Roe v. Wade was formally overturned on June 24, 2022, when the U.S. Supreme Court decided Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, holding that the Constitution does not confer a right to abortion and returning regulatory authority to the states.

Following Dobbs, U.S. states rapidly implemented highly divergent abortion-law frameworks:

• Many Republican-led states activated or passed bans or severe restrictions, often with differing contours around gestational limits (e.g., near‑total bans, 6‑week bans, 12‑ or 15‑week limits).
• States varied significantly on exceptions (life/health of the pregnant person, rape, incest, fatal fetal anomaly), sometimes excluding rape and incest, or tying them to narrow evidentiary requirements and reporting deadlines.
• Democratic-led states moved in the opposite direction, enacting protections or expansions of abortion access, including “shield laws” for providers and patients traveling from restrictive states.

The result since mid‑2022 has been a patchwork system widely described by legal scholars, medical groups, and major media as chaotic or confusing:

• Rapidly changing state injunctions and court rulings have repeatedly altered whether particular bans are in force. Providers and patients in states like Texas, Idaho, Alabama, Wisconsin, and others have had to change practices multiple times in response to shifting legal landscapes.
• Physicians report uncertainty and delays in providing care (including miscarriage and emergency pregnancy care) because of unclear or restrictive statutory language and fear of criminal and civil liability.
• Large numbers of patients now travel across state lines to obtain abortions, with access depending heavily on residence and resources, illustrating substantial practical chaos in obtaining care.

More than three years have passed between the podcast (May 7, 2022) and the current date (late 2025). In that period, the post‑Dobbs environment has demonstrably featured exactly what the prediction described: states independently constructing varied, often conflicting abortion-law frameworks and a sustained period of legal and practical chaos around access. Accordingly, the prediction is right.