On Abortion, Trump and Biden Both Got It Wrong

‘Babbling’ and ‘hoarse’: Biden’s debate performance sends Democrats into a panic.

The above NBC News headline was typical of media reaction to the June 27, 2024, presidential debate between Joe Biden and Republican candidate Donald Trump. Indeed, it was a most humiliating and embarrassing moment for the 81-year-old president, who spoke incoherently and stumbled over his words before an audience of 50 million viewers. Now in a true panic, the Democratic Party is desperately trying to plug up the many holes the Biden debate debacle drilled into its political ship as it sails to a possible wreck come the November election. 

The debate itself was dominated by false statements from both sides: exaggerations, untrue claims, insults, and accusations—with the two candidates managing to speak the truth occasionally. However, on the issue of legalized abortion, and in particular the Roe v. Wade decision itself, both Biden and Trump got it wrong. Indeed, it is staggering just how wrong a sitting president and a former president were regarding the most important social issue of our time. Biden especially misrepresented what the 1973 Supreme Court decision actually said and what it actually permitted in terms of the legalization of abortion, and Trump seemed not to understand the goals of the pro-life movement.

CNN journalist Dana Bash, serving as one of the debate moderators, started off the candidates’ debate on abortion. When addressing Biden, she pointing out that seven states permit abortion through the ninth month of pregnancy. She then asked, “Do you support any legal limits on how late a woman should be able to terminate a pregnancy?” Biden responded, “I supported Roe v. Wade, which had three trimesters. First time is between a woman and a doctor. Second time is between the doctor and an extreme situation. And a third time is between the doctor—I mean, it’d be between the woman and the state.” 

Biden says he supports Roe v. Wade—but it’s a little difficult for him to support something he doesn’t even understand! True, Roe did divide a woman’s nine month pregnancy into three trimesters. And, although his description of what the Court allowed in the first trimester is simplistic, it’s essentially accurate. Roe determined that since maternal mortality was low in the first three months of pregnancy 

the attending physician, in consultation with his patient, is free to determine, without regulation by the State, that, in his medical judgment, the patient’s pregnancy should be terminated. If that decision is reached, the judgment may be effectuated by an abortion free of interference by the State. 

In other words, abortion in the first trimester of pregnancy is unrestricted by state law. Biden’s most serious misrepresentation of Roe is what he said regarding the “second time,” meaning the second trimester. He made it seem as though Roe only permitted abortion in the fourth through sixth month for “an extreme situation”—in other words, for the hard cases: rape, incest, fetal deformity, maternal heath, etc. That is hardly the case, as indeed in the fifty-year period of Roe literally tens of thousands if not millions of preborn children were killed in states that permitted abortion-on-demand well into the second trimester! I do not have to look any further than my home state of Michigan where, under Roe, abortions were performed for any reason, or for no reason at all, through the 24th week of gestation—on preborn babies as much as six months old. 

Roe ruled that abortions in the second trimester could not be restricted but only regulated “in ways that are reasonably related to maternal health.” What Biden said about abortion in the second trimester was his most egregious error on the abortion subject.

As regards the third trimester, Roe held that states have a compelling interest in protecting “potential life” at the point of viability, when “the fetus presumably has the capability of meaningful life outside of the mother’s womb.” Roe determined that viability began at 28 weeks of fetal gestation; thus, at the start of the third trimester. And here’s where Biden also got it wrong. Regarding the third trimester, Biden oddly stated that abortion was now between “the woman and the state.” We shall assume he meant to say that at this point the state may, in the words of Roe: “proscribe abortion…except when it is necessary to preserve the life or health of the mother.” But again, Biden gave the impression that somehow abortions were meaningfully restricted by Roe in the third trimester. Not true. 

