The word “freedom” is plastered on signs at Vice President Kamala Harris’ campaign rallies. It is communicated in each soundbite and television ad, and it’s the throughline of every speech Harris delivers—speeches that are preceded by her official walkout song, “Freedom” by Beyoncé.

As it’s the defining word of her campaign, a future Harris-Walz administration needs to be prepared to truly embrace it—and the weight it carries—in its approach to reproductive rights if they succeed in their path to the White House, even if it means breaking from a Roe v. Wade-focused mindset and going further to secure equitable access to abortion for all Americans.

Gen Z, the newest and one of the most progressive generations of voters, has played a key role in bolstering her candidacy through a formidable online presence. Harris represents the future of the party—so her approach to reproductive rights should similarly reflect a transition to a more aggressive strategy for protecting and expanding one of the most fundamental freedoms: bodily autonomy.

As a college student who is a member of the Gen Z voting bloc, I believe that one of the most effective ways for a President Harris to build my generation’s long-term support for Democrats is to deliver on abortion rights.

There are several abortion policies that a Harris administration should support: the codification of abortion rights into law and expanded access, data privacy, a nationwide information campaign about reproductive care, support for reproductive equity, and a long-term strategy to prevent future attacks on abortion rights.

Protect abortion nationally and expand abortion pill access

Roe vs. Wade was settled law for nearly 50 years, and Democrats should, without question, fight tooth and nail to codify the right to abortion. Realistically, to do this through Congress, Democrats will need a majority in both chambers and a suspension of the filibuster.

According to Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), there are enough votes in the Senate to suspend the filibuster and codify Roe into law through Congress. However, this will only be possible with Democratic control of the White House and both chambers of Congress. While this would be the ideal scenario, Harris must be equally prepared for something less optimal.

Without a Democratic trifecta, there are still several ways in which a Harris-Walz administration could advance reproductive freedom, aside from and including the codification of the right to abortion into law.

Abortion access can be expanded by making abortion pills available over the counter (OTC), similar to how one birth control pill is now sold OTC. Mifepristone specifically is safer than Tylenol and other OTC drugs, meaning that making them available by prescription only serves the moral opposition to abortion, rather than the scientific evidence about the efficacy and safety of medication abortion. In a country where abortion access is determined by state, OTC medication abortion would alleviate some barriers to care.

Privacy protections

Data privacy regulations are crucial to protect access to abortion care because private companies otherwise have nearly unfettered access to what should be private health-care information.

Republican vice presidential nominee J.D. Vance has publicly supported a policy that would enable police to track patients who cross state lines for abortion care. Even if Democrats can’t codify abortion rights into federal law, a Harris administration can make strides on abortion access through health-care privacy measures with a nationwide data privacy bill that protects location and health-care data from being sold to or accessed by private companies.

Democrats have made strides with privacy protections in states like Massachusetts, where the proposed Massachusetts Data Privacy and Protection Act would protect online search history relating to health-care services, ban the sale of cell phone location data, and protect data collected online about a person’s reproductive health care (like the purchase or use of contraception and birth control).

In February, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) released a report detailing how a data broker shared cell phone location data with an anti-abortion group to target reproductive health clinic patients in 48 states with anti-abortion misinformation ads. These attacks are particularly harmful to vulnerable populations, such as Gen Z folks who may have limited resources and access to care due to their age.

The proposed data privacy protections tie into the Harris campaign’s message of freedom, and a bill of this nature could be passed without a Democratic trifecta. Basic data privacy should be palatable to moderate Republicans (especially ones who favor limited government) because the nature of this bill is simple: to support the freedom of all Americans to health-care treatment without the unnecessary and harmful interference of private companies.

Nationwide information campaign against CPCs

In a similar vein to data privacy and misinformation around reproductive health care is the issue of “crisis pregnancy centers” (CPCs), also known as anti-abortion centers. CPCs lure in patients seeking abortions through deceptive advertising—for example, they might claim they will “consult” patients on their decision to obtain an abortion, when in reality they try to persuade them to carry the pregnancy to term. Many CPCs have a record of claiming to provide “abortion reversals,” which is a myth and not a legitimate medical treatment.

