This thesis argues that expressions of religious ideology, both implicit and explicit, create and enforce stereotypes of women as they relate to motherhood under the law. In particular, I apply this framework in analyzing the oral arguments of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (argued in December 2021 and to be decided in June 2022). In doing so, I look to
historical and landmark case law, alongside legal and feminist theory, to contextualize the arguments made in Dobbs and to understand the implications of how the Court may rule. I conclude that, if the Court overturns Roe v. Wade, in part or in its entirety, it will represent an increase in state power over reproductive health, which will significantly limit the substantive due process protections women are afforded under the law. This will have significant and lasting repercussions for women and other marginalized communities in all states.