Greer Donley

How's that happen? @greerdonley.bsky.social and I have it all here in our article from late last year: From Medical Exceptions to Reproductive Freedom.

Judge Blocks State from Enforcing Abortion Ban Against Religious Objectors A judge has handed down a ruling that prevents Indiana from enforcing its near-total abortion ban against women who say the procedure is a requirement of their religious faith.

A narrow but important win in Indiana. Cracks in abortion bans start small, then they grow.

& If you haven't already, please also check out @revasiegel.bsky.social's great article also critiquing these scholars through a different lens! papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....

Thanks to the many people who offered incredible feedback, including @dsc250.bsky.social @maryrziegler.bsky.social @revasiegel.bsky.social @mayamanian.bsky.social @jillwieberlens.bsky.social Aaron Tang Yvette Lindgren Jessie Allen & @mblawrence.bsky.social

Quite clearly: fetuses were not understood to be "persons" at the time bc (1) they were not understood to be "LIVING human beings" or SEPARATE "individuals," (2) the law did not recognize personhood until birth, & (3) the public understood person in the Lockean sense of an individual w free will.

"An Originalist Critique of Fetal Personhood" w Chip Carter is officially online (& forthcoming in U. Penn. L. Rev.)! papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers..... We scour 19th cen. dictionaries & the context in which the 14A was ratified to discover the original public & legal meaning of "person" in 1868.

On X, Josh Craddock is posting his critique of Reva Siegel's article on the weaknesses of arguments about fetal personhood:

papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....

Read both papers and decide for yourself. :)

And when you are done, read this important piece by @greerdonley.bsky.social and Chip Carter on originalism and personhood:

papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....

Thanks Maya!!! Both are so much better bc of your feedback!

Ally beat me to it, but excited to share that "Perinatal Palliative Care & Abortion," co-authored with @amwhelan.bsky.social, is forthcoming in the Virginia Law Review.

Abstract below and it will be up on SSRN as soon as SSRN allows...

Thanks, David!! As always, your feedback was so helpful!

This is a great piece! You want originalism and abortion? Here it is. And it's now that you think.

It is such an honor for @ssrn.bsky.social to feature my work! Thank you to Apoorva Anand for getting to know my scholarship and for writing this up!

Excited to announce that “Perinatal Palliative Care & Abortion,” co-authored with the fabulous @jillwieberlens.bsky.social, will be published with Virginia Law Review… SSRN draft coming soon 😊

LOL - the vortex!!!! So glad you introduced me that. I'll be using it for the rest of my life.

Sure! Email me, and I'll send it to you.

Thrilled that my article with William ("Chip") Carter, An Originalist Critique of Fetal Personhood, is now forthcoming in the Pennsylvania Law Review!!! It was weirdly fun to spend months buried in 19th century dictionaries & Locke's writings. We are still editing but hope to have it online soon!

A Pregnant Woman at Risk of Heart Failure Couldn’t Get Urgent Treatment. She Died Waiting for an Abortion. In a state that had legislated its commitment to life, Graham spent her final days struggling to find anyone to save hers.

NEW: After doctors sent her home with a racing heart, Ciji Graham came to believe the best way to protect her health was to end her pregnancy.

But new restrictions in NC and nearby states made finding an abortion provider difficult.

www.propublica.org/article/nort...

Three Years After Dobbs, ‘the Reality Is People Are Getting Abortions’

Great NYT piece showing that despite massive changes in law & policy after Dobbs, the # of abortions have increased every year. That could change quickly, but is quite remarkable. ⭐ quotes from @dsc250.bsky.social @carolejoffe.bsky.social @ushma.bsky.social & others. www.nytimes.com/2025/12/09/u...

FDA Slow Walking a Long-Awaited Abortion Pill Safety Study The Food and Drug Administration has delayed a promised review of safety data for the abortion drug mifepristone at Commissioner Marty Makary’s request to put it off until after the midterm elections,...

If the Trump FDA does eventually tighten abortion pill regulation, all of these public quotes that identify it as a political decision will only make the arbitrary & capricious challenge stronger... bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-12-08/fda-slow-walking-a-long-awaited-abortion-pill-safety-study

I recognize this is a provocative conclusion. It is meant to start a conversation, not end it. I’m deeply in debt to the many folks who helped me with this piece, esp the property law scholars who were patient with me as waded into a totally new field (which I hope to never write in again 🤣)!

Finally, I briefly explore what a property theory of the body could mean for self-sovereignty, including a new articulation of abortion rights through a property lens (right to exclude & destroy) and a constitutional lens (takings, due process, involuntary servitude).

I rely heavily on Margaret Radin’s articulation of property that can be relational & constitutive of our personhood. Importantly, I am not comparing a fetus to fungible goods, but to the most personal form of property, where the owner’s rights are the strongest.

If the fetus is a part/product of the PP’s body, & parts/products are property, then she may have a property interest in her fetus *before* birth. I argue that a property theory of the fetus best embodies subjective fetal value, where the *PP* decides its meaning (loved child, clump of cells, etc).

From here, I build out a theory of the fetus. I start by looking at the legal status of body parts & products, concluding we have a property interest in them, so long as they are not abandoned. I describe the deep historical roots of self-ownership & how it differs from+protects *against* slavery.

Those sections describe how other forms of biological human life are not constitutional persons (brain dead humans, immortal cell lines, frozen embryos); why the fetus is a part of the PP's body (not a separate entity contained within her); & how the lived experience of pregnancy is subjective.

The article begins w 3 premises about the fetus. 1. The fetus is both biologically 'living' & human, but not a constitutional person. 2. The fetus is a part & product of the pregnant person’s ("PP's") body. 3. The fetus’s value is defined by the PP’s subjective relationship w it (or lack thereof).

This Article considers the question: what is the fetus’s constitutional status, if it’s not a “person.” There are defensive & offensive reasons for this inquiry. An alternative theory of the fetus gets us off fetal personhood’s turf & may also create a new foundation for abortion rights.

My latest article, “A Non-Person Theory of the Fetus,” is finally online (forthcoming in Boston College Law Review). I have been thinking about this paper’s very tricky question for nearly 4 years, and I’m relieved it’s finally out in the world. 🧵👇 papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....

Just saw this @greerdonley.bsky.social piece on SSRN. Haven't read it yet (downloaded!) but from the abstract it looks smart & interesting. In utero embryo fetus as property. I've LONG been irked by the law's unwillingness to call human "stuff" (not humans) property.
papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....