News Not Noise Letter: Abortion Under Trump
What the next four years might look like for reproductive rights.
For daily news updates and analysis, be sure to follow us on Instagram. You can also find us on TikTok, YouTube, and Threads.
This newsletter is sponsored by:
Happy almost-Christma-kah. In a rare coincidence this year Christmas night also happens to be the first night of Hannukah. If you’re still looking for holiday gifts may I suggest a subscription to NNN?
Today we’re going deep on a topic that is front of mind for many of you: reproductive rights. Trump’s nominees for key jobs, now on the cusp of taking power, have been part of the anti-abortion movement’s 50-year campaign to roll back reproductive rights — and many of you are asking what they may do in Trump’s next term.
We can’t know which of the strategies described below will be implemented or whether the Supreme Court will uphold them if pursued. The Court has broken with precedent quite a bit lately and we should prepare for more. Please understand that nothing here is sensationalized or far-fetched based on the officials Trump has selected thus far. What I lay out may be shocking and/or difficult to read, but I believe information allows you to prepare for your personal needs and political goals. If it’s too much right now, save this newsletter. It’ll be relevant in the new year.
Americans’ Views on Abortion:
Let’s be clear. An overwhelming majority of Americans support broad access to abortion.
Overall, 63% of the American public agrees that abortion should be legal in all or most cases; that includes 85% of Democrats and 41% of Republicans. 76% of Americans ages 18-29 believe abortion should be legal in all or most cases.
An Axios/Ipsos poll found that 81% of US adults believe abortion should be managed between a woman and her doctor, not the government. 72% of Americans believe medication abortion should be legal and easily accessible.
About 21 states plus DC have measures protecting access to abortion and 26 states + 3 territories have abortion bans or limits (see a map here).
Trump’s Team and Abortion:
To understand what’s possible it helps to know the views of some of the key players in the new administration.
President-Elect Trump: Trump said he’d he’d veto an abortion ban if it came to his desk. He also said he won’t bar the use of mifepristone. But he’s filling his administration with officials who have worked to roll back reproductive rights.
VP-Elect JD Vance: He recently said there will be no abortion ban. During his 2022 Senate campaign, Vance said he’d like abortion to be illegal nationally. He defended Texas’ onerous abortion ban, including the lack of exceptions for rape and incest, and opposed Ohio’s constitutional amendment protecting abortion access. (It passed.) He is also closely connected to the architects of Project 2025, for whom ending abortion is a top priority.
RFK Jr, Health and Human Services: RFK was originally in favor of expansive abortion rights, then he said he supports more limits, and now, according to Sen Josh Hawley, he is open to dramatic restrictions. Project 2025 states that HHS’ #1 Goal should be “Protecting Life, Conscience, and Bodily Integrity.” The document envisions a startling overhaul of our health care system that rolls back access to reproductive services, some of which is detailed below. Roger Severino, who wrote the relevant chapter in Project 2025, wants to rename HHS “the Department of Life.”
Dave Weldon, Centers for Disease Control: When he served in the House of Representatives, physician Dave Weldon became the author and namesake of the Weldon Amendment. Passed in 2006, the amendment prohibits the federal government from actions that “discriminate” against medical practitioners or institutions that refuse to provide abortion care. Known as a “refusal of care” policy, it’s the reason health care workers can deny women abortion care on “conscience” grounds even when it’s legal. Project 2025 imagines that under Trump the CDC would “ensure that it is not promoting abortion as health care,” and instead work to protect “life and conscience rights.”
Dr. Marty Makary, Food and Drug Administration: Dr. Makary is a Johns Hopkins University professor and Fox News contributor who has argued that fetuses have feelings at a very early stage. Some abortion rights advocates have called him an anti-abortion extremist. Project 2025 wants the FDA to “reverse its approval of chemical abortion drugs.” Trump says he’ll ensure medication abortion stays legal, but there are many ways the FDA can put it out of reach.
