Abortion
Subterms
More stories
- in Elections
Clarence Thomas Decided Against the Staycation
Bret Stephens: Just for a change, Gail, let’s start with something other than Donald Trump. How about … Clarence Thomas’s junkets?Gail Collins: Absolutely! When Justice Thomas isn’t busy announcing that the Supreme Court could do to contraception what it did to abortion rights, he’s apparently been happily taking luxury yacht and jet trips with his great old friend the billionaire Republican megadonor and Nazi memorabilia collector Harlan Crow. Along with Thomas’s wife Ginni — I guess she was taking time off from trying to overturn the 2020 election.Bret: You know, every time I try and fail to overturn an election, a nice $500,000 vacation in Indonesia helps salve the disappointment.Gail: Bret, I presume the happy couple was having a great holiday weekend despite all the fresh publicity about their trips. They got to listen to all the reports of a Trump-appointed federal judge in Texas blocking the sale of a drug that terminates pregnancy in the first 10 weeks.Next, I guess, Thomas will be suggesting that the only acceptable form of birth control is the rhythm method. Much about him, from his judicial goals to his behavior, is a scandal. Let’s not forget that he’s the one who was confirmed despite the compelling testimony of Anita Hill about his wretched comments.Any chance of getting him tossed off the court, huh? Huh?Bret: Sorry, but the only scandal I see here is that the luxury trips don’t square with Justice Thomas’s self-portrait as a guy who likes to drive his R.V. around the country, spending nights in Walmart parking lots. Until last month, there was no rule requiring justices to disclose this kind of information about vacations with wealthy friends, assuming those friends didn’t have business before the court. Which makes the idea of trying to toss him off the court a nonstarter, not to mention a bad precedent lest some liberal justices turn out to have rich and generous friends, too.Of course, I say all this as someone who’s generally a fan of Justice Thomas, even if I’m not as conservative as he is. If people want to criticize him, it should be for his votes, not his vacations.Gail: I admit my call for a Thomas-toss was probably rhetorical. But intensely felt. I’ve been bitter ever since Mitch McConnell sat on that Supreme Court opening to keep Barack Obama from having a chance to fill it.Bret: Totally agree. I’d sooner toss out McConnell than Thomas.Gail: And while we can’t punish Thomas for his spouse’s misbehavior, Ginni Thomas’s very, very public attempts to get the last presidential election overturned are themselves quite a scandal.Bret: Agree again. But dubious taste in spouses is not an impeachable offense.Gail: So let’s go to Thomas’s opinions, especially that one on abortion.When the court overturned Roe v. Wade, Thomas urged his colleagues to go further and take on issues like the right to contraception. Presuming you weren’t on board with that one?Tasos Katopodis and Michael M. Santiago for Getty ImagesBret: As the father of three kids as opposed to, say, a dozen: no. And definitely not on board with the ruling in Texas on the abortion pill.Gail: So what is it about Thomas you find so … terrif?Bret: Ideology aside, I read his memoir, “My Grandfather’s Son.” I’d recommend it to anyone who hates him, particularly the chapters about his dirt-poor childhood in the Jim Crow South. Few public officials in America today have pulled themselves up as far as he has or against greater odds. Also, I agree with a lot of his jurisprudence, particularly when it comes to issues like eminent domain and affirmative action.But of course I part company on abortion and contraception — no small questions, especially now.Gail: I’ll say.Bret: Speaking of which, you must have been pleased to see a liberal judge in Wisconsin win her election to the state Supreme Court in a landslide, largely on the strength of her pro-choice views. As I predicted last year — and I was not alone — the Dobbs decision is going to hang around Republican necks like a millstone.Gail: Didn’t Trump blame the anti-abortion crowd for all those Republican defeats last fall? He might have been right — although his lousy choice in candidates certainly didn’t help.Bret: Sometimes even Trump has a point. And his opposition to abortion always struck me as being about as sincere as most of his other moral convictions.Gail: Back during his first presidential foray, when he was still speaking to the Times Opinion folk, I remember him telling us how amazed he was to discover you could get a conservative audience wildly excited just by saying something bad about abortion. That is exactly how Trump became anti-choice.Speaking of Trump stuff, I had the strangest experience when he went to court last week. Former president facing 34 felony counts. Nothing like that in all American history.And I found myself feeling … bored. What’s wrong with me?Bret: Nothing is wrong with you. It’s a normal reaction because none of it is news: We’ve known about the hush-money payments to Stormy Daniels for years, and we’ve been discussing this indictment for weeks.On