Accessing an abortion has become considerably more challenging for many Americans since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022. Yet, despite states imposing new restrictions and clinics closing, the yearly number of abortions had continued to rise—until, it appears, this year.
Approximately 518,940 abortions were performed by clinicians in states without near-total abortion bans during the first six months of 2025. This marks a 5% decrease compared to the same timeframe in the preceding year, according to new research published by the Guttmacher Institute, an organization dedicated to the study and advocacy of sexual and reproductive health and rights. The number of individuals who traveled across state lines for an abortion during this period also declined by about 8% compared to the first six months of 2024.
These new findings represent a reversal of trends observed in previous Guttmacher Institute research. Earlier data showed that the number of abortions provided by clinicians in most of the U.S. increased in the year following the court’s decision, compared to 2020. In 2024, that number rose —by less than 1%—compared to the year before. However, out-of-state travel for abortions that year did see a minor reduction compared to 2023.
Even as the number of people traveling across state lines for abortions has continued to decrease this year, researchers noted that this figure remains “significantly higher” than it was before Roe was overturned.
Isabel DoCampo, a senior research associate at Guttmacher who contributed to the new analysis, suggests one potential reason for the overall decline observed in the group’s findings: the increasing use of “shield law” provisions. These laws may enable more individuals in states with near-total bans to receive abortion pills by mail via telehealth, thereby eliminating the need for interstate travel.
DoCampo informed TIME that researchers exclusively analyzed abortions provided by clinicians in states without near-total bans. Therefore, Guttmacher’s estimates do not include abortion pills sent to states with near-total bans under shield laws, or self-managed abortions. She stated that this means, “we shouldn’t consider these estimates to reflect trends in abortion nationwide.”
Instead, DoCampo asserts that the data “highlight that shield laws, I think, are a critical option that people are making use of.”
She continued, “This is an innovation of the last couple years that I think has been incredibly important, and it’s important that policymakers and advocates continue to protect and expand these provisions because it’s clear that they’ve been incredibly important to the abortion access landscape in the U.S.”
Another potential explanation for the trend could be the financial costs associated with travel across state lines to access care, which DoCampo indicates points to “the need for policymakers to address some of these financial strains.”
DoCampo also noted the variability in the data across different states.
The largest declines in the number of abortions provided occurred in states that implemented a six-week abortion ban in 2024, and in states bordering those with near-total bans. In Florida, for example, there were 27% fewer abortions provided by clinicians during the first six months of 2025 compared to the same period the previous year. Florida enacted a six-week ban in 2024; previously, the state had a 15-week ban.
Illinois, which DoCampo described as a primary destination for individuals traveling from other states for abortion care, has experienced a significant reduction in the number of out-of-state travelers this year. This decline accounted for nearly three-quarters of the total decrease in abortions provided within the state. She stated, “Declining travel is the primary source of the decline in caseloads in Illinois.”
Meanwhile, in New York, the number of abortions provided by clinicians in the state decreased by roughly 5%, but the number of people traveling to the state for care increased by about 51%. DoCampo suggested this was likely due to a greater number of individuals traveling from Florida to New York, given Florida’s new abortion restrictions.
Overall, however, DoCampo stated that the research indicates a reversal from the rising trend in abortion provision seen in previous years.
Diana Greene Foster—a professor at the University of California, San Francisco who was not involved with Guttmacher’s research—agrees that the apparent overall decline in abortions provided this year could be attributed to individuals accessing care under shield laws, which are not captured in the data. However, she expressed concern that some people might not be able to obtain pills via shield laws or travel out of state for care.
“A decrease, to me, just raises the concern that there could be people who want abortions who don’t get them,” Foster remarked. Foster previously conducted her own years-long study that found individuals who were denied abortions experienced worse economic and health outcomes than those who received care.
“My big concern is whether people who need to travel are able to travel,” she stated. “We don’t know from this data that they’re not, but it is a concerning possibility.”
