The Tulane University Newcomb Institute hosted its annual Roe v. Wade lecture last Thursday, an event commemorating the establishment and discussing the annulment of abortion as a constitutionally protected right.
Tulane affiliates, activists and community organizations gathered in the Diboll Gallery to hear Tulane alumnus and pro-choice activist Jessica Valenti headline the lecture. The speech was preceded by a collection of presentations given by Newcomb Institute’s student interns on related topics as a part of a greater Conceiving Equity 2026 event.
Valenti opened her speech by contrasting the public’s perspective on abortion care for a woman who “desperately wants more children” with one who “knows that she probably could swing it financially, but she is not ready to be a parent.”
“Here in those two stories, I think we all know which woman gets more sympathy,” Valenti said. “And despite what we might be led to believe, one was not morally better than the other.”
Valenti used her opening of comparing “good abortions” and “bad abortions” to make the argument that deciphering between them leads to greater maternal and infant suffering and mortality.
“There is no overseeing the damage that [Dobbs v. Jackson] has done,” Valenti said, referring to the Supreme Court case which overturned Roe v. Wade. “And I know that in part because I have been tracking that damage since the end of Roe.”
“I’ve spoken to a woman in Tennessee who was denied prenatal care because she was unmarried, and that was illegal,” Valenti said.
Valenti also spoke about women who were denied abortions, including a woman whose fetus was developing without a head and another who was left with no fallopian tubes after being denied treatment for an ectopic pregnancy.
“One of the stories I’ll never forget is the woman in Texas who was forced to carry a dead fetus around for weeks on end, who said she felt like a walking coffin,” Valenti said.
The lecture also discussed the examination of related data, a major initiative supported by the Conceiving Equity event at the Newcomb Institute, alongside its Tulane and non-profit partners in Louisiana.
“We provide high-quality, timely data at no cost to our partners because evidence matters,” said Anita Raj, professor and executive director of the Newcomb Institute.
The conversation was twofold, centering on both the underrepresentation in data of medical complications resulting from statewide abortion bans, as well as federal and state data tracking.
“You could multiply all of those stories [about maternal medical complications] by 100, and we still would not get close to the actual number of people who have been harmed by these bans,” Valenti said.
The “controlled substance” classification of certain commonly-used medications has influenced data privacy.
“Do you know what else happens when you make something a controlled substance? It’s tracked to the state database,” Valenti said. “That’s the other kind of attack that has been exported — attacks on data and privacy.”
Valenti criticized the vague laws that some women have been charged under in relation to abortion cases.
“In the first two years, after Dobbs, there were more than 400 pregnancy-related arrests,” Valenti said. “We have seen women arrested … in Georgia, in Ohio, … prosecuted for abuse of a corpse after flushing her miscarriage.”
These charges, which Valenti argued were flagrant attacks on women’s healthcare accessibility and bodily autonomy, provoke deeper questions about what a post-Dobbs America looks like.
“If they’re willing to do that to women who lose their pregnancies, what do you think the future holds for women who end their pregnancies?”
Despite the challenges which have redefined the work of abortion activists in recent years, Valenti concluded her lecture on a more optimistic note, reminding the audience of the groundswell of popular support for abortion care among U.S. voters.