In light of the incoming post-Dobbs Trump administration, students gathered on Thursday to discuss the future of reproductive care in the U.S. and at Stanford.
Though president Donald Trump has long supported abortion bans, even calling himself the “most pro-life president” in 2023, anti-abortion strategists reportedly advised Trump to avoid discussion of their plans for abortion during the presidential election. However, in his most recent campaign platform, Trump wrote that he “will oppose late term abortion” and affirmed that the states are “free to pass laws protecting [fetus] rights.”
Around 15 Stanford affiliates met in the Haas Center for Public Service to hear from Stanford Law lecturer and Climenko Fellow at Harvard, Gemma Donofrio. The event, entitled “Know Your Rights: Reproductive Realities Under Trump,” was hosted by Stanford Women in Politics (SWIP) in conjunction with the Sexual Health Peer Resource Center (SHPRC) as part of “Sex Week” programming.
“We wanted to have this conversation to create an open discussion about what [reproductive care] could look like, especially because there’s a lot of young women here that’s all really going to impact,” SWIP executive team member Sidney Suh ’26 told The Daily.
According to Suh, there has “been a lot of concern” among students regarding the future of reproductive policy, access to care and medication and even digital health privacy laws.
Trump wrote that he will “end left-wing gender insanity,” specifically stating that he will reverse Biden’s “radical rewrite” of Title IX education regulations and “ban taxpayer funding for sex change surgeries.” These actions will be done with the end goal of “restor[ing] protections for women and girls.”
Donofrio, who teaches the Stanford law school course “Reproductive Justice Across Public and Private Law,” says she is concerned that the Trump Administration will take actions that “might draw less public attention” than a Congressional ban.
“The Trump administration could decide to take executive action that functionally bans or severely limits access to abortion, such as tightening restrictions on mifepristone or attempting to enforce the Comstock Act.,” Donofrio wrote in an email to The Daily.
However, Donofrio noted the potential relevance of The Comstock Act, a 1873 anti-obscenity law that restricts the mailing of items deemed “indecent, filthy, or vile” or “intended for producing abortion.” Because the act has not been explicitly invalidated, Trump’s anti-abortion strategists have spoken about its enforcement.
“We don’t need a federal ban when we have Comstock on the books,” Texas lawyer Jonathan F. Mitchell told The New York Times.
Although SWIP Vice President Benita Kisembo ’25 said she has never encountered anybody who publicly opposes abortion at Stanford, she said she has observed many individuals on campus express “passive support.”
“Abortion and productive rights disproportionately impact women and people that have uteruses,” Kisembo said.
Though women, especially at a school like Stanford, are “really focused” on their careers and future aspirations, they still “have to think about” reproductive health “all the time,” Kisembo said.
Following her presentation, Donofrio answered questions from the audience on topics such as contraception, fetal personhood, in vitro fertilization (IVF) and the risks of prosecution for both doctors and patients seeking reproductive care. However, Donofrio said the recent care people have been giving abortion rights was “hopeful” and that she was “inspired” by the group in attendance.
In 2022, Prop 1 was passed in California, adding abortion rights to the state’s constitution. Shortly after the overturning of Roe v. Wade, Gov. Gavin Newsome stated that “California has the resources and support available to help you exercise your reproductive freedom — and we will always stand ready to fight.”
Even under the protections that come with residing and attending school in California, SWIP President Isha Kalia ’25 believes the issue of reproductive rights requires “less stigma around it and just more awareness.”
Kalia called on the University to be a “little more proactive, rather than reactive” when it comes to supporting and destigmatizing women’s health, especially in “openness” regarding the resources available.
“Stanford is one of the largest research institutions in the country. As a research institution, we should be putting money and resources and time into answering questions with the goal of trying to get reproductive justice for everyone who needs it,” Kalia said.
Among friends, peers and even the adults in her community, Suh said that she has observed political apathy, especially regarding reproductive health, become a “really big problem.”
“If you are dissatisfied with the way things are right now and you want to see change, you can’t just complain about it. You have to go out and do something about it,” Suh said.
The Daily has reached out to the University for comment.
This article was updated to include additional perspective from Gemma Donofrio.