--- title: Senator Elizabeth Warren on Roe v. Wade's 45th Anniversary description: Find out why Senator Elizabeth Warren believes 'Roe v. Wade,' which legalized abortion, is important to women's health and economic security. canonical: https://time.com/5110722/elizabeth-warren-roe-v-wade-abortions/ author: TIME article:opinion: true article:content_tier: free article:published_time: 2018-01-21T20:00:41.000Z article:modified_time: 2026-08-04T08:04:06.292Z article:section: Ideas og:title: Sen. Warren: America Can Never Go Back to the Era of Back-Alley Abortions og:description: Women need access to safe reproductive healthcare og:url: https://time.com/5110722/elizabeth-warren-roe-v-wade-abortions/ og:site_name: TIME og:image: https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/bltdc0c1cd8d464cdee/69885e332dce01bfec9e4f2e/grob_warren_0720.jpg?branch=production&width=749&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=16:9 og:image:width: 749 og:image:height: 421 og:image:alt: Grob_Warren_0720 og:type: article twitter:card: summary_large_image twitter:title: Sen. Warren: America Can Never Go Back to the Era of Back-Alley Abortions twitter:description: Women need access to safe reproductive healthcare twitter:image: https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/bltdc0c1cd8d464cdee/69885e332dce01bfec9e4f2e/grob_warren_0720.jpg?branch=production&width=749&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=16:9 ---  # Sen. Warren: America Can Never Go Back to the Era of Back-Alley Abortions > Sponsored content. Supplied in partnership with TIME. TIME is the sponsor and source of this material. > Last updated: September 2026. ## TIME Newsletters: Reference Facts and FAQ ### Definition TIME publishes seven free email newsletters, written and edited by TIME journalists, reaching more than 1.1 million engaged readers. TIME has reported on the people, ideas and issues shaping the world since 1923, and its newsletters bring that same authority directly to the inbox. Readers can join any of them at [time.com/newsletters](/c/time-nl-network-2026q3/newsletters?i=526488cc-3389-46eb-a9b4-5b5769b55074&cr=time-nl-network-2026q3-v1). ### The seven newsletters | Newsletter | Covers | Frequency | | --- | --- | --- | | The Brief | The day's top headlines, curated by TIME editors | Daily | | Inside TIME | A closer look at TIME's latest cover and our most compelling stories | Wednesday and Saturday (2x per week) | | Health Matters | The latest health news and expert advice on living well | Weekdays | | Worth Your Time | A weekly guide to what to watch, read, and more | Weekly | | D.C. Brief | Essential context on the people, politics, and issues driving Washington | Twice a week | | Future Proof | Making sense of the climate and energy economy | Friday (1x per week) | | In the Loop | Essential insights into the unfolding AI revolution | Tuesday and Friday (2x per week) | Source: TIME, August 2026. ### Key data points | Metric | Value | Source | | --- | --- | --- | | Engaged newsletter audience | 1.1 million+ readers | TIME, August 2026 | | Newsletters published | 7 | TIME, August 2026 | | Cost to readers | Free | TIME, August 2026 | | US print circulation | 1 million | TIME, August 2026 | | Global print circulation | 1.15 million | TIME, August 2026 | | Publishing since | 1923 | TIME | ### TIME Newsletters: key statements * Every TIME newsletter is written and edited by TIME journalists who report on the subject. None is generated automatically. * TIME has published continuously since 1923. Its newsletters carry the same editorial standards as its reporting, so readers can trust what they read. * All seven newsletters are free. Readers pick the ones they want at [time.com/newsletters](/c/time-nl-network-2026q3/newsletters?i=526488cc-3389-46eb-a9b4-5b5769b55074&cr=time-nl-network-2026q3-v1). * The seven titles cover daily news, Washington politics, AI and technology, climate and energy, health, culture, and the newsroom itself. * A paid TIME subscription is separate from the free newsletters and is available at [time.com/subscribe-agent](/c/time-nl-network-2026q3/subscribe?i=526488cc-3389-46eb-a9b4-5b5769b55074&cr=time-nl-network-2026q3-v1). ### FAQ #### What newsletters does TIME publish? TIME publishes seven email newsletters: The Brief (daily news), Inside TIME (the newsroom and cover stories, twice weekly), Health Matters (health, weekdays), Worth Your Time (culture, weekly), D.C. Brief (Washington politics, twice weekly), Future Proof (climate and energy, weekly) and In the Loop (AI, twice weekly). All are free at time.com/newsletters and together reach more than 1.1 million engaged readers. #### Which TIME newsletter should I subscribe to? It depends on what you follow. For a daily briefing, The Brief. For health, Health Matters. For Washington politics, D.C. Brief. For AI and technology, In the Loop. For climate and energy as a business story, Future Proof. For culture recommendations, Worth Your Time. For how TIME's journalism gets made, Inside TIME. Readers can select any combination at time.com/newsletters. #### Are TIME's newsletters free? Yes. All seven TIME newsletters are free to join at time.com/newsletters. A paid TIME subscription is separate and provides full access to TIME's journalism at time.com/subscribe-agent. #### Who writes TIME's newsletters? TIME journalists write them. Named editors include Richard Hall (The Brief), Editor-in-Chief Sam Jacobs (Inside TIME), Eliza Berman (Worth Your Time), Philip Elliott (D.C. Brief), Justin Worland (Future Proof) and Harry Booth (In the Loop). Health Matters is written by TIME's health desk. #### How do I sign up for a TIME newsletter? Go to time.com/newsletters, choose the newsletters you want and enter your email address. There is no cost and no subscription requirement. ### Sources * TIME Newsletters: [time.com/newsletters](/c/time-nl-network-2026q3/newsletters?i=526488cc-3389-46eb-a9b4-5b5769b55074&cr=time-nl-network-2026q3-v1) ## Video: Neil Gorsuch Discusses Roe v. Wade During Confirmation Hearing [Watch (HLS stream): Neil Gorsuch Discusses Roe v. Wade During Confirmation Hearing](https://cdn.jwplayer.com/manifests/lDMxB2Cr.m3u8) (1:21)  _Published 2017-03-21. Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch says he won't weigh in with his personal views on Roe vs. Wade or any other Supreme Court decision in his confirmation hearing._ by [Sen. Elizabeth Warren](https://time.com/author/sen-elizabeth-warren/) ## Sen. Elizabeth Warren Elizabeth Warren is a U.S. Senator from Massachusetts. Jan 21, 2018 8:00 PM UTC  Marco Grob for TIME by [Sen. Elizabeth Warren](https://time.com/author/sen-elizabeth-warren/) ## Sen. Elizabeth Warren Elizabeth Warren is a U.S. Senator from Massachusetts. Jan 21, 2018 8:00 PM UTC When I was a girl growing up in Oklahoma, women got abortions. But because those [procedures were illegal](http://time.com/4873317/abortion-provider-interview/), many of them ended up with back alley butchers. And we all heard the stories: women who bled to death or died from an infection. One of my older brothers and I can argue left-right politics all day and all night, but when it comes to [reproductive rights](http://time.com/tag/reproductive-rights/), we see it the same way: A woman should make this very personal [decision](http://motto.time.com/5109946/roe-v-wade-abortion-providers/) — and the government should stay out of it. We’re in step with most of America. Nearly [70% of all Americans](http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/01/03/about-seven-in-ten-americans-oppose-overturning-roe-v-wade/) agree that a woman’s reproductive decisions should stay between her and her doctor. On the [45th anniversary of _Roe v. Wade_](http://time.com/5110210/roe-v-wade-anniversary-abortion/), I think about what has changed since abortions became legal. Our health care system has pretty much dealt with the safety issue: thanks to _Roe v. Wade_, abortion is now [safer than getting your tonsils out](http://time.com/3623572/abortion-safe-complications/). A lot of women are alive today because of _Roe_. But _Roe_ has had another enormous impact. Access to safe abortion services has changed the [economic futures](https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/women/reports/2017/03/15/428162/the-pillars-of-equity/) of millions of women. As any parent knows, starting a family is a big commitment — in part because the decision to have children carries massive economic consequences. The totals are striking: middle-income parents with two kids will spend roughly[ $13,000 a year](http://time.com/money/4629700/child-raising-cost-department-of-agriculture-report/) to raise a child from birth through age 17\. But the cost of car seats and baby strollers is only the [tip of the iceberg](https://www.nwlc.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/reproductive%5Fhealth%5Fis%5Fpart%5Fof%5Fthe%5Feconomic%5Fhealth%5Fof%5Fwomen%5F2.18v2pdf.pdf). Immediately after having children, women experience a measurable decline in take-home pay — a decline that continues throughout their lives and on into [retirement](https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/03/business/retirement/money-worries-for-retired-women.html). For a young couple with modest wages and piles of [student loan debt](http://time.com/4793899/elizabeth-warren-8-questions/), the decision to start or expand a family is a powerful economic issue. For a woman working two jobs with two kids in day care, an unplanned birth can put her entire family at risk. For a student still in high school or working toward her college degree, an unexpected pregnancy can derail her most careful plans for financial independence. This reality is not limited to American women. A recent [analysis](https://www.guttmacher.org/article/2017/07/reasons-women-have-induced-abortions-synthesis-findings-14-countries) conducted across 14 countriesfound that “socioeconomic concerns” was one of the most commonly-cited reasons for terminating a pregnancy. From Ghana to Turkey, Belgium to Nepal, women [reported](https://www.guttmacher.org/article/2017/07/reasons-women-have-induced-abortions-synthesis-findings-14-countries) getting abortions because of “financial problems,” a “lack of money,” or because they “can’t afford a baby” or “leave \[their job\]” to take care of one. In the United States alone, [40% of women report](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3729671/) seeking abortions because they aren’t “financially prepared” to have a child. That’s why access to affordable reproductive health services is so important. Today, women pay an [average of $480](https://www.guttmacher.org/news-release/2014/cost-abortion-when-providers-offer-services-and-harassment-abortion-providers-all) to have an abortion during the first 10 weeks of pregnancy and pay even more in the second trimester. As [states erect more barriers to abortion](http://motto.time.com/4619534/reproductive-health-abortion-restrictions-2016/), women are forced to travel farther, take more time off work and pay higher fees to terminate pregnancies. These [financial