Amandla Stenberg accuses a lesbian NYT film critic of objectifying her

As a result of the U.S. Supreme Court’s reverse of Roe v. Wade, advocates on both sides of the abortion rights debate have shifted their attention to state judiciaries, which may now have the final say on the matter.

According to Ballotpedia, there are state Supreme Court elections in 30 states and a total of 85 seats, although the majority of the fights are for nonpartisan justices’ seats. In November, though, in at least three states — North Carolina, Ohio, and Illinois – party control of the supreme court is in doubt.

The recent U.S. Supreme Court judgments on redistricting and limiting the constitutional right to an abortion have boosted state judicial elections, with large sums of money projected to flow into this cycle’s campaigns.

Douglas Keith, counsel in the Democracy Program at the Brennan Center for Justice, stated, “The U.S. Supreme Court is making it obvious that it is stepping back from its responsibility of preserving individual rights and ensuring that other systems of our democracy are functioning.” “Now that the U.S. Supreme Court has made this abundantly obvious, it’s becoming clear to a lot of people that state supreme courts will be as essential as they’ve ever been because they’ll be deciding these crucial concerns.”

The 2019 judgement by the U.S. Supreme Court that federal courts have no role in evaluating accusations of political gerrymandering left state courts as the sole venues for legal challenges to voting boundaries set to entrench the party in power and redirected attention to state judicial races. According to a research by the Brennan Center, the 2019-2020 election cycle set a record for spending in state justice campaigns, with nearly $100 million spent nationwide.

However, the Supreme Court’s June decision to overturn Roe v. Wade has increased interest in state judicial elections, as abortion rights supporters are already bringing litigation in state courts to challenge newly enacted limitations based on state constitutions.

Keith anticipated that, due to the intensity around abortion rights, these fights will usher in the most expensive midterm cycle for state court elections to date.

“Previously, if there was a law restricting abortion access or a partisan gerrymander established by the legislature, those who wanted to challenge those acts had two options: They could go to state court and make state law claims, or they could go to federal court and sue under the U.S. Constitution,” Keith explained. “Since the U.S. Supreme Court is closing federal court doors to so many of these matters, state courts gain more powerful since they have the final say on certain of these issues.”

Nonetheless, he noted, state courts are “not exhibiting assertiveness These questions are being denied access by the federal courts.”

In 1999, Montana’s highest court decided that abortion restrictions violated a woman’s right to private privacy under the state constitution, thereby recognizing the state constitutional right to abortion. There, though, Republicans hope that a change in the composition of the state Supreme Court will result in the reversal of the 23-year-old verdict. In November, two candidates sponsored by the state GOP will be on the ballot: Justice Jim Rice and attorney James Brown.

In November, Ohio voters will cast ballots for three Supreme Court seats, all of which are currently occupied by Republicans. There are now four Republican justices and three Democratic justices on the Ohio Supreme Court, and this November’s election will be the first in which party affiliation will appear alongside candidate names.

Kellie Copeland, executive director of Pro-Choice Ohio, stated that the state’s high court elections, as well as its gubernatorial race, are a “top priority” for the organization, especially since one of the seats to be filled belongs to Chief Justice Maureen O’Connor, who is a swing voter and is retiring due to age restrictions.

“The court’s control is up for grabs, so both pro-choice and anti-choice organizations are laser-focused on the state Supreme Court,” she told CBS News. “There are challenges that will work their way through the state courts and wind up at the Supreme Court.” We believe this is the quickest and most efficient method to restore abortion access in Ohio.

At least one legal challenge to an Ohio law prohibiting abortions after the detection of embryonic cardiac activity, which occurs around six weeks into a pregnancy, asserts that the measure violates the Ohio Constitution, which, according to the abortion providers who filed the lawsuit, protects the fundamental right to an abortion.

“It is crucial to win this court with people who will adhere to the state constitution and acknowledge the human rights provided there,” she stated.

Copeland also warned that the state supreme court might play a significant role if proponents of abortion rights pursue a ballot initiative to amend the Ohio Constitution to safeguard abortion rights, a strategy that frequently results in litigation over an initiative’s wording.

If the majority of the state Supreme Court is opposed to abortion rights, “it will be extremely difficult for us not just to restore abortion access, but also to ensure it in the future,” she warned.

In Michigan, Democratic Party-affiliated judges enjoy a slender 4-3 majority on the state’s highest court, and Democrats hope to keep their grip. Governor Gretchen Whitmer has urged the Michigan Supreme Court to overturn a 91-year-old legislation prohibiting abortion that predates the Supreme Court’s ruling in Roe v. Wade and to recognize the right to an abortion under the Michigan Constitution.

In a separate lawsuit from Michigan abortion clinics, a lower court has halted enforcement of the pre-Roe legislation, while the case is still making its way through the state’s judicial system.

“If voters care about abortion access, the Ohio and Michigan Supreme Court elections in November are among the most crucial,” said Jake Faleschini, legal director for state courts at the Alliance for Justice Action Fund, a court-focused liberal organization.

As a result of the redrawing of district lines for the state’s seven-member Supreme Court, there are two competitive judicial elections in Illinois this year. While Democrats have enjoyed a four-seat majority on the state Supreme Court for over two decades, this year’s redistricting might shift that majority, according to Faleschini.

The Illinois Supreme Court has acknowledged the constitutional right to an abortion, but a change in its composition might lead to a court battle that abortion rights activists fear will imperil access. Such a move, according to Faleschini, would not just affect Illinois patients, but also those from neighboring states who travel to Illinois for abortion treatments owing to restrictions in their own states.

“Illinois plays a disproportionately large role in the Midwest in maintaining abortion access,” he said.

In the meanwhile, North Carolina’s judicial elections are among the most carefully watched this year, as Republicans have the opportunity to flip the current 4-3 court. Republican state legislators are in hot water with the state supreme court over redistricting, with a challenge involving court-drawn congressional boundaries generating a blockbuster election law case that will be considered by the U.S. Supreme Court in the future term.

A state Supreme Court under Republican control might also be an obstacle for Democratic Governor Roy Cooper, who signed an executive order in July to protect access to abortion services.

As proponents of abortion rights contend that access will be on the ballot in November, activists are making new investments to elect pro-abortion rights candidates at all levels of government. Planned Parenthood stated on Wednesday that it will invest a record-breaking $50 million in nine states where access to reproductive health care is on the ballot: Georgia, Nevada, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, Arizona, North Carolina, New Hampshire, Michigan, and Wisconsin.

Sarah Standiford, spokesperson for Planned Parenthood Votes, stated in a statement to CBS News that the advocacy and political groups of the reproductive health care provider extend to Congress, state legislatures, courts, and the ballot box.

She stated, “State supreme courts are a crucial safeguard and, in some instances, a chance to defend our fundamental rights.” Planned Parenthood’s advocacy and political organizations will prioritize supreme court campaigns in numerous states, including Ohio, Michigan, and North Carolina, whenever possible.

In this election cycle, the Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee will invest for the first time in state supreme court contests.

“State legislatures remain our top priority, but state Supreme Courts retain enormous power over state legislation, redistricting maps, and election administration,” said Gabrielle Chew, the organization’s spokeswoman, in an email to CBS News. “Democrats, like to state legislatures, have habitually neglected state supreme courts to their detriment. Here at the DLCC, we intend to alter this.”