A Multi‐Study Assessment of Public Attitudes Toward Government's Role in Regulating Abortion Before and After the Dobbs v. Jackson Decision

Background The Dobbs v. Jackson decision radically shifted US abortion policy. This study examines how public attitudes toward state and federal government involvement in abortion regulation evolved surrounding this ruling. Methods Using a mixed‐methods approach, we first analyzed survey (N = 1583) and interview data (n = 24) collected in 2021, examining people's views on government involvement in abortion (Study 1). We then used a longitudinal survey (N = 647) collected before and after the Dobbs decision (Study 2) to assess how Dobbs influenced attitudes toward federal and state roles in abortion regulation and predictors of attitude change. Results Study 1 shows that slightly more participants favored less government involvement than more, and qualitative findings indicate that these respondents largely expressed more permissive attitudes toward legal abortion. Conversely, references to more government involvement came from respondents who favored either increased abortion restrictions or stronger abortion protections. Study 2 findings demonstrate that after Dobbs, people indicated later weeks’ gestation limits at both federal and state levels than before Dobbs, with more conservative sub‐groups driving this trend. Conclusion Taken together, our findings highlight the complexity of abortion attitudes in a shifting legislative landscape, where post‐Dobbs state restrictions may reflect a growing disconnect between public attitudes and abortion policy.