Pregnancy is a unique legal topic because pregnancy itself is unique. No other biological process includes the growth and development of a future person. Likewise, no other biological process impacts a person’s bodily integrity to such an extent. It is no wonder that abortion is such a fraught subject in the United States. Abortion, within liberal frameworks, pits the pregnant person against the potential child, in which the pregnant person is asked to defend their own personhood and rightsrights. If the pregnant person “wins,” the fetus “loses.” This narrative of rights contributes to a stigmatizing dialogue in which abortion is considered a medical process that will inevitably end in trauma, and through this expresses a bias against individuals who have abortions. The history of abortion in the United States is bound up within the liberal dialogue of rights and questions of personhood, setting the stage for the current debates over legal personhood. This chapter examines pre-during-after legislation on abortion in the United States and examines its language and construction of personhood. Central to this discussion is the concept of the “obsceneobscene.” Obscenity seems to convey more than a notion of something hidden or sexually explicit; it reflects a tool of power and control, which enables the shaping of bodies and behaviors through patterns of visibility and prohibition. In the case of abortion, its labeling as “obscene” then becomes a part of discipline by which reproductive autonomy has been depicted as deviantdeviant and hence bound under strict regulation. This dynamic is highlighted in the revival of the Comstock Act, which utilizes a broad definition of obscenity to impose a moral and legal framework-one that suppresses reproductive choices by making certain aspects of pregnancy and abortion unspeakable or tabooComstock Act.