CEO of Democracy Forward Skye Perryman joined Maggie McGrath on "Forbes Newsroom" to discuss the ramifications of the Supreme Court’s decisions on abortion.
Fuel your success with Forbes. Gain unlimited access to premium journalism, including breaking news, groundbreaking in-depth reported stories, daily digests and more. Plus, members get a front-row seat at members-only events with leading thinkers and doers, access to premium video that can help you get ahead, an ad-light experience, early access to select products including NFT drops and more:
https://account.forbes.com/membership/?utm_source=youtube&utm_medium=display&utm_campaign=growth_non-sub_paid_subscribe_ytdescript
Stay Connected
Forbes on Facebook: http://fb.com/forbes
Forbes Video on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/forbes
Forbes Video on Instagram: http://instagram.com/forbes
More From Forbes: http://forbes.com
Fuel your success with Forbes. Gain unlimited access to premium journalism, including breaking news, groundbreaking in-depth reported stories, daily digests and more. Plus, members get a front-row seat at members-only events with leading thinkers and doers, access to premium video that can help you get ahead, an ad-light experience, early access to select products including NFT drops and more:
https://account.forbes.com/membership/?utm_source=youtube&utm_medium=display&utm_campaign=growth_non-sub_paid_subscribe_ytdescript
Stay Connected
Forbes on Facebook: http://fb.com/forbes
Forbes Video on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/forbes
Forbes Video on Instagram: http://instagram.com/forbes
More From Forbes: http://forbes.com
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00 Obviously, each Supreme Court case is different. Each state legislative decision is a little bit
00:05 different. And, you know, every scenario, you had the Alabama IVF that also happened.
00:10 But what I'm wondering is, as you let's focus on the Supreme Court, as you look at the arguments
00:16 made and the questions asked in the Miffy-Preston case, and as you look at the arguments made and
00:21 the questions asked in the Idaho case, what has that told you about that, about this court? And
00:27 what does that tell you about what the state of abortion care will look like in a month or two
00:34 when the court issues its decisions? Right. So we don't know what the court's going to do,
00:38 but we certainly have seen, we have certainly seen justices, including justices, for instance,
00:45 that were behind the Dobbs decision, entertain questions that are very concerning, questions
00:51 that come from an extremist perspective that are not based on medical reality, that are not based
00:56 on facts and evidence, and that are not based on the basic principles of women's health care.
01:00 So we are seeing that, and it's highly concerning. What it means is that we can't take our
01:07 reproductive health care access for granted. Dobbs showed us that, to the extent that there was any
01:12 doubt. The Dobbs decision showed people that. But this says that this fight is going to go much
01:17 further. And yesterday, to have to hear the Solicitor General of the United States,
01:24 you know, passionately and very competently defend a federal law that has been on the books since the
01:30 80s that protects people who need emergency care. It's highly concerning. So I think,
01:38 you know, the fight is not going to be over. And regardless of what the Supreme Court does
01:41 in these decisions, we are seeing such an influx, whether it is in state Supreme Courts, whether it
01:49 is in other courts or in communities, we are seeing such an influx of attack. Nothing is going
01:54 to be off limits. You've already seen the attacks on IVF. There are attacks on contraception. We
02:00 have seen writings from Justice Thomas suggesting that he wants to reconsider contraception access
02:06 altogether. And so I think that, you know, what it tells us is this is an important issue that
02:11 we all need to be paying attention to, and that we need to be using our lives and our tools that
02:16 we have in order to bring about greater access. >> When we think about the extremists on one side,
02:24 the people who are bringing these cases to the court, you referenced everything's on the table,
02:31 and there's something called Project 2025 that ties into all of this. What do our viewers need
02:37 to know and understand about Project 2025? >> Well, Project 2025 is an effort that I think
02:45 around 70 organizations have joined, including organizations such as ones that have not
02:52 supported women's reproductive health care access. It is bankrolled by the same moneyed interests
02:57 that bankrolled the overturning of Roe v. Wade. And it is a plan that is being set forth and
03:03 documented for how the federal government should operate or how the extremists want to shape the
03:11 federal government in a world where there is a presidency or a legislative session where there
03:18 are people that do not support democracy. And so what we are seeing in that plan, which is about
03:23 900 pages, your viewers don't have to -- they don't have to read it. You can go to democracy4.org
03:30 and we have some resources to learn more about it. But where women's reproductive health care
03:34 is concerned, we are seeing blatant attempts, really clear about the intent to roll back
03:43 reproductive health care access more to enforce Victorian-era laws that would criminalize
03:48 medication abortion, that would seek to criminalize -- potentially even, you know,
03:54 so -- yeah, that would seek to criminalize this care. And so it's very concerning.