Sign up for Executive Dysfunction, a weekly newsletter that highlights one under-the-radar story about how Trump is changing the law—or how the law is pushing back—and keeps you posted on the latest from Slate’s Jurisprudence team.

For a time, after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, a civil war between the states on reproductive rights seemed inevitable. Red-state attorneys general threatened out-of-state doctors with criminal charges and lawsuits; blue states responded with shield laws that aimed to protect residents from out-of-state legal consequences. These conflicts appeared to be heading for a reckoning, but then things went quiet.

That reckoning, however, is about to come due. Specifically, we should expect things to accelerate quickly after the midterms, when Republicans won’t have to worry that unpopular abortion policies will cost Donald Trump a congressional majority. A major new case shows that the ultimate battleground here may not be over telemedicine abortion but about the freedom of speech.

That is the issue at the heart of a major new case called Planned Parenthood Northwest v. Commissioner of the Indiana State Department. The case began when Indiana passed a law in 2017 involving abortion access for minors. Before Roe was overturned, most states applied laws allowing minors to get abortions without parental involvement using a procedure called a judicial bypass. In those hearings, minors could avoid parental involvement requirements if they could show that they were mature enough to make a decision themselves or that an abortion would otherwise be in their best........

© Slate