First, the Roe decision only permitted states to “proscribe abortion” in the third trimester. Restricting abortion was not mandated by Roe—and indeed, under Roe some states had no time restriction on when abortions could be performed, such as in New Mexico, Colorado, and Vermont, as well as the District of Columbia. And as Bash indicated, post-Dobbs: “Seven states have no legal restrictions on how far into a pregnancy a woman can obtain an abortion.” Also, it is extremely important to note that if a state restricted or banned abortion in the third trimester, states could only do so except when the killing of the preborn is “necessary to preserve the life or health of the mother.” It appears then that Roe does allow states to protect preborn children through the last three months of their intrauterine existence. 

But Biden’s simplistic characterization of the third trimester in Roe misses the exceptionally broad and controlling definition of maternal health found in Roe’s companion case, Doe v. Bolton. According to the “medical judgment” of the physician, such judgment: “may be exercised in light of all factors—physical, emotional, psychological, familial and the woman’s age—relevant to the wellbeing of the patient…All these factors may relate to health.” With such a broad understanding of what constitutes maternal health, the proscription of abortion in the third trimester becomes almost meaningless.

As for Trump, he certainly did more to advance the pro-life cause than any other president. Even if “all” he did was appoint Supreme Court justices who voted to overturn Roe v. Wade, this would be true. However, certain comments he made during the debate reveal that he is certainly not a pro-life champion. Though, let me be absolutely clear: all those who seek to end the legalized killing of the preborn have only one reason to vote for Trump—namely, he is not Joe Biden! Nonetheless, several statements he made during the debate are disconcerting from a pro-life perspective.  Let me be absolutely clear: all those who seek to end the legalized killing of the preborn have only one reason to vote for Trump—namely, he is not Joe Biden!Tweet This

Bash began the debate segment on abortion by first addressing Trump, stating that “the federal government still plays a role in whether or not women have access to abortion pills. They’re used in about two-thirds of all abortions.” She then asked, “As president, would you block abortion medication?” Trump responded: “First of all, the Supreme Court just approved the abortion pill. And I agree with their decision to have done that, and I will not block it.” 

First of all, the Supreme Court, on June 13th, didn’t approve the abortion pill. The Court unanimously threw out a challenge by certain doctors to the FDA’s Mifepristone policies, arguing that the plaintiffs “lacked standing.” However, when Trump told America the Court approved the abortion drug and that he agreed with “their decision” and “will not block it” he told the country that he supports—defends—the legal killing of the preborn at least in the first weeks of fetal gestation. This is hardly the position of someone who may be called “pro-life.” 

Indeed, Trump acted as if the abortion issue was now settled—as if the pro-life movement had achieved its goal with the reversal of Roe v. Wade. Consider what he exactly stated:

Fifty-one years ago, you had Roe v. Wade, and everybody wanted to get it back to the states, everybody, without exception, Democrats, Republicans, liberals, conservatives. Everybody wanted it back. Religious leaders.

And what I did is I put three great Supreme Court justices on the court, and they happened to vote in favor of killing Roe v. Wade and moving it back to the states. This is something that everybody wanted.

Now, 10 years ago or so, they started talking about how many weeks and how many of this are getting into other things, but every legal scholar, throughout the world, the most respected, wanted it brought back to the states. I did that.

Now the states are working it out…they’re all making their own decisions right now. And right now, the states control it. That’s the vote of the people…

What happened is, we brought it back to the states and the country is now coming together on this issue. It’s been a great thing.

Here Trump gave the distinct impression that this is what the pro-life movement ultimately wants—a return of the issue of whether the preborn live or die back to the states—meaning, now each state is a battleground over the lives of the preborn. What Trump should have said is that the reversal of Roe is just the beginning of ensuring that all human beings, including the preborn, are protected by law—and that, as president, he would do what he can to advance that justice. But, that’s kind of hard for someone to do if he or she approves accessibility to the abortion pill. 

