Abortion was perhaps the most polarising issue of the 2024 election, and one which Kamala Harris was relying on to return her to the White House.
But with Trump claiming an unexpectedly emphatic victory, the Democrats appear to have failed to mobilise the groundswell of support they had hoped for on reproductive rights.
This presidential election – the first since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v Wade, a landmark ruling which protected the right to the procedure in the US – had been something of a referendum on abortion.
Harris had made the issue central to her campaign against Trump, who presided over a dramatic rollback in reproductive rights during his last stint in the White House, and was relying on women and pro-choice voters coming out in droves to support her.
The Vice President had pledged to restore reproductive rights in the US, calling for Roe v Wade to be put back in place by Congress.
Harris’s website stated she would “never allow a national abortion ban to become law,” and that she and running mate Tim Walz “trust women to make decisions about their own bodies, and not have the government tell them what to do.”
During the campaign, Harris visited an abortion clinic and met women who have been denied care because of their state’s restrictions. She was endorsed by organisations such as the Planned Parenthood Action Fund, Reproductive Freedom for All and the Committee to Protect Health Care.
Harris had hoped to make gains in states where abortion rights have been rolled back as a result of Trump’s last presidency.
But instead, the key swing states with restrictive abortion laws rejected Harris in favour of Trump. Where did it all go wrong?
How did states with restrictive abortion access vote?
States where abortion is effectively illegal – Idaho, South Dakota, Texas, Oklahoma, Missouri, Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Tennessee, Indiana, Kentucky and West Virginia, according to the Centre for Reproductive Rights – all backed Trump.
These are traditionally Republican constituencies. But the real blow to the Democrats came from swing states with tight abortion laws and purple politics.
There were seven swing states determined to be crucial to deciding the next resident of the White House.
Five of them – Arizona, Wisconsin, Georgia, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania – have “hostile” or “restrictive” abortion policies, according to the Centre for Reproductive Rights and Guttmacher Institute.
What are the swing states policies on abortion?
Seven swing states were key to deciding the US election – and five of them have abortion policies deemed as “hostile” or “restrictive”.
The Centre for Reproductive Rights defines this as states where authorities have “expressed a desire to prohibit abortion entirely”, and are “extremely vulnerable to the revival of old abortion bans or the enactment of new ones, and none of them has legal protections for abortion.”
As they call for Trump, despite Harris’s extensive courtship, this is what their rules on the procedure are.
Arizona
Arizona voted on Tuesday in favour of amending the state’s constitution, marking a victory for pro-choice activists in a state deemed “very restrictive” by the Guttmacher Institute.
Prior to this, it had banned abortion after 15 weeks, state Medicaid can’t be used for abortion except in very limited circumstances, and telemedicine for abortion – abortion care given by phone call or online consultaton – is banned. Parental consent is needed for minors. Only physicians, not other health professionals, can carry out the procedure.
Voters have now backed an amendment to guarantee abortions access up to the point of fetal viability (around 24 weeks) and allow exceptions for abortions beyond the point of viability to protect the life or physical or mental health of the pregnant person.
Georgia
Abortion is banned in Georgia after six weeks and the state is also marked “very restrictive”. The rule has exceptions for medical emergencies, pregnancy determined to be medically futile, or pregnancy from rape or incest, but only if reported to police and performed at 20 weeks or less.
Patients have to go through a mandatory 24-hour waiting period and must receive a consultation at least 24 hours before the procedure. Parental consent is required for those under 18 and state Medicaid usually doesn’t cover abortion, and only physicians can carry out the procedure.
Unlike bans in other states, Georgia does not explicitly state that a pregnant woman will not be prosecuted for an unlawful abortion.
Wisconsin
Abortion is legal up to 20 weeks, but abortion telemedicine is banned and they must have an ultrasound even if not medically necessary. Patients must receive in person counselling and then return the next day for the procedure.
State Medicaid coverage of abortion care is banned except in very limited circumstances and parental consent is required for under 18s. Only physicians, not other health professionals, can carry out the procedure.
North Carolina
Abortion is banned at 12 weeks and afterwards. Patients must visit a clinic for in person counselling and the return at least 72 hours later for the procedure. As in the other states, state Medicaid can rarely be used for the procedures and parental consent is needed for minors, but health professionals other than physicians can carry them out.
Pennsylvania
Abortion is banned at 24 weeks. Patients must go through counselling to obtain one and wait at least 24 hours for the procedure, however they do not have to get an abortion in person.
State Medicaid is usually not available to cover costs and parental consent is needed for under-18s. Only physicians can carry out the procedure.
Team Harris had been hoping to secure victory in these critical seats, in part due to her abortion platform. While counting continues, Trump looks set to have won all five.
Utah, Wyoming, North Dakota, Nebraska, Iowa, Florida, South Carolina, also deemed “hostile” to abortion, all backed the Republicans, with Kamala Harris picking up just one electoral college vote from Nebraska’s second district out of the bunch.
Why didn’t Kamala Harris win them over?