the other hand, it reminds me of what Orson Welles supposedly said about flying — something to the effect that the only two emotions one can possibly have on an airplane are boredom and terror. Watching Trump’s speech in Mar-a-Lago later that night was the terror part for me, because he is very likely to ride this misbegotten indictment all the way to the Republican nomination, not to mention an eventual acquittal on appeal — if it even gets to an appeal.Gail: Listening to the post-indictment speech, I was sorta surprised it was pretty much just … his speech. No sense that this crisis was going to turn anything around. That goes to your point that all this is just another piece of equipment for his re-election tour.Bret: I hate to say this, but in Trump’s lizardly way his speech was masterful. His pitch has always been that he’s fighting a corrupt system — even if what he’s really doing is corrupting the system. And in the progressive district attorney, Alvin Bragg, he’s got a perfect foil. It’s why I hate the fact that this particular case is the one they’re throwing against him. The case in Georgia is so much stronger.Gail: Hey, New York gets the proverbial ball rolling. But trying to overturn the results of a presidential election — really overturn them — is a tad more serious. Once we move on to Georgia, we really move on.Bret: Assuming Trump isn’t president again by the time we get there.I also hate the fact that this case allows him to suck up all of the available political oxygen. All of us in the news media are like moths to the flame, or lambs to the slaughter, or lemmings to the cliff, or, well, pick your cliché.Gail: Hamsters to the wheel? I’d like something more … nonviolent.Speaking of elections, what did you think about the mayoral contest in Chicago? Deep liberal versus conservative Democrat, right? And guess who won.Bret: Seemed to me like a choice between a sane moderate, Paul Vallas, versus a not-so-sane progressive, Brandon Johnson. I wish Johnson well, because I love Chicago and always root for the White Sox except when they play the Yankees. But I’m fearful for its future as a city where people will want to work, invest and build. The No. 1 issue in the city is public safety, and I don’t think that Johnson’s the guy to restore it, even if he no longer supports defunding the police the way he once did.Gail: Pretty hard to combat crime in a city like Chicago unless the law-abiding folks in high-crime neighborhoods have confidence in you.Bret: Sure. Also hard to get cops to do their jobs when they feel their mayor doesn’t have their backs.Gail: Of course, the best thing anybody could do to curb crime in Chicago would be to get guns off the street. The city has very tough gun control laws, but they don’t mean a heck of a lot as long as there’s a massive flow of illegal weapons coming in from outside.Bret: Sorta demonstrating the futility of Chicago gun control …Gail: Bret, we’ve been talking about abortion rights becoming such a powerhouse election issue. Any chance we’ll ever see the same thing happen with guns?Bret: Well, you saw what happened with the state legislators in Tennessee, two of whom got expelled after they held a protest in the legislative chamber. A lot of political theater. Not a lot of legislative accomplishment.Gail: Sigh.Bret: Gail, this week’s conversation has been too depressing. So, if you haven’t already, be sure to read our colleague Esau McCaulley’s beautiful, profound meditation on the meaning of Easter. It’s not my holiday, religiously speaking, but I couldn’t help but be moved by two paragraphs in particular.First, Esau asks: “Isn’t it easier to believe that everyone who loves us has some secret agenda? That racism will forever block the creation of what Martin Luther King Jr. called the beloved community? That the gun lobby will always overwhelm every attempt at reform? That poverty is a fact of human existence? Despair allows us to give up our resistance and rest awhile.”And then: “That indestructibility of hope might be the central and most radical claim of Easter — that three days after Jesus was killed, he returned to his disciples physically and that made all the difference. Easter, then, is not a metaphor for new beginnings; it is about encountering the person who, despite every disappointment we experience with ourselves and with the world, gives us a reason to carry on.”The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram. More
- in US Politics
Iowa suspends provision of emergency contraception to sexual assault victims