Although the Supreme Court ruled in 2018 that CPCs cannot be compelled to provide patients with accurate information on terminating their pregnancies, a potential Harris-Walz administration could counter the dangerous consequences of misinformation by unlicensed anti-abortion fake clinics through a nationwide advertising campaign that maps and distinguishes CPCs from actual reproductive health-care and abortion clinics.

This issue is especially pertinent to young voters. A CPC is the perfect trap for a college student who is desperate to end a pregnancy and may not have the financial or educational resources to know where they should receive care. While Harris should strive to reinstate the right to an abortion nationwide, concrete access to reproductive health care will nevertheless be hampered if CPCs are not exposed for their deceptive practices.

Promoting reproductive equity

Even in a world where Americans have unfettered access to legal abortion care, broad swaths of the population won’t be able to access abortion services until we make strides in reproductive equity—which, in simple terms, means that every person has the right to make decisions about their own body and is provided with accessible and affordable care to meet their reproductive health-care wants and needs.

We have the Hyde Amendment—which bars the use of federal funds for abortion services (with the exception of rape, incest, and life-threatening pregnancies) and has been renewed each year in the federal budget since 1976—to thank for this.

The Hyde Amendment impacts “particularly Black, Latina, and Indigenous women, who earn only slightly more than half the wages of white men and are more likely to be uninsured,” according to the National Network of Abortion Funds. This makes a basic health-care procedure discriminately inaccessible—particularly to young people who are uninsured at higher rates than the national average. According to the National Women’s Law Center, “half of women who obtain an abortion live below the federal poverty level.” For Harris to truly deliver on her promise of freedom, she must work to repeal the Hyde Amendment to alleviate disparities in access to abortion care.

In tandem with a repeal of the Hyde Amendment, which opens a pathway to Medicaid coverage of abortion in any circumstance, a potential Harris administration should support federal legislation that requires private insurers to cover abortion services. This may require an amendment to a provision of the Affordable Care Act that allows states to exempt private insurers from covering abortion in health insurance plans.

Preventing future attacks on abortion

A President Harris should prioritize repealing the Comstock Act to ensure that a future Republican president can’t pass a national abortion ban.

At present, the Comstock Act of 1873—a dormant chastity law that declared contraceptives to be illicit and outlawed their distribution across state lines or by mail—is the best vehicle for a national ban. The architects behind Project 2025 have outlined a path to a national ban that involves calling on the Department of Justice to revive and enforce the Comstock Act. Consequently, abortion would be banned nationwide due to restrictions on mailing and transportation of equipment and medication across state lines.

A repeal of the Comstock Act is a necessary first step in preventing the further degradation of reproductive rights in the United States. Whether or not abortion rights are codified into law, the Comstock Act must also be repealed under a Harris administration.

Bottom line: Democrats need to deliver

As evidenced by Harris’ campaign, the overturn of Roe in 2022 marked a watershed moment for reproductive rights, health, and justice in the country—and U.S. electoral politics. Rather than running away from the topic of abortion, as they did for decades, Democrats from the bottom to the top of the ticket are now running on the message of abortion as a fundamental component of freedom and autonomy.

Harris and down-ballot Democrats will continue to campaign on abortion because it is strong, effective, and accurate. But for the sake of their credibility and long-term success, especially among Gen Z voters who will remember this moment in politics for decades to come, Democrats must deliver on their promise to secure abortion rights nationwide.

While codifying Roe would be a basic first step, that is the floor. As president, Harris would have the opportunity to drive forward a new, progressive narrative on abortion and the full spectrum of reproductive justice—this means not just securing the right to bodily autonomy, but promoting equitable, affordable abortion access and protecting the country from future attacks on reproductive care.