Texas is home to one in 10 Americans of reproductive age, and mandated births due to the state's abortion ban will increase the number of maternal deaths, according to new research from the University of Colorado.

Currently, 26 Republican-led states plan to outlaw abortion, and there is a growing movement by conservatives to make it illegal nationwide.

Amanda Stevenson, assistant professor of sociology at the University of Colorado-Boulder and the study's lead author, said should it happen, maternal deaths would jump 13% in the first year, and increase to 24% in subsequent years.

"In the United States, the rate of maternal deaths in 2020 was 23 deaths per 100,000 births," Stevenson pointed out. "In rich countries that have good access to health care, the rate of maternal deaths is well below 10."

Texas has the eighth-highest maternal mortality rate in the nation, with just over 34 deaths due to complications of pregnancy or childbirth for every 100,000 births.

Stevenson noted just how society will facilitate access to abortion for those living in states where it is illegal, or how criminalizing it will impact health care, were not factored in.

Overall, the United States has the highest maternal death rate of any developed country, which Stevenson said climbs still higher for rural residents, and even higher for Black Americans.

"Staying pregnant is more deadly than having an abortion," Stevenson explained. "Abortion is very safe, staying pregnant is relatively deadly in the United States, and so, more people will die."

Stevenson recommended investments in maternal health care in states where abortion is illegal, especially to address racial inequalities. Neighboring New Mexico, where abortion remains legal, is now a destination state for many Texans seeking the procedure.

A Montana measure that would have implemented harsh penalties for medical providers who did not give life-sustaining care to newborns was voted down last week.

Lawmakers brought forward the so-called Born-Alive Infant Protection Act for the exceedingly rare cases when a baby is born alive after an abortion, or born severely premature.

Opponents say it was misleading and unnecessary, since infanticide already is illegal.

Hillary-Anne Crosby, campaign coordinator and communications lead for the No on LR-131 campaign, said there are tragic situations when infants are born with fatal health conditions.

Families can make choices in these situations, such as to hold the infant or baptize and read last rites.

But she said LR-131 would have mandated "life saving care," which would have meant taking an infant away from its parents.

"We're certainly excited," said Crosby, "but more so just relieved on behalf of those providers that would have been torn between, 'Do I honor and respect a family's wishes or do I obey a law that I know to be cruel and unethical?'"

If the measure had passed, health-care providers found to have violated the law faced fines up to $50,000 and 20 years in prison.

While the measure has been lumped in with other abortion measures across the country, it was referred to the ballot by the 2021 Montana Legislature before the Dobbs Supreme Court case allowing states to decide on abortion. It would not have directly affected access to abortion.

Crosby said unfortunately, the lawmakers that crafted this legislative referendum did not consult with the people who would have been impacted.

"They should have reached out to these experts," said Crosby, "they should have reached out to these families to better understand what kind of support they need and what kind of laws just further traumatize them, and I really hope that that was a lesson that they took away, in that you cannot legislate what you're not even willing to try to understand."

Even with the Dobbs ruling, the Montana Supreme Court has ruled the state Constitution protects abortion access under its right to privacy.

However, now that Republicans have a supermajority in the Legislature, lawmakers could move to change this in 2023.

Crosby said she believes the "no" vote on LR-131 should be a sign that Montanans don't want this kind of change.

"We do really think that LR-131 sent a pretty clear message that Montanans value our privacy and we value our private medical decisions," said Crosby. "So hopefully they'll take that cue and they will trust and respect and support Montanans' wishes. But if not, we'll be there to remind them."

Last week's midterm elections saw conservative Republicans shore up their majorities in Wyoming's legislature, and Janna Farley - communications director with the American Civil Liberties Union of Wyoming - said reproductive-rights activists will have a heavy lift reversing what many see as government overreach on women's bodily autonomy.

Abortion rights came under immediate fire in the 2022 legislative session when a trigger bill banning abortion after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade was signed by Gov. Mark Gordon.

"The bill was passed with a large majority of legislators in both chambers in favor of it," said Farley. "Abortion is still legal in Wyoming while a lawsuit that contests the ban moves ahead."

Plaintiffs in the suit point to Article 1, Section 38 in Wyoming's constitution - which says "Each competent adult shall have the right to make his or her own health-care decisions."

Defenders of the trigger ban argue that article was created in response to the Affordable Care Act, and that the state's constitution does not include the word abortion.

While many believe that ending a pregnancy is an unnecessary loss of life, Farley noted that in many instances, access to abortion is critical to save the life of the pregnant person.

"The reasons for people having an abortion is something best left to a person and their health-care team, their doctors, their physicians," said Farley. "Politicians should not be in the exam room with you, making those decisions for you."

If the court rules in favor of reproductive-rights groups on the trigger ban law, Farley said the Legislature still wants to limit abortion access, and expects a new law would be introduced in the next session.

She said after the Supreme Court turned abortion rights over to states, protecting access will mean challenging the new status quo.

"If we want to change the political landscape in Wyoming, we're going to need people to get involved," said Farley. "If abortion access is going to be left to the political process like this, those of us who care about reproductive rights have to get engaged."

Kentucky voters rejected a ballot measure that would have changed language in the state's constitution to permanently deny the right to an abortion.

Reproductive-health advocates say the election results could pave the way for striking down the state's trigger law, which banned the procedure in the state immediately after the overturning of Roe v. Wade earlier this year.

Kentucky State Director for Planned Parenthood Alliance Advocates Tamarra Wieder explained that the state's Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on November 15 in a case that considers if the ban violates the privacy, bodily autonomy and self-determination rights guaranteed by the Kentucky Constitution.

"And it's no coincidence that we're in the courts next week," said Wieder. "The Supreme Court said they wanted to see what Kentuckians wanted from this vote."

Kentucky's official voter turnout report will be available on the State Board of Elections website in the coming days, but Secretary of State Michael Adam has said more than 50% of registered voters cast their ballot on Tuesday - possibly the highest voter turnout in a midterm election in decades.

On Twitter, Adams thanked candidates of both parties who lost "and graciously conceded rather than falsely alleging voter suppression or election fraud."

Wieder said reaction from residents on the "No" vote on Amendment 2 has been strong.

"When I'm out in the community, all I hear is that people want more access to health care, not less," said Wieder. "And this win transcended political ideology, religious identity, and really shows that Kentuckians come together to support people seeking health care, and they believe abortion is health care."

Kentucky Attorney General Daniel Cameron said in a statement released Wednesday his office has filed a motion with the Kentucky Supreme Court arguing that voters' decision should have, quote, "no bearing on whether the court should consider creating a Kentucky version of Roe versus Wade."