The Iowa attorney general’s office has paused its practice of paying for emergency contraception – and in rare cases, abortions – for victims of sexual assault, a move that has drawn criticism from some victim advocates.Federal regulations and state law require Iowa to pay many of the expenses for sexual assault victims who seek medical help, such as the costs of forensic exams and treatment for sexually transmitted infections. Under the previous attorney general, Democrat Tom Miller, Iowa’s victim compensation fund also paid for Plan B, the so-called morning-after pill, as well as other treatments to prevent pregnancy.A spokesperson for the Republican attorney general, Brenna Bird, who defeated Miller’s bid for an 11th term in November, told the Des Moines Register that those payments were now on hold as part of a review of victim services.“As a part of her top-down, bottom-up audit of victim assistance, attorney general Bird is carefully evaluating whether this is an appropriate use of public funds,” the spokesperson, Alyssa Brouillet, said in a statement. “Until that review is complete, payment of these pending claims will be delayed.”Victim advocates were caught off guard by the pause. The chief executive officer of Planned Parenthood North Central States, Ruth Richardson, said in a statement that the move was “deplorable and reprehensible”.Bird’s decision comes as access to the most commonly used method of abortion in the US plunged into uncertainty after conflicting court rulings on Friday over the legality of the abortion medication mifepristone. For now, the drug the Food and Drug Administration approved in 2000 appeared to remain at least immediately available in the wake of separate rulings issued in quick succession.Federal judge Matthew Kacsmaryk in Texas, a Donald Trump White House appointee, ordered a hold on federal approval of mifepristone. But that decision came at nearly the same time that federal judge Thomas Rice in Washington state, a Barack Obama White House appointee essentially ordered the opposite.The extraordinary timing of the competing orders revealed the high stakes surrounding the drug nearly a year after the US supreme court overturned the federal abortion rights established by Roe v Wade. Joe Biden said his White House administration would fight the Texas ruling.In Iowa, money for the victim compensation fund comes from fines and penalties paid by convicted criminals. For sexual assault victims, state law requires that the fund pay “the cost of a medical examination of a victim for the purpose of gathering evidence and the cost of treatment of a victim for the purpose of preventing venereal disease”. But it makes no mention of contraception or pregnancy risk.Sandi Tibbetts Murphy, who served as director of the victim assistance division under Miller, said the longtime policy for Iowa has been to include the cost of emergency contraception in the expenses covered by the fund. She said that in rare cases, the fund paid for abortions for rape victims.“My concern is for the victims of sexual assault, who, with no real notice, are now finding themselves either unable to access needed treatment and services, or are now being forced to pay out of their own pocket for those services, when this was done at no fault of their own,” she said. More
- in US Politics
AOC urges Biden to ignore Texas ruling suspending approval of abortion drug
The New York congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said on Sunday there was “an extraordinary amount of precedent” for the Joe Biden White House to ignore a Friday court ruling suspending federal approval of a drug used in medication abortion.Those remarks from the Democratic US House member quickly prompted a threat by the Texas Republican congressman Tony Gonzales to defund certain programs under the federal agency which oversees medication approvals if Biden’s administration did as Ocasio-Cortez suggested.The Biden administration has already said it plans to appeal a Friday ruling from Texas-based federal judge Matthew Kacsmaryk, a conservative appointed by the Donald Trump White House, that blocked the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) approval of the drug mifepristone. The FDA approved the drug in 2000, a move that is now being challenged by the Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative Christian legal group.In urging the Biden administration to decline to enforce the ruling, Ocasio-Cortez noted that the Trump administration had ignored court rulings on immigration issues. She also pointed out that there was a contradicting ruling from a federal judge in Washington state on Friday which blocked the FDA from taking any action to limit access to the drug, virtually ensuring that the US supreme court would settle the matter at some point.“There is an extraordinary amount of precedent for this … The Trump administration also did this very thing. This has happened before,” she said during an appearance on CNN’s State of the Union.“The courts rely on the legitimacy of their rulings. And when they make a mockery of our system, a mockery of our democracy and a mockery of our law, as what we just saw happen in this mifepristone ruling, then I believe that the executive branch, and we know that the executive branch has enforcement discretion, especially in light of a contradicting ruling coming out of Washington.”CNN host Dana Bash said Ocasio-Cortez was offering a “pretty stunning position” and pressed the congresswoman on whether the Biden administration should ignore the ruling if the US supreme court eventually upheld Kacsmaryk’s decision.