The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which has been designated as a contentious topic.
This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
A news item involving Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 24 June 2022.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Abortion, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Abortion on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AbortionWikipedia:WikiProject AbortionTemplate:WikiProject AbortionAbortion articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's Health, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's Health on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's HealthWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HealthTemplate:WikiProject Women's Healthwomen's health articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is part of WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court cases, a collaborative effort to improve articles related to Supreme Court cases and the Supreme Court. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.U.S. Supreme Court casesWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court casesTemplate:WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court casesU.S. Supreme Court articles
This article may favor a certain viewpoint and lacks neutrality. The reliance on a single source, identified only as "Miller," without additional sources, may contribute to bias. Furthermore, claims such as the increase in abortions during World War II lack proper citations and sourcing, with only a link to a Wikipedia article provided. Additional citations from diverse, reliable sources are needed to ensure the article's neutrality and accuracy.
The above text was added by TragicPower when adding a {{pov}} tag to the article in this edit. As the text is not appropriate for the article, but appears to be a good faith complaint about POV I've copied it here so that other editors can contribute. I have no opinions on the reasoning at this time. Sideswipe9th (talk) 22:14, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello @Sideswipe9th, I also noticed the reliance on the single source "Miller" and the lack of sourcing for the claim about WW2, which may not be suitable for this article on the case. Although I didn't contribute to those sections yet, I share your concern. I started on the common law section (explained below). I've added a neutrality dispute tag to the article and plan to review this section for potential edits. I'd appreciate your input on the accuracy and relevance of those claims to the article, as I share the concern that they aren't adequately sourced or adequately related. Thank you for the message. TragicPower (talk) 22:42, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm seeing lots of sources in the present version of the article. Is this tag still needed? If so, can someone specify the nonneutral point of view the article represents? Warren Dew (talk) 15:55, 2 March 2024 (UTC)h[reply]
The content sourced to Miller was moved to a more general background article. Same for the cite to the case United States v. Vuitch, which was the "link to a Wikipedia article". Citations to cases can link to the Wikipedia articles for those cases). In this case the citation to a primary source was opaque and unexplained and is no longer in the article. All the issued raised have been resolved and the tag can be removed. Ben Azura (talk) 22:22, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Although the header mentions that impact on abortion rates is disputed and unclear, the "Effects on abortion rates" section later in the article claims abortion rates went down in states with trigger laws. Should these contradicting claims be reconciled? Veilure (talk) 21:55, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Overall the content about this is scattered in different sections and should be merged into the section "Effects on abortion rates" to avoid the article making contradictory claims. Some of it may need to be updated along with the lede. Ben Azura (talk) 01:56, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
