With the Supreme Court poised to roll the clock back half a century on abortion, codifying Roe v. Wade just became alarmingly urgent for those who believe a person has the right to terminate their pregnancy.

The landmark Roe decision legalized abortion on a national scale when it was handed down in 1973, but theres ample reason to believe we wont be celebrating its 50th anniversary. The Supreme Court confirmed on Tuesday that a draft of a decision on a pending abortion rights case published by Politico on Monday was indeed authentic.

The draft takes a hard-line stance, criticizing abortion in part on the basis that it is not deeply rooted in the Nations history and traditions. It strikes a very different tone from the one the court took in 1992 when the majority opinion in Planned Parenthood v. Casey emphasized how the ability of women to participate equally in the economic and social life of the Nation has been facilitated by their ability to control their reproductive lives.

Americans do not need to rely on the Supreme Court to ensure abortion care is legal: Elected representatives, backed by a majority of Americans who support Roe, could enact a law cementing the right to an abortion.

But it does not appear very likely to happen nationwide. Heres why.

Congress could pass the Womens Health Protection Act.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer announced Tuesday his chamber would vote on the Womens Health Protection Act, a bill the House passed back in September that would codify the right to an abortion. President Joe Biden has already said he strongly supports the bill, so would no doubt sign it.

The measure would legalize abortion before fetal viability and in cases where the health of the mother is at risk. It specifically calls out a long list of speed bumps implemented by conservatives in some states things like mandatory wait times and bans them.

But it faces seemingly unsurmountable hurdles in the Senate.

While the Democrats control the Senate, the chamber is split 50-50 with Republicans . (Vice President Kamala Harris casts the deciding vote, if needed.) So Democrats would first need everyone on their side to get on board with the Womens Health Protection Act, which is not the case right now since Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) opposes abortion rights.

Then, even if the Democrats could present a united front, they would need to overcome the filibuster, which is the Senate rule that says at least 60 members must agree to bring a bill to the floor for a vote, where it could then pass with a simple majority. The Democrats dont have 60 votes theyd need to convince Manchin plus 10 Republicans.

That means Schumers call for a vote is mostly symbolic: It will force each senator to commit to the record their stance on abortion rights. And theres little reason to believe anything has changed since March when the Senate tried to pass the bill but was blocked by every Senate Republican, plus Joe Manchin.

If passed, the Womens Health Protection Act will likely face legal challenges, Linda McClain, a law professor at Boston University who addresses gender-based inequality, told HuffPost.

But officials could also make the argument that access to abortion is vital to the equal protection of women, McClain theorized, or that it affects interstate commerce, which Congress can regulate. (Some women who live in states where abortion is restricted already choose to travel to other states, although many do not have the resources to do so.)