“I think one of the things that we need to examine is the grounds of that ruling,” she said. “But I do not believe that the courts have the authority … over the FDA that [Kacsmaryk] just asserted. And I do believe that it creates a crisis. Should the supreme court do that, it would essentially institute a national abortion ban.”During a later appearance on State of the Union, Gonzales told Bash that there would be consequences if the Biden administration ignored the ruling.“The House Republicans have the power of the purse,” Gonzales said. “And if the administration wants to not live up to this ruling, then we’re gonna have a problem. And it may become a point where House Republicans on the appropriations side have to defund FDA programs that don’t make sense.”Bash also asked the secretary of the US Department of Health and Human Services, Xavier Becerra, whether ignoring the ruling was “off the table”. Becerra declined to say specifically what the administration would do if appellate courts, including the supreme court, upheld the decision.“Everything is on the table,” he said on CNN. “We want the courts to overturn this reckless decision.” More
- in US Politics
‘What next?’ Schumer lambasts Texas judge’s abortion pills ruling
Democratic lawmakers are doubling down on outrage against Friday’s ruling that threatens access to a widely used abortion medication, saying the ruling sets a “dangerous new precedent” that could harm future medications approved by the Food and Drug Administration.“Make no mistake, the decision could throw our country into chaos,” said the Democratic Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer on a call with reporters on Saturday. “Republicans have completely eviscerated the FDA as we know it and threatened the ability of any drug on the market to avoid being prohibited.“What could come next if some fringe radical group brings a lawsuit? Cancer drugs? Insulin? Mental health treatment?”Mifepristone was approved for use by the FDA in 2000 and, along with a second drug called misoprostol, is the most common method for terminating a pregnancy in the US. More than half of women in the country who get abortions use the two medications.On Friday, federal judge Matthew Kacsmaryk of Texas suspended the FDA’s approval of mifepristone in a lawsuit that challenges the drug’s initial approval. Kacsmaryk gave the FDA a week to appeal his ruling.Meanwhile, a federal court in Washington state handed down a conflicting ruling that orders the FDA to not take any action that affects the drug’s availability.The president and chief executive officer of the Center for Reproductive Rights, Nancy Northrup, told reporters the Texas judge’s decision could have a “devastating impact” if it goes into effect.“If allowed to stand, it would remove mifepristone from the market in states where it’s legal and exposes the lie” that states would get to decide their own abortion laws after the US supreme court eliminated federal abortion rights through their Dobbs decision last year, Northrup said. She added: “It threatens the FDA’s authority over its entire drug approval process, which could severely limit the development of new drugs overall and have far-reaching repercussions on patients’ access to FDA-approved medications.”Northrup emphasized that the medication is a safe and effective means of abortion and that the drug is on the World Health Organization’s list of essential medicines. She also said the appeal could end up in the US supreme court within a week, if the litigation from the 2021 Texas abortion ban – which was quickly taken up by the court – is any indication.“That’s entirely possible, but abortion providers across the country are preparing and being advised on what to do if this actually goes into effect,” Northrup said.Democrats on Saturday said they support the appeal that the US justice department on Friday indicated it would file, seeking a halt to Kacsmaryk’s decision. And the party is still working to get the Women’s Health Protection Act passed. The legislation, introduced late last month, seeks to protect abortions on a federal measure but lacks the Republican support needed to pass.A Democratic senator from Washington, Patty Murray, said Democrats would “put Republicans on the record every way we can so the American people know exactly who is responsible for this chaos”.“We will have this debate out in the public for everyone to see,” she said.Schumer said that Republicans have likely mostly been silent on the ruling because “they’re afraid to speak out”.“That is outrageous. They are letting the … extreme wing of their party … run the whole show,” he said. “They have an obligation to speak out or they are complicit in taking away mifepristone for tens of millions of Americans.”Beyond the justice department appeal, it is unclear what other course of action Demcrats are planning to take to combat the ruling. Schumer and Murray were asked by a reporter if there is any possibility that the federal government could take similar action to Washington state, where governor Jay Inslee announced on Tuesday that his administration would stockpile thousands of abortion pills for his constituents in anticipation of it becoming difficult to access.“Our very first action is to make sure that this does not go into effect,” Murray said. “Our most important task is to have this appealed.”Also on Saturday, more than 40 House Democrats sent Joe Biden a letter calling on the president to “use all the tools at your disposal to protect access to abortion and reproductive healthcare”.The representatives said that in addition to legal action against the ruling, the White House should defend the authority of the FDA and meet with the pharmaceutical industry to “discuss possible ramifications of an unfavorable decision regarding market access to medication abortions and the implications it will have on the [FDA] drug review process at large”. More
