[W]hile pro-choice advocates in Vermont fear that the now-inevitable shift in the balance of the Supreme Court could lead to a reversal of Roe v. Wade, the country’s landmark abortion rights ruling, pro-life groups don’t expect to see a change in state policy.

Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy announced last week he will step down after three decades on the court. While Kennedy has tended conservative, he has served as a swing vote on many controversial issues, including abortion.

The pending opening has prompted widespread speculation that President Donald Trump will nominate a successor to Kennedy who will be willing to overturn Roe v. Wade, which determined that women have a constitutional right to abortion services.

Trump, who made it a campaign pledge that he would put forward judges willing to overturn the 1973 case, is poised to select a nominee from a list vetted by the conservative legal group the Federalist Society.

Planned Parenthood of Northern New England is preparing for the possibility of a new majority supporting a reversal of the decades-old ruling.

“We are kind of horrified frankly at the idea of a Trump appointee,” Vice President of Public Policy for PPNNE Lucy Leriche said Monday.

Leriche said that many questions remain, and it is not clear how the 1973 case would be handled by the court. The most likely scenario, she said, is that it would not be overturned with a single case, but that precedent would be set through a series of cases.

“It’s hard to know what it will look like, but we do know it’s an assault on women’s rights and it’s an assault on women’s bodies,” she said.

In the meantime, she said, the organization is giving consideration to state laws currently in place in Vermont concerning women’s access to abortion, in case the federal protections are overturned.

“I don’t even have words to describe how disappointing this is and how horrifying this is,” Leriche said. “It just feels like our nation has lost its way, that we could be here and still fighting this battle after all these years.”

Mary Beerworth of Vermont Right to Life said there have been times in the past when many speculated Roe v. Wade was poised to be overturned.

“I’m not going to fall for that just yet,” Beerworth said.

Beerworth would welcome the overturning of the decision she said is “as poorly crafted and unconstitutional as anything that’s ever been.”

But Beerworth said that reversing the landmark decision would not likely curb abortion in Vermont. The court’s decision more likely will shift the focus of setting abortion policy largely to the states.

“It’s at the whim of Planned Parenthood that this Legislature does everything,” she said.

In the meantime, Beerworth said the group would try to reduce the number of abortions in the state.

“We’re fighting to keep the number as low as possible, that’s our job,” Beerworth said.

Jared Carter, an assistant law professor at Vermont Law School, said Kennedy’s retirement marks a shift in the country’s top court.

“Any major constitutional issues that are going before the court, this is a major moment, and there will be broad impacts for the long term,” Carter said.

Carter said it is “pretty unlikely” that the high court would take on a case that would overturn Roe v. Wade in “one fell swoop.” It is more probably that the landmark case would be subject to “death by a thousand cuts.”

He expects to see conservative-leaning states test the waters by passing laws restricting access to abortion. Those cases could be appealed up to the Supreme Court, which would then be in a position, on a case by case basis, uphold those laws.

Those cases are not likely to have an impact on states that choose to have more permissive laws, like Vermont he said.

Vermont could be forced to change its laws if the court were to rule on a case addressing, for example, the constitutional rights of the unborn, he said. Such a ruling could pave the way for a court challenge of Vermont’s laws.

Some state lawmakers say they would consider taking legislative action to preserve abortion access in Vermont in the face of a change by the Supreme Court.

Rep. Ann Pugh, D-South Burlington, chair of the House Human Services Committee, said that she would be interested in reviewing Vermont’s current laws to see what might be appropriate action to take.

“I believe and support very strongly the importance of a full range of health care options available to women,” Pugh said.

Pugh said she has friends who underwent risky abortion procedures in the days before Roe v. Wade. “And I do not want to go back to the dark ages,” she said.

“When the federal government is not there for all people, it’s up to the states and it’s up to Vermont to ensure that Vermont supports all of its citizens in whatever way that means,” Pugh said.

House Majority Leader Jill Krowinski, D-Burlington, said there are a lot of questions that remain and it is not clear how the nomination process will play out, or how the nominee would come down on this issue.

However, she said, legislators would consider taking action if there were a move toward restricting abortion access.

“If there is a threat, we would act,” Krowinski said.

Rep. Anne Donahue, R-Northfield, said she believes court nominees should be selected based on their qualifications, rather than how they would decide a particular issue.

However, were there to be a change in the court’s precedent on Roe v. Wade, she does not anticipate that it would have an impact on state laws.

A spokesperson for Gov. Phil Scott said he would support protecting abortion access within Vermont.

“While we can’t predict the impacts of any future appointment to the Supreme Court, the Governor is pro-choice and has been clear in his support for women’s right to choose,” Rebecca Kelley said in an email. “He would hope to see these protections upheld at the Federal level and would advocate for the protection of such access in Vermont.”