongoing good works like new pregnancy centers in various cities. A third-party impact study on Colombia is available, detailing the effects of these efforts and offering a vision for how everyday people, under strong pastoral leadership, can effect change in their communities and nations.

Conclusion: The Ongoing Mission for Life

In conclusion, the Dobbs decision has irrevocably altered the legal landscape of abortion in the United States, shifting the battle to individual states. However, the vast majority of abortions occur globally, presenting an urgent “world missions challenge”. The United States, though influential, is but one part of a larger, global struggle for the sanctity of life. The successes and setbacks in the U.S. states, coupled with the critical lessons learned from nations like Colombia, highlight the imperative for the church, particularly its leadership, to abandon silence and actively engage in defending the innocent, both domestically and across the globe. The call to stand for life is not merely a political stance, but a moral and biblical imperative that demands active participation and courageous leadership.

This article is adapted from the episode transcript.