- in US Politics
Democrats condemn judge’s ‘draconian’ decision threatening abortion drug
Democrats angrily denounced as “dangerous” and “draconian” a decision by a Texas judge that threatens access to a widely used abortion medication, while demanding the Joe Biden White House do more to protect reproductive rights.Nearly a quarter-century after the Food and Drug Administration approved the abortion pill mifepristone, the federal judge Matthew Kacsmaryk on Friday sought to invalidate the agency’s decision, handing down an unprecedented order that – if upheld – would severely restrict access to one of the most commonly used methods of terminating a pregnancy.In a dueling court ruling, handed down moments after, a judge in Washington state contradicted the Texas decision, ordering the FDA to maintain the “status quo” availability of mifepristone.With the future of access to medication abortion in potential jeopardy, even in states where the procedure remains legal, Democrats, reproductive rights advocates and providers vowed to keep fighting to protect the drug’s availability.In a statement, Biden called the ruling the “next big step toward the national ban on abortion that Republican elected officials have vowed to make law in America” and pledged to fight Kacsmaryk’s decision. On Friday night, the justice department gave notice that it would appeal the Texas ruling and said it was reviewing the Washington decision.The conflicting court orders left much uncertainty about the future of abortion access, probably elevating the issue to the US supreme court. With little faith in a majority conservative court that overturned Roe v Wade, Democrats are urging the administration to act more aggressively.“Ignore this ruling,” the US senator Ron Wyden, a Democrat of Oregon, said, arguing that the FDA has the authority to disregard the decision by Kacsmaryk, who was appointed to the federal bench by the Donald Trump White House.Wyden added: “The FDA, doctors, and pharmacies can and must go about their jobs like nothing has changed and keep mifepristone accessible to women across America.”Mifepristone is the first pill in a two-drug medication abortion regimen, which is approved for use through the 10th week of pregnancy. More than half of abortions in the US rely on the medication, and the Texas decision, if allowed to stand, would have severe ramifications for access.The president of the abortion rights group All* Above All, Morgan Hopkins, said Biden’s administration must “act immediately to ensure medication abortion care remains available, without interference from politicians or judges”.Since the supreme court eliminated the constitutional right to abortion, administration officials have moved to expand access to abortion medication and protect patients seeking care who travel to states where the procedure is legal. But the White House has so far resisted calls from reproductive rights advocates to declare a public health emergency for abortion.Biden has insisted, as he did again on Friday, that the “only way to stop those who are committed to taking away women’s rights and freedoms” is to elect candidates who will codify abortion protections into federal law.The Texas ruling comes days after a liberal judge won a commanding victory to serve on the Wisconsin supreme court in a contest that underscored the enduring potency of abortion politics. The judge, Janet Protasiewicz, had effectively promised voters that if they elected her, flipping the ideological balance of the court from conservative to liberal, the new majority would overturn Wisconsin’s 1849 abortion ban.Successive victories in favor of abortion rights from Kansas to Michigan have galvanized Democrats, who say the issue was key to their unexpectedly strong showing in last year’s midterms. The party plans to continue harnessing voter anger over the loss of federal abortion protections in upcoming elections.“The Republican party is playing with fire,” said Cecile Richards, a former president of Planned Parenthood who is now a co-chair at American Bridge 21st Century, a Democratic organization. “They have put their rightwing politics ahead of the health and wellbeing of American women. They are trying to strip Americans of our basic rights to control our bodies and our futures.”Laphonza Butler, president of Emily’s List, said the group was “working overtime to replace Republicans up and down the ballot with Democratic pro-choice women who are committed to protecting our reproductive freedoms no matter what”.Democrats were quick to cast the decision by Kacsmaryk, who had written critically of the Roe precedent, as part of a broader effort by conservatives to erode women’s reproductive rights.