Trump could have simply stuck to his own party platform on abortion, namely that: 

The Constitution’s guarantee that no one can “be deprived of life, liberty or property” deliberately echoes the Declaration of Independence’s proclamation that “all” are “endowed by their Creator” with the inalienable right to life. Accordingly, we assert the sanctity of human life and affirm that the unborn child has a fundamental right to life which cannot be infringed. We support a human life amendment to the Constitution and legislation to make clear that the Fourteenth Amendment’s protections apply to children before birth.

It would be fair to say that Trump opposes late-term abortions except for the many exceptions he told America he supported, you know, “Like Ronald Reagan.” He rightly accused the Democrats of advocating abortion late into the third trimester when he said, “They will take the life of a child in the eighth month, the ninth month, and even after birth—after birth.” And in Trump’s most effective and strongest pro-life statement, he said of Biden, “He’s willing to, as we say, rip the baby out of the womb in the ninth month and kill the baby.”

And in response, Biden again showed that he simply doesn’t know what he’s talking about:

That is simply not true. That Roe v. Wade does not provide for that. That’s not the circumstance. Only when the woman’s life is in danger, if she’s going to die—that’s the only circumstance in which that can happen.

But we are not for late term abortion, period—period, period.

I have already explained that, indeed, Roe v. Wade did codify abortion all the way through the second trimester. And as for the third trimester, states “may proscribe abortion”—meaning that Roe did not require that they do so—and so, yes, it was possible under Roe for preborn children to be killed up to the very moment before birth—and in a few states that was exactly the case. 

Moreover, Trump was correct in his accusation that Biden and nearly every Democratic legislator in Congress supports the Women’s Health Protection Act. On March 8, 2023, Senator Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) introduced the latest version of the pro-abortion “Women’s Health Protection Act” (S. 701) which seeks to broaden access to abortion up to birth. The earlier version, HR 3755, prohibited state bans on abortion after viability if: “continuation of the pregnancy would pose a risk to the pregnant patient’s life or health” and it is the abortionist who makes that determination. 

However, in the latest version, S-701 goes even further, “denying any authorization for a government official to ‘interfere with, diminish, or negatively affect a person’s ability to obtain or provide abortion services’” in these circumstances. In other words, should a woman have a health concern in moments just before the delivery of her baby, states may not pass laws that would ensure that should the baby still be safely delivered, the attending physician must ensure the baby’s survival as “no government official may ‘diminish’ or ‘negatively affect’ a decision by a ‘health care provider’” to ensure the child’s death instead.

When in May 2022 the bill failed to achieve the needed votes for passage, Biden issued this White House statement:

Once again—as fundamental rights are at risk at the Supreme Court—Senate Republicans have blocked passage of the Women’s Health Protection Act, a bill that affirmatively protects access to reproductive health care. This failure to act comes at a time when women’s constitutional rights are under unprecedented attack—and it runs counter to the will of the majority of American people.

And Trump’s accusation against the former governor of Virginia, Ralph Northam, was accurate when he said: 

He can take the life of the baby in the ninth month and even after birth, because some states—Democrat-run—take it after birth. Again, the governor—former governor of Virginia: put the baby down, then we decide what to do with it. 

To what was Trump referring? On January 30, 2019, during an interview on WTOP-TV, Northam defended a bill introduced by state Democrats that would legalize abortion up to the point of birth. And he even went on to say: 

If a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen. The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.

So indeed, a baby just delivered, who was meant to be killed in a late-term abortion, could be saved “if that’s what the mother and family desired.” This also means, of course, that the baby could just as well be left to die depending on what the “mother and family desired.” Despite both candidates’ distortion and misrepresentation of legalized abortion, Trump certainly remains the better candidate, if for no other reason than it’s likely he won’t make things any worse than they are now for the oppressed preborn.

As for Biden, he vows, if elected, “to restore Roe v. Wade.” This means, in terms of the intention of his will, that Biden is essentially a mass murderer as he personally desires to reopen the floodgates by which millions of innocent people will perish. No person of good will, let alone any Catholic, can support such a candidate.

[Photo Credit: Getty Images]