The Supreme Court's Dobbs ruling overturned Roe v. Wade, returning the authority to regulate abortion to the states. This has led to litigation where abortion providers and advocates challenge state abortion bans by arguing these bans violate state constitutions or other state laws. Furthermore, new legal questions have emerged concerning the interaction between federal and state authority when applied to access to abortion and contraception. The litigation tracker provides updated information on ongoing cases across state and federal courts concerning access to both contraception and abortion, categorized under topics such as pregnancy and work, emergency care, family planning, privacy, medication abortion, minors access, and state abortion bans.

The shift following the Dobbs decision creates a complex jurisdictional tension between state autonomy and federal legal frameworks regarding bodily autonomy and access to essential healthcare. The emergence of litigation focused on state constitutional challenges suggests that the battleground is now defined by the interpretation of state-level rights versus established federal legal precedents, forcing courts to reconcile conflicting spheres of authority. The focus on the intersection of abortion regulation with contraception access signals a broader inquiry into how state-level restrictions impact fundamental rights across various domains of personal health. This dynamic implies that resolving these legal challenges will require an examination of underlying constitutional principles concerning privacy, bodily integrity, and the scope of delegated federal power in matters of healthcare governance. The ongoing litigation reveals a contested landscape where established rights interact with shifting political realities at the state level.