“This judge’s ruling is bullshit,” tweeted Senator Catherine Cortez Masto, a Democrat of Nevada who narrowly won re-election last year after making abortion rights a central issue of her campaign.The Democratic Connecticut senator Chris Murphy added in a statement: “We cannot allow rightwing judges to ignore the science, and put the health, safety, and autonomy of millions of women at risk.”And Congressman Hakeem Jeffries, the US House Democratic leader, said Republican efforts to restrict access to abortion care were “like a malignant tumor” spreading across the US.Yet despite their fury, congressional Democrats see few legislative options. With Republicans in control of the House, and Senate Democrats unable to eliminate the 60-vote legislative filibuster, efforts to protect abortion access are all but certain to fall short.Nevertheless, the Senate majority leader, Chuck Schumer of New York, said his caucus was “relentlessly working to protect a woman’s right to choose from this extreme … Republican agenda” and recommitted to passing the Women’s Health Protection Act, legislation that seeks to enshrine abortion protections in federal law. But the measure lacks enough support to overcome the filibuster.In response to the Texas judge’s ruling, a number of Democrats renewed calls to eliminate the filibuster in the Senate, though they do not have enough support among their caucus to do so.Some prominent conservatives celebrated Kacsmaryk’s decision. For instance, Trump’s vice-president, Mike Pence, said: “Life won again today”.But some top Republicans, including Trump, the leading contender for the party’s 2024 presidential nomination, were silent late on Friday, reflecting a growing unease within the party about the political risks of overreaching on one of the most emotionally charged issues in American politics. More
- in US Politics
‘Unborn human’: the anti-abortion rhetoric of Texas judge’s ruling
Texas-based federal judge Matthew Kacsmaryk on Friday issued a ruling aiming to suspend the Food and Drug Administration’s approval of mifepristone, a common abortion drug approved for use 23 years ago that has been consistently found to be safe and effective.It is widely believed that the anti-abortion groups who brought the case challenging the FDA’s authorization of the drug did so in Amarillo, Texas, so that it would be certain to land on the desk of this particular judge. Kacsmaryk, who was appointed by Donald Trump, is known for disregarding precedent and for weighing in on the far-right side of culture war issues.Kacsmaryk’s 67-page decision – a preliminary ruling that will be appealed and is likely to wind its way up to the supreme court – makes plain that the strategy paid off. His decision employs the same rhetoric that has been deliberately seeded over decades by the anti-abortion movement. Some examples are below.‘Unborn child’In the very first footnote to the decision, Kacsmaryk sets the tone for the opinion, explaining he why he will use “unborn human” or “unborn child” throughout his ruling:Jurists often use the word “fetus” to inaccurately identify unborn humans in unscientific ways. The word “fetus” refers to a specific gestational stage of development, as opposed to the zygote, blastocyst, or embryo stages … Because other jurists use the terms “unborn human” or “unborn child” interchangeably, and because both terms are inclusive of the multiple gestational stages relevant to the FDA Approval, 2016 Changes, and 2021 Changes, this Court uses “unborn human” or “unborn child” terminology throughout this Order, as appropriate.‘To kill the unborn human’Mifepristone, the drug at the center of the case, works by blocking progesterone, a hormone required for a pregnancy to develop. It is approved by the FDA to be taken up until 10 weeks of pregnancy and is generally used in conjunction with misoprostol, which causes the uterus to contract. This is how Kacsmaryk describes this two-pill regimen, which together account for more than half the abortions in the US:Because mifepristone alone will not always complete the abortion, FDA mandates a two-step drug regimen: mifepristone to kill the unborn human, followed by misoprostol to induce cramping and contractions to expel the unborn human from the mother’s womb.‘Shame, regret, anxiety, depression’The anti-abortion movement is known to champion the idea that people who have abortions come to be plagued by regret – an idea promoted by former supreme court justice Anthony Kennedy in a 2007 decision, even as he admitted there’s “no reliable data to measure the phenomenon”. But reliable data finally came in 2020, with the landmark Turnaway Study, which spent five years following nearly 1,000 women who sought abortions. The study found that 95% of women who had abortions reported five years later that it had been the right decision for them.Kacsmaryk, however, writes:Women who have aborted a child – especially through chemical abortion drugs that necessitate the woman seeing her aborted child once it passes – often experience shame, regret, anxiety, depression, drug abuse and suicidal thoughts because of the abortion.