Impacts of Trump’s Supreme Court Appointments on Abortion Rights
The campaign advertisements for Kamala Harris prominently feature the phrase, “Trump did this.” This statement refers to the appointment of three Supreme Court justices by Donald J. Trump, a move that played a pivotal role in the overturning of Roe v. Wade. This landmark decision has led to a cascade of state-level abortion bans, resulting in deeply distressing situations for numerous pregnant women who have been denied necessary medical care.
While the implications of this judicial shift are profound, both abortion rights advocates and opponents are bracing for the possibility that an elected President Trump could take even more drastic measures to impose a nationwide abortion ban. Anti-abortion activists have provided him with a comprehensive roadmap for achieving this goal.
Determining which elements of the anti-abortion agenda Mr. Trump would endorse is complex. His public stance on abortion has fluctuated significantly, making it challenging to ascertain his true beliefs or intentions. At various times, he has suggested that the issue should be “left to the states,” and more recently, he has indicated that he would not support a federal abortion ban, even stating he would veto such legislation if it reached his desk from a Republican-controlled Congress. Additionally, he has expressed support for in vitro fertilization (I.V.F.), a position that has drawn criticism from certain anti-abortion factions.
Nevertheless, if re-elected, Mr. Trump would undoubtedly face intense pressure from the anti-abortion groups that have fervently backed him. These groups would likely urge him to take measures that extend well beyond the proposed 15-week national bans that have gained traction among congressional Republicans since the fall of Roe. Some potential actions include:
- Reversing federal guidance that mandates states with abortion bans to permit medical professionals to provide abortions in emergency situations.
- Utilizing administrative agencies to restrict access to abortion pills.
- Exercising executive powers to advance the anti-abortion movement’s ultimate objective: the constitutional recognition of fetal personhood.
These actions could be implemented without requiring congressional approval and may unfold within the obscure corners of the federal bureaucracy, orchestrated by Trump appointees. Although any alterations to abortion policy would likely face legal challenges, those cases could be adjudicated by judges appointed by Trump, whether they are incumbents or new appointees. As David S. Cohen, a law professor at Drexel University who specializes in federal regulation of abortion, points out, “There are levers that he and his appointees can pull, way short of an abortion ban, which would make abortion much more difficult — if not illegal — in all the states where it’s still legal.”