On Tuesday, Nov. 3, voters shifted control of Congress away from lawmakers aligned with the pro-life movement.
That result may feel discouraging, especially after two years of strong pro-life leadership and a historic effort to cut federal Medicaid funding to many abortion providers. Still, the movement has faced difficult political conditions before and found ways to make progress. The next two years will require a similar effort.
One immediate priority is protecting long-standing provisions. The Hyde Amendment, which bars federal taxpayer funds from directly paying for abortions, is likely to face renewed challenges in the next Congress. Protections under the Weldon Amendment, which shield health care providers that decline to perform abortions, could also be at risk.
Both measures have survived Congresses with pro-abortion majorities before. In 2021, for example, a House committee advanced a spending bill that left out the Hyde and Weldon provisions. Pro-life groups organized in response and pressed lawmakers to treat the protections as non-negotiable. They will need to make that case again.
There is also broad public support for these policies. A 2026 Knights of Columbus-Marist poll found that 54% of Americans oppose taxpayer funding for abortion, while 63% support conscience protections for health care providers. Lawmakers should hear that message clearly.
Another likely fight is over the Women’s Health Protection Act. Supporters say the bill would protect abortion access nationwide. Critics argue it would prevent states and local governments from restricting abortion before viability and undo safeguards such as ultrasounds to confirm a pregnancy or identify an ectopic pregnancy. They also warn it would remove waiting periods and permit abortion medication to be sent by mail without restrictions.
Pro-life groups have opposed the bill since it was first introduced in 2013. It passed the House during the 117th Congress but fell short of the 60 votes needed to advance in the Senate. The new Congress may be less willing to observe existing limits, and some lawmakers could consider changing the filibuster rules. Pro-life organizations will need to present a united response if that happens.
Congress is only one part of the broader political landscape. The movement can also press its case through the Trump administration and in state governments. After years of pro-abortion majorities following Roe v. Wade, the movement eventually achieved a major victory in the Dobbs decision.
Federal agencies remain another avenue for action. The Food and Drug Administration’s review of the abortion pill is ongoing, and its latest court filing suggests the findings could be made public by March 2027. Restoring in-person dispensing as a basic safeguard for mifepristone remains an option. Any review, though, needs to be rigorous enough to withstand political scrutiny.
The Trump administration could also reverse the Biden-era Office of Legal Counsel’s interpretation of the Comstock Act and direct the Justice Department to enforce the law. Addressing the distribution of abortion pills by mail will be an important part of the movement’s response to this week’s losses.
Advocates should keep working in all 50 states, too. Recent losses in Texas are a reminder that political support for protecting life cannot be taken for granted, even in places where it seems strongest.
American politics is also a contest over culture and persuasion. As Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia once argued, questions about abortion and its limits should be settled through public debate and voting.