‘Fetal personhood’Kacsmaryk also writes that any consideration of alleged damage caused by the abortion pill should extend to the fetus. This is a nod to the radical idea of “fetal personhood” – that embryos and fetuses are people entitled to the full protection of the US constitution. That argument presumes abortion to be murder, and were it to take hold in the legal system, could lead to a national ban on the procedure. Invoking the name of the US supreme court decision which eliminated federal abortion rights, he writes:Parenthetically, said “individual justice” and “irreparable injury” analysis also arguably applies to the unborn humans extinguished by mifepristone – especially in the post-Dobbs era.Comstock ActThe groups that brought the case ruled on by Kacsmaryk aim to revive a long dormant, 150-year-old anti-obscenity law called the Comstock Act, which prohibited sending abortifacients in the mail. Kacsmaryk’s decision indeed revives that law – and some experts fear his logic could extend to more abortion methods and even lead to a national ban.This purported “consensus view” is that the Comstock Act does not prohibit the mailing of items designed to produce abortions “where the sender does not intend them to be used unlawfully”. Id. This argument is unpersuasive for several reasons … In any case, the Comstock Act plainly forecloses mail-order abortion in the present … the law is plain.Abortion as eugenicsKacsmaryk also quotes conservative US supreme court justice Clarence Thomas, who has linked abortion to eugenics, the belief in selective breeding to produce a superior society. In rejecting research pointing to worse psychosocial and financial outcomes for children of people denied abortions, he also seems to draw a line between abortion and the worst atrocities of the last century:(“[A]bortion has proved to be a disturbingly effective tool for implementing the discriminatory preferences that undergird eugenics.”) Though eugenics were once fashionable in the Commanding Heights and High Court, they hold less purchase after the conflict, carnage and casualties of the last century revealed the bloody consequences of Social Darwinism practiced by would-be Übermenschen. More
- in Elections
A Week of Youthful Activism Sends Out Political Shockwaves
After Donald Trump’s indictment on Tuesday, progressives cemented two crucial victories in Wisconsin and Chicago, and, in Nashville, a firestorm erupted after the expulsion of two liberal lawmakers.A surge of youthful activism powered major liberal victories in Wisconsin and Chicago and a boisterous legislative uprising in Tennessee this week, as Republicans absorbed a string of damaging political blows, beginning with the arraignment of their leading presidential contender on criminal charges in Manhattan.The drumbeat of news seemed to batter the G.O.P.’s brand by the hour: Donald J. Trump became the first American president to be led into a courtroom to hear his indictment. Voters in Wisconsin handed Democrats a landslide victory and a one-seat majority on the state’s Supreme Court, with the fate of abortion and Wisconsin’s heavily gerrymandered political map at stake.And liberal activists helped one of their own rise to mayor of Chicago, defeating a more moderate Democrat who had the backing of Republicans in and around the nation’s third-largest city, and overcoming conservative-tinged arguments about crime and policing.A coda, or perhaps an own-goal, came on Thursday in red-state Tennessee, when the overwhelmingly Republican Legislature voted to expel two young, Black male representatives for their roles in leading youthful protests calling for gun control, after a mass shooting at a Christian school in Nashville, but narrowly allowed a white female lawmaker who had stood with them to remain.The three Tennessee state representatives who were subject to expulsion votes on Thursday, Mr. Pearson, Justin Jones and Gloria Johnson. Ms. Johnson was the only one not expelled.Jon Cherry for The New York TimesIn so doing, Tennessee Republicans achieved little besides catapulting the representatives, Justin Jones and Justin J. Pearson, as well as Gloria Johnson, onto the national stage: Both men could be reappointed to their seats by officials in their Nashville and Memphis districts as soon as next week, as they await special elections in which they are favored to win.“If my job, along with other members of the R.N.C., is to protect the brand of the Republican Party, this didn’t help,” said Oscar Brock, a Republican National Committeeman from Tennessee. “You’ve energized young voters against us. Worse than squandering support, you’ve made enemies where we didn’t need them.”To be sure, there were bright spots for Republicans: They won a special election giving them a supermajority in the Wisconsin Senate, which entails broad impeachment powers. And a Democrat’s switch to the G.O.P. in the North Carolina House of Representatives handed Republicans a two-chamber legislative supermajority in the only Southern state where abortion is broadly legal, granting Republicans in Raleigh the ability to override the vetoes of Gov. Roy Cooper, a Democrat.But in an odd-numbered year and a season when Americans are more taken with daffodils than with politics, the clamor of youthful activism and anger may have left the more lasting impression.