UCLA Life Sciences
In 2022, when the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade with the Dobbs decision, many Americans were taken by surprise. However, for those who had been watching closely, the fall of Roe was neither sudden nor unpredictable. It was the culmination of decades of strategic, ideological, and deeply personal work—rooted in belief systems, political momentum, and a sophisticated reimagining of science and law.
As part of its Distinguished Speaker Series, the UCLA Center for Reproductive Science, Health and Education (CRSHE) hosted New York Times journalist Elizabeth Dias, who shared her insights from The Fall of Roe: The Rise of a New America, a bestselling book coauthored with fellow Times journalist Lisa Lerer.
Life Sciences Dean Tracy Johnson introduced the event, underscoring CRSHE’s mission – to support human reproductive health, promote healthy families, and advance the well-being of society through science and education – and highlighting this event as an example of the timely discussions being led by the Center.
The event, held on April 7 at the California Nanosystems Institute at UCLA, unfolded as a public conversation led by CRSHE founding director Amander Clark. Following the dialogue, Dias fielded questions from the audience.
Clark guided the conversation to draw on Dias’ insights from 15 years of reporting on religion and politics, including the extensive research that she and Lerer undertook for their latest book, which involved over 350 interviews with key figures vying to shape the Supreme Court’s stance on abortion.
The exchange between Clark and Dias illuminated a number of important areas to focus further reflection.
Conservative women played a pivotal role in ending abortion
When asked about notable insights from researching The Fall of Roe, Dias highlighted the many conservative women who spent decades of their careers working to end abortion rights.
While the women who were dedicated to overturning Roe represented an especially conservative minority, they were effective in spreading their conservative vision of womanhood, motherhood, and family. They leveraged social media through a very active PR campaign that united people in their own spheres and strengthened their position within the Republican party.
When does life begin?
Clark asked Dias for her perspective on the question of when life begins.
“It’s complicated,” Dias said. “Are you asking biologically, when a human life begins? There’s also a sociological, religious question. And once you start to think about it as a social question, this is where you get a lot more conflict.”
As a journalist, Dias said she likes to explore the question itself: how has it been asked in our lifetime, in our country, and in what political context.
“It’s actually evolving and changing, and it’s not the same for everyone,” she said. “You can learn a lot by asking what the question is trying to explore, instead of having the answer be the most important thing.”
Shaping science for legal arguments
Dias also provided her journalistic insights on how anti-abortion groups shaped the science they used in legal arguments.
“They knew that the mainstream science that was being used in law and government was working counter to their goal,” said Dias. “They developed their own institutions, funded by their own supporters, with scientists that were aligned with their philosophical views—and religious views at times—and they built up an alternate scientific stream… not just research and research papers, but also expert witnesses that could go to court hearings and lend scientific credibility to them. There was a lot of reverse engineering, and ultimately this was effective.”
Dias pointed to possible blind spots, when considering science and recent abortion laws.
“If you only look at what the science says—you’re not thinking about the political motivations, legal strategy, the phrasing of the language in these bills, and who is supporting them,” she said.
Clark then asked how scientists can be better communicators so that their science can be understood, and Dias pointed out the need to think of the different audiences who would be receiving the information.
“It depends on the goal,” said Dias. “How is science understood in journalism and in public education, and public thought generally? Then how should science be communicated in legal contexts or in political contexts? These are niche fields that require different skills.”
Facing unimaginable change
When Clark asked why supporters of abortion rights were unprepared for the outcome of Dobbs, Dias talked about the difficulties of confronting unimaginable change.
“Generally, this is a story of the power of belief versus the power of denial. It’s really hard to imagine that something that has been part of your framework for understanding how the world works can just go away. It’s hard for human brains to actually sit in that reality and make active plans for that future.”
Anti-abortion activists were actively working to end abortion in state legislatures, and the facts on the ground were consistently, and often, in public view.
Dias ended her response with another question, “When you’re confronted with the reality of what someone says, do you believe it or not?”
A framework for considering current and future societal challenges
As they wrapped up their conversation, Clark asked Dias the same the big questions posed at the end of The Fall of Roe, about the future of the country and the future for women in America.
“The story is rapidly changing,” Dias replied. “I’m curious to report on what people like you want it to be. What are you doing to make it be that way? Is that possible? America is changing. The questions of our democracy, our democratic values, the values of the people – I’m engaging these questions by paying attention to the human stories, to learn as much as I can, then to share it as best I can along the way.”
Dias said that by understanding how Roe fell, it provides a framework for understanding current societal challenges and an approach for considering the future.
“Looking at what happened with Roe as a case study and roadmap, you can see it being translated to other aspects of scientific work. If you understand how Roe fell, you’ll have the tools to understand the political, cultural, and religious forces working to reshape America.”