Dr. Mehmet Oz, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid: In his 2022 Pennsylvania Senate race Dr. Oz said he believes life begins at conception and abortion is “murder” at any stage. He was lampooned for saying that abortion decisions should be made by “women, doctors, local political leaders.” It seems he was trying to make clear that states and not the federal government should decide abortion policy. As the head of CMS he would have enormous power to reward or punish states by directing how health care dollars are spent.
Russ Vought, Office of Management and Budget: Remember this name. Vought is one of the architects of Project 2025. Among his many distinctions, in 2021 he wrote a piece entitled, “Is there anything actually wrong with Christian Nationalism?” As the head of OMB he would decide the executive’s budget priorities — meaning that if the administration aims to restrict abortion by withholding funds from states and entities that protect abortion rights, Vought can help direct that plan. Note: the man Trump tapped for Vought’s chief of staff, Ed Martin, advocated for jailing women who get abortions and supported a national abortion ban with no exceptions, according to CNN.
Aaron Reitz, Dept of Justice, Office of Legal Policy: The OLC drafts opinions that provide the legal basis for actions the White House and agencies want to take. In this position, he could serve a vital role in defending anti-abortion rights policies. A fiercely conservative legal pugilist, Reitz was Ted Cruz’s chief of staff. He was also deputy to Texas’ Attorney General Ken Paxton, who has innovated new ways to limit abortion access and the rights of pregnant women.
When it comes to divisive topics like reproductive rights it can be challenging to tell reality from spin. That’s why I use Ground News to compare news coverage across the political spectrum. Their app and website compile sources around the world to provide insights into each outlet's bias, reliability, and ownership. This helps me gain clarity and spot sources that are playing up the sensationalism. GroundNews is offering the NewsNotNoise community a discount – 50% off their all-access vantage subscription plan. To subscribe, go to GroundNews.com/NNN. Hope you check it out.
The Issues:
National ban? President-elect Donald Trump, VP-elect J.D. Vance, and House Speaker Mike Johnson all insist there will be no national abortion ban. It’s also unlikely and politically untenable given Republicans’ tiny margin in Congress and public support for abortion access — but as I’ve already indicated, there are many ways Team Trump can stifle abortion rights by exercising the “deep state’s” power of the agencies. Katie Herchenroeder, who reports on reproductive rights for Vanity Fair, believes they could use these tools to ensure “abortion access nationwide is decimated — perhaps beyond recognition.”
Comstock Act: Passed in 1873, the Comstock Act is an “anti-obscenity” law that bans the interstate mailing and receiving of various “obscene, lewd and lascivious” things. This includes anything “designed or intended for the prevention of conception or procuring an abortion.” Congress later changed the language to allow contraception to be sent by mail, but the abortion language remains. It is currently unenforced.
Possible Impact: Although in August Trump said that “generally speaking … I would not” enforce Comstock, his Justice Department still could — and it’s central to the abortion opponents’ strategy. This could include prosecuting individuals and organizations who send medication abortion by mail. They could also prosecute anyone who sends other materials used in abortions — like dilators, suction catheters, even gloves, etc. How would they discern whether these tools are being used for abortion or for treating miscarriage and ectopic pregnancy? Project 2025 envisions stepped up medical surveillance of pregnant women. We’ll see if the men Trump’s appointed to relevant posts will persuade him to enforce the Comstock Act.
Creating Barriers to Medication: Mifepristone, one half of the abortion pill, is used in about 60% of all abortions. Trump said he’ll ensure it remains legal, but his team could make it all-but-impossible to obtain. For example, currently about 20% of all US abortions are done with medication that is mailed to the patient after a telehealth visit, but the Trump Administration could eliminate the use of telehealth for mifepristone. A handful of states with abortion protections allow providers in their states to mail the pills to women in states with abortion bans. The Trump Administration could work to make this practice illegal (Texas AG Ken Paxton has already filed a test case, prosecuting a New York doctor for prescribing in Texas). Project 2025 proposes onerous rules requiring patients make multiple visits to a doctor, take the medication in a physician’s office, and reduce the amount of time they have to take it.
How likely is this? The Supreme Court unanimously threw out a case that would have implemented these requirements, but did so on procedural grounds. Experts warn that the Court could take up a similar case in the future — like the Texas case or one currently being pushed by three states.