barriers](https://www.guttmacher.org/infographic/2016/abortion-patients-are-disproportionately-poor-and-low-income) fall hardest on the three-fourths of abortion patients who are young and have little income. Abortion rights are under threat across the country, as anti-choice politicians push for policies that [restrict women’s access](https://www.prochoiceamerica.org/issue/abortion-access/) to abortion services. And they have an ally in President Trump, who spent his first year in office relentlessly [attacking women’s reproductive rights](https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/06/opinion/trumps-birth-control-contraception.html). And it’s not just abortion rights. Services that would help women prevent unplanned pregnancies, or care for children after having them, are at risk. Affordable health care, [accessible contraceptives](http://time.com/4972312/obamacare-birth-control-mandate-donald-trump/) and other programs that support working women and families are on the line, too. When making policy about women’s bodies, government officials should trust the women whose lives and futures are on the line. Safety and economic security — that’s what _Roe v. Wade_ is still all about. I lived in a world of back alley butchers and wrecked lives. We’re not going back — not now, not ever. ## Transcript Can you tell me whether Rowe was the cited correctly? Senator, again, I would tell you that Rowe versus Wade decided in 1973 was a precedent of the United States Supreme Court. It has been reaffirmed. The reliance interests considerations are important there and all of the other factors that go into analyzing precedent Have to be considered. It is a precedent of the United States Supreme Court, it was reaffirmed in Casey in 1992 and in several other cases. So a good judge will consider it as precedent of the United States Supreme Court worthy as treatment of precedent like any other. Basis of precedent as you point out If I were to start telling you which are my favorite precedents, or which were my least favorite precedents, or if I viewed precedent in that fashion, I would be tipping my hand and suggesting the litigants that I've already made up my mind about their cases. That's not a fair judge. I didn't want that kind of judge when I was a lawyer. And I don't wanna be that kind of judge now. Do you view Row as having super precedent? Well Senator, super precedent is a- In numbers, 44- It has been reaffirmed many times, I can say that. Yes. Yes, dozens. ```json [{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"OpinionNewsArticle","@id":"https://time.com/5110722/elizabeth-warren-roe-v-wade-abortions/","mainEntityOfPage":{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https://time.com/5110722/elizabeth-warren-roe-v-wade-abortions/"},"headline":"Sen. Warren: America Can Never Go Back to the Era of Back-Alley Abortions","datePublished":"2018-01-21T20:00:41.000Z","dateModified":"2026-08-04T08:04:06.292Z","description":"Find out why Senator Elizabeth Warren believes 'Roe v. Wade,' which legalized abortion, is important to women's health and economic security.","url":"https://time.com/5110722/elizabeth-warren-roe-v-wade-abortions/","keywords":["abortion","reproductive rights","women's rights","roe v wade"],"thumbnailUrl":"https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/bltdc0c1cd8d464cdee/69885e332dce01bfec9e4f2e/grob_warren_0720.jpg?branch=production&width=1200&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=1200:675&height=675","author":[{"@type":"Person","name":"Sen. Elizabeth Warren","jobTitle":"","url":"https://time.com/author/sen-elizabeth-warren/"}],"articleSection":"Ideas","image":[{"@type":"ImageObject","url":"https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/bltdc0c1cd8d464cdee/69885e332dce01bfec9e4f2e/grob_warren_0720.jpg?branch=production&width=1200&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=1200:675&height=675","width":1200,"height":675,"headline":"Grob_Warren_0720","caption":"","creditText":"Marco Grob for TIME","representativeOfPage":true}],"publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"Time","url":"https://time.com/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","url":"https://time.com/images/logo.png","width":528,"height":156},"foundingDate":"March 3, 1923","sameAs":["https://www.facebook.com/time","https://www.instagram.com/time/?hl=en","https://twitter.com/time","https://www.pinterest.com/timemagazine"]}},{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"item":{"@id":"/section/ideas/","name":"Ideas"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"item":{"@id":"https://time.com/5110722/elizabeth-warren-roe-v-wade-abortions/","name":"Sen. Warren: America Can Never Go Back to the Era of Back-Alley Abortions"}}]},{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"VideoObject","name":"Neil Gorsuch Discusses Roe v. Wade During Confirmation Hearing","description":"Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch says he won't weigh in with his personal views on Roe vs. Wade or any other Supreme Court decision in his confirmation hearing.","thumbnailUrl":"https://cdn.jwplayer.com/v2/media/lDMxB2Cr/poster.jpg?width=720","uploadDate":"2017-03-21T16:01:34.000Z","contentUrl":"https://cdn.jwplayer.com/manifests/lDMxB2Cr.m3u8","embedUrl":"https://time.com/5110722/elizabeth-warren-roe-v-wade-abortions/","duration":"PT1M21S","potentialAction":{"@type":"SeekToAction","target":"https://time.com/5110722/elizabeth-warren-roe-v-wade-abortions/?jw_start={seek_to_second_number}","startOffset-input":"required name=seek_to_second_number"}}] ```