Political institutions and public opinion on abortion decisions post-Dobbs

At a time when state institutions are increasingly setting abortion policy through different channels, understanding which decision-making processes the public views as legitimate has crucial consequences for democratic governance and public trust in democratic institutions. We argue that in the post-Dobbs political climate, public support has shifted away from court-issued abortion decisions toward those made through voter referendums, driven by higher perceived procedural fairness in direct democracy. We fielded two unique survey experiments, one before the Dobbs decision removing the federal constitutional right for pregnant people to seek an abortion, and one after the decision. Pre-Dobbs, we find few differences in citizens’ perceptions of abortion decisions made by state courts, legislatures, or referendums. Post-Dobbs, we find that people evaluate both pro-abortion and anti-abortion decisions more favorably when decided through voter referendums. Our results hold critical implications for policies on abortion in the post-Dobbs landscape, but also for policy formation and evaluation on other contentious public policy issues.