“The right wing understands that time is not on their side,” said Representative Maxwell Frost, 26, a Florida Democrat who last year became the first member of Generation Z to be elected to the House. “What we saw in Chicago and Wisconsin, and what we saw in the backlash in Tennessee, is young people rising, and all of this played out in one week.”A “die-in” at the Tennessee State Capitol on Thursday. “It was a shameful day, but it will also wake people up, especially young people,” said Steve Cohen, a Tennessee congressman.Jon Cherry for The New York TimesFew Republicans defended the decision by their compatriots in Tennessee to try to silence elected Democrats by chucking them from the state house. Democrats, for their part, seized the moment.Representative Steve Cohen, the lone Democrat in Tennessee’s congressional delegation after the gerrymandering of district lines before last November’s election, recalled the one and only time he got any attention from the national press as a member of the State Legislature: with a vote against displaying the Ten Commandments. Even so, he said, it amounted to just a quote in Time magazine. Mr. Pearson and Mr. Jones became national celebrities over the course of 24 hours.“It was a shameful day, but it will also wake people up, especially young people,” Mr. Cohen said.Worrywarts in either party looking for ill omens could find plenty.Mr. Trump’s arraignment on felony charges that he falsified business records to hide hush money to a porn star in the final days of the 2016 election set off a bonanza of fund-raising for his campaign and rallied many Republicans around his third run for the presidency. And a spate of new polling pointed to Mr. Trump’s improving competitiveness against President Biden in 2024.Not even his rivals for the Republican nomination dared question the indictment’s underlying allegations that Mr. Trump engaged in extramarital dalliances with a pornographic film actress and a Playboy Playmate.“No matter how tawdry the charges and whether true or false, making a sexual encounter between two consenting adults the focal point of a criminal indictment or an impeachment strikes most Americans as an abuse of power and a distraction,” said Ralph Reed, a veteran political strategist and voice of Christian conservatives.Janet Protasiewicz at her election night party in Wisconsin after an easy victory for a Supreme Court seat.Jamie Kelter Davis for The New York TimesOne of the week’s through-lines was the awakening of the young, who are often neglected because, for all their activism, they often fail to vote. Young voters were not only crucial to the easy victory of Janet Protasiewicz, the liberal candidate for Wisconsin’s open Supreme Court seat, they also powered the liberal candidate for mayor of Chicago, Brandon Johnson, to an upset victory over the more moderate law-and-order candidate, Paul Vallas.And in the Tennessee State Capitol in Nashville, the chants of young protesters boomed through the hallways before, during and after the votes to oust the two state representatives, Mr. Jones, 27, and Mr. Pearson, 29.The drama in Nashville on Thursday was incendiary on multiple levels, a political cauldron of young versus old, Black versus white, a marginalized minority against an overwhelming majority — all playing out against the backdrop of gun violence in schools.Then there were the issues: guns and abortion.Addressing her party’s defeat in Wisconsin a day later on Fox News, Ronna McDaniel, the chairwoman of the Republican National Committee, conceded, “Where you’re losing by 10 points, there is a messaging issue. Abortion is still an issue, and we can’t allow the Democrats to define Republicans on it.”Her comments, however, elicited a storm of protest from anti-abortion voices in her party, which has showed no letup in its push for abortion curbs. Ron DeSantis, the governor of Florida and a potential rival of Mr. Trump’s for the presidential nomination, appears intent on signing a bill in Tallahassee to ban abortions after six weeks. Idaho’s Republican governor, Brad Little, signed legislation this week prohibiting minors from traveling outside the state for an abortion without parental consent.Still, Ms. McDaniel stood by her comments: “We can’t put our heads in the sand going into 2024,” she said on Fox News.Mr. Brock, the national committeeman from Tennessee, similarly warned his party on its response to gun violence after the shooting at the Covenant School in Nashville left six dead, including three children. Republicans, he said, can stay true to the Second Amendment’s right to bear arms and still respectfully listen to the arguments for more gun-safety regulation.“Even in Tennessee, we have swing districts in the State House and Senate,” he said, “and if you’ve angered tens of thousands of students and presumably their parents, you could theoretically expose yourself to a united front.” More