Unexpectedly, the national exit poll of voters conducted by Edison Research found that Harris failed to win a comfortable majority among voters who believe abortion should be legal. These voters only backed Harris 51 per cent to 47 per cent for Trump.
This indicates Trump may have benefited from recent ambiguity over his position on abortion policy.
While Trump had previously told supporters he was “proud to be the most pro-life president in American history”, he has shifted his rhetoric on the issue during the 2024 campaign trail.
He recently claimed he would be “great for… reproductive rights”, indicated that he supported states making their own decision on abortion, and said it was a “lie” to suggest he would sign a national abortion ban.
It’s too early for any data on the gender breakdown of the vote, but the results indicate Harris failed in her crusade to win over Republican or undecided female voters based on her abortion platform.
Some may have been decidedly anti-abortion, while others may have voted primarily based on other issues such as immigration or the economy.
Exit polls show that Harris did have a 10-point advantage with women, taking 54 per cent over Trump’s 44 per cent, while Trump had the same lead over Harris among men. But crucially, Harris failed to win over as many women as her predecessor Joe Biden.
In his analysis for i, leading political scientist John Curtice said that “there was little sign of the much widely made suggestion that the gender gap would widen given the particular prominence of the abortion issue this time around.”
“Rather, at 10 points, the Democrat lead among women was down on the 15-point gap in 2020, while Mr Trump’s advantage among men, 10 points, was similar to the eight-point lead he enjoyed in 2020,” he wrote. “It looks as though the issue may not have changed many women’s minds after all.”
Religion may also have played a part, partly among followers of the Catholic Church which does not support abortion.
Exit polls recorded a large swing for Trump among Catholic voters – 56 per cent vs 41 per cent for Harris. This marks a significant change from the 2020 election, when Catholics backed Joe Biden, by a five-point margin. In both years, about a quarter of voters have been Catholic. Other religious groups remained broadly the same.
Kelly Baden, vice president for public policy at the Guttmacher Institute, said that abortion failed to determine the election partly because it was subsumed by other issues – such as immigration or the economy – and partly because Trump had successfully clouded his position on it.
“The Trump campaign very heavily hedged on this issue,” she said. “We saw constant flip flopping, and there’s no clarity right now on what his position on abortion policy is and what he might actually do. We feel pretty clear about what he might do because he’s been there before, and he used the campaign moment to recognise that abortion is popular and bring folks to his side.”
Ms Baden also suggested the Democrats had failed in communications on abortion, including linking it to the economy and in clarifying the reason Roe v Wade was overturned.
“It is also confusing for many voters not steeped in this issue day to day that the decision overturning Roe v Wade happened during the Biden administration,” she added.
“It happened because Donald Trump appointed justices to the Supreme Court to make that happen, but that is more confusing and nuanced message for voters, and those messages take time. When there’s so much going on I’m not sure some voters necessarily understood that. So when they looked at abortion they might say yes I care about it, but I care about other things more. Or, I think that Trump is fine, he says send the issue back to the States, that’s good enough for me.”
Ms Baden also suggested that the Democrats failed to communicate “how abortion is an economic issue”, which consistently topped polls of voter priorities.
“The biggest financial decision a person makes in their lifetime, particularly women, is whether or not they will have children.”
What do the election results mean for abortion?
Despite the recent softening in his stance on abortion, pro-choice activists fear another Trump presidency could mean further roll backs on reproductive rights.
He has celebrated the overturning of Roe v Wade, claiming credit for the decision and calling it “a great victory”. He called the ensuing state-level restrictions “a beautiful thing to watch”.
“We broke Roe v Wade,” he told the press at one point. “Nobody thought that was possible.”
His running mate JD Vance – now Vice President Elect – openly opposes abortion and has said it should be “illegal” in all 50 states.
But is not only the occupant of the Oval Office which could affect abortion rights; several states were also voting on abortion measures this polling day, and the determination of the Senate and House of Representatives will also be hugely influential.
Amendments were on ballot papers in 10 states to undo bans or restrictions that currently block varying levels of abortion access.
These votes produced mixed results.
South Dakota, Florida and Nebraska rejected the ballot measure that would have restored or protected abortion access, while Arizona, Maryland, Colorado, New York, Nevada, Montana and Missouri voted in favour.
Victories in these states will give hope to pro-choice activists.
Ms Baden of the Guttmacher Institute said: “The election did show – in other ways – that abortion is popular, when voted on directly on the ballot by voters. Clearly that didn’t translate into the presidential election results.
“When people are voting for a candidate, there’s a whole host of issues they’re voting, as well as personalities. Whereas when they’re voting on a ballot, it’s much more direct and much cleaner.”
Ahead of the vote, Mary Ziegler, a professor at the University of California Davis School of Law and an expert on the history of reproductive rights in the US said that if all abortion rights measures pass, “it’s a sign of how much of a juggernaut support for reproductive rights has become.”
“If some of them fail, then you’re going to see some conservatives looking for guidance to see what the magic ingredient was that made it possible for conservatives to stem the tide,” she said.
