2026-03-09 05:00
5:00
March 9, 2026
am
America/Chicago
People are leaving or avoiding living in states with abortion bans, a new paper shows — resulting in lower rental prices and higher vacancies than in states that protect reproductive rights.
The research — published Monday by the National Bureau of Economic Research, a nonprofit economic research organization — compared housing markets in states with abortion bans to states without those restrictions. They found that between July 2022 — the first month after the fall of Roe v. Wade — and June 2025, housing markets with abortion bans experienced a 2.2 percent decline in rental prices, compared to similarly trending markets in states without bans. Rental vacancies went up by an average of 1.1 percent in housing markets with abortion bans compared to similar markets in states without bans.
The paper’s authors concluded that abortion bans had an “economically meaningful and statistically significant” effect on rental markets.
“This combination of findings—falling rents alongside rising rental vacancies—is consistent with a demand shift,” they wrote.
The paper is part of a growing body of research showing how abortion bans are reshaping communities. Other studies have linked abortion bans to higher rates of poverty and higher property crime rates, and found that they may be driving young people to leave their home states. Surveys have shown that aspiring doctors — especially those training to OBGYNs — are less likely to choose residencies in states with abortion bans.
Abortion rights may not be the only factor people weigh when choosing where to live. States with abortion restrictions may have cheaper housing, for instance, or offer people a chance to live closer to family.
Read Next:
Read Next:
Abortion bans seem to be driving young people to move out of state
But the paper’s findings suggest access to reproductive health care is influencing a meaningful share of people in the United States regarding where they want to live — especially renters, who have more mobility than homeowners. Rental prices declined more as time progressed, which suggests the trend may continue as long as states’ approaches to abortion continue to diverge.
“What we establish in our paper is that the policies around abortion matter to some people — to enough people to move the needle significantly when it comes to the real estate market,” said Jason Lindo, an economist at Georgia Institute of Technology and one of the paper’s authors.
That, he added, may stem from people thinking about abortion itself — and what health care they may need if they or their loved ones become pregnant — but also considerations about the broader political environment in a state with abortion restrictions.
“It could be about the social message or about the broader policy climate or concerns regarding bodily autonomy or concerns around how issues concerning women are treated in the state,” he said. “Abortion bans affect abortion access, but also it’s possible the effects we find could be a result of what the abortion bans signal more broadly.”
When Kayla Smith moved from Idaho, where she had lived for more than a decade, the state’s abortion law was a key factor. Smith was 18 weeks pregnant in 2022, when her doctor discovered the fetus had fatal anomalies, including inoperable heart issues. Smith had developed severe preeclampsia, a high blood pressure condition, in her previous pregnancy. Staying pregnant with a nonviable pregnancy didn’t feel like an option.
Idaho’s abortion ban had taken effect two days prior; Idaho’s law does not have an exception for fetal anomalies, even fatal ones. In fact, of the 13 states with near-total abortion bans and four- with six-week bans, only six have exceptions for fatal fetal anomalies. But even those are difficult for people to use.
Smith and her family traveled to Washington state for an abortion. Idaho’s law left them unsure if the procedure — which would cost more than $10,000 — would be covered by insurance. The couple took out a loan to pay for her health care. Smith later joined a lawsuit against the state of Idaho, seeking to clarify exceptions to the state’s ban. Last April, a state court in Idaho ruled in the case to broaden the state’s abortion exceptions, but it did not add an abortion allowance for cases of fatal fetal anomalies.
Still reeling, Smith and her husband began talking about whether it was safe to stay in Idaho, where they owned their home and had a close network of friends. Down the line they had talked about moving to Washington to be closer to her family, but they’d never imagined it would happen so soon. They knew a state with abortion rights protections would be more expensive to live in. But what they would gain felt evermore worth it.
“It became a nightly conversation with my husband and I,” she said. “We felt personally victimized by the state of Idaho.”
After becoming pregnant again in 2023, Smith worried about what health care she would need in Idaho and whether she’d be able to receive it. So did her maternal-fetal medicine specialist, who told her she didn’t believe the state was a safe place to be pregnant. Smith thought about her daughters — the one she already had, and the second one she was now expecting. She was maybe 28 weeks pregnant when they decided to leave the state. That September, they sold their house. A month later, she gave birth. If not for the abortion ban, she said, she doesn’t think they’d have made that decision.
“It sucks. But ultimately, we feel like we made the right choice in moving to Washington,” she said. “It shouldn’t matter what ZIP code you live in, right? But here we are.”