Trump's Actual Stated Positions on Abortion & IVF

[Tommy Callahan]

Just now, The Frankish Reich said:

But more to the point: why should we trust that Trump's latest "completely a matter for the states to decide" will be his position as President?

What if Republicans take the Senate and keep the House, and send Trump a bill outlawing abortion nationally after 15 weeks? Would he sign it? He previously suggested he would.

Dobbs.

 

and don't forget it was a Highly funded DEM Pac that sued the 15-week state limit, that took the case to the supreme court. That ruled that abortion is not a federal issue, but a state issue.

 

 

[phypon]

1 minute ago, The Frankish Reich said:

But more to the point: why should we trust that Trump's latest "completely a matter for the states to decide" will be his position as President?

What if Republicans take the Senate and keep the House, and send Trump a bill outlawing abortion nationally after 15 weeks? Would he sign it? He previously suggested he would.

I see your point, and that goes with any politician and their stance/platform.  I think if that were to happen there would be a lot of blowback and the next administration would use that and correct it (hopefully).  Also, we're talking about a "what if" here.  I mean, "what if" he does exactly what he says he will do?  That is certainly a strong possibility as well.

[The Frankish Reich]

1 minute ago, Tommy Callahan said:

Dobbs.

 

and don't forget it was a Highly funded DEM Pac that sued the 15-week state limit, that took the case to the supreme court. That ruled that abortion is not a federal issue, but a state issue.

 

 

Partially correct.

They ruled that the right to have an abortion was not something deeply rooted in American history and tradition. In other words, it is not a substantive due process right.

They didn't rule on whether the federal government may have some constitutional basis (the commerce clause, etc.) to regulate abortion, and they certainly didn't rule on whether things like medication abortion can be controlled by the federal government through statutory authority (the FDA's enabling statute, etc.)

2 minutes ago, phypon said:

I see your point, and that goes with any politician and their stance/platform.  I think if that were to happen there would be a lot of blowback and the next administration would use that and correct it (hopefully).  Also, we're talking about a "what if" here.  I mean, "what if" he does exactly what he says he will do?  That is certainly a strong possibility as well.

Well, yes.

Look, strong 2nd Amendment advocates would be right to be suspicious of a Presidential candidate who campaigns on a platform that the states and federal government have no authority to restrict gun ownership, but who had previously expressed interest in federal legislation restricting that right.

[phypon]

3 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said:

Partially correct.

They ruled that the right to have an abortion was not something deeply rooted in American history and tradition. In other words, it is not a substantive due process right.

They didn't rule on whether the federal government may have some constitutional basis (the commerce clause, etc.) to regulate abortion, and they certainly didn't rule on whether things like medication abortion can be controlled by the federal government through statutory authority (the FDA's enabling statute, etc.)

Well, yes.

Look, strong 2nd Amendment advocates would be right to be suspicious of a Presidential candidate who campaigns on a platform that the states and federal government have no authority to restrict gun ownership, but who had previously expressed interest in federal legislation restricting that right.

Not sure why you are bringing up the 2A here.  The 2A is written in the constitution.  Abortion is not.

[Tommy Callahan]

Dobbs

3 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said:

Partially correct.

They ruled that the right to have an abortion was not something deeply rooted in American history and tradition. In other words, it is not a substantive due process right.

They didn't rule on whether the federal government may have some constitutional basis (the commerce clause, etc.) to regulate abortion, and they certainly didn't rule on whether things like medication abortion can be controlled by the federal government through statutory authority (the FDA's enabling statute, etc.)

Well, yes.

Look, strong 2nd Amendment advocates would be right to be suspicious of a Presidential candidate who campaigns on a platform that the states and federal government have no authority to restrict gun ownership, but who had previously expressed interest in federal legislation restricting that right.

Thats as weak of a position as the 14th being used to claim its a federal issue.

 

The second is spelled out in the constitution, Aborting a fetus isn't.

 

 

 

 

[The Frankish Reich]

30 minutes ago, Tommy Callahan said:

Dobbs

Thats as weak of a position as the 14th being used to claim its a federal issue.

 

The second is spelled out in the constitution, Aborting a fetus isn't.

 

 

 

 

Well, you either have constitutional authority to legislate or you don't. 

You see my basis for skepticism about Trump's latest position?

Obviously as the campaign continues he'll be asked those questions, the ones like "if Congress presents you with legislation protecting the right to abortion through 15 weeks, will you sign it?"

[B-Man]

 

 

Trump promises abortion rights will be decided by states if re-elected, sidestepping national ban

by Snejana Farberov

 

Former President Donald Trump declined to endorse a national abortion ban Monday, instead saying that abortion laws should be left to the states. “My view is now that we have abortion where everyone wanted it from a legal standpoint, the states will determine by vote or legislation, or perhaps both. And whatever they decide must be the law of the land. In this case, the law of the state,” Trump said in a video message posted to his Truth Social page. He didn’t say after how many weeks of pregnancy he believes abortion should be banned.

 

 

https://nypost.com/2024/04/08/us-news/trump-promises-abortion-rights-will-be-decided-by-states-if-re-elected-sidestepping-national-ban/

 

 

 

.

[The Frankish Reich]

No, they're not Trump.

But a lot of Republican Senators are on the record as supporting a 20-week federal abortion ban. And that includes Ted Cruz, supposedly a strict constitutionalist and constitutional lawyer. So he apparently believes there is some federal constitutional authority allowing Congress to legislate abortion bans.

 

https://www.cruz.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/sens-cruz-graham-colleagues-introduce-20-week-abortion-ban

 

By the way, this is, of course, Trump tacking toward the center after wrapping up the nomination early. I usually think that's a good thing, and it is a good thing here. But ... I thought that was happening in the 2016 general election as well, and then Trump went all, well, Trumpy once he was in office, firing his "my generals" and his Reince Priebuses etc. If he wins and sees his popularity slipping (he'll never have a majority), watch him try to shore up the base by once again moving right on abortion.

[B-Man]

 

 

 

 

 

[The Frankish Reich]

12 minutes ago, B-Man said:

 

 

 

 

 

A rare case in which Big Mollie is correct. The one-sentence summary is simply not correct. Dobbs didn't purport to ban states from doing what their elected representatives or voters think is right.

 

Larger picture: why did Trump's statement - otherwise clear about the federal government not getting involved - end with a comment about "but we've got to win elections?" That suggests a public opinion driven position, not a clear issue of constitutional law and the separation of state/federal powers. Hence ... skepticism.

Edited April 9 by The Frankish Reich

[Tommy Callahan]

1 hour ago, The Frankish Reich said:

Obviously as the campaign continues he'll be asked those questions, the ones like "if Congress presents you with legislation protecting the right to abortion through 15 weeks, will you sign it?"

Don't you love when journalist create the narrative like that.

 

Kind of ironic question as the same sources cheered France making a 15 limit into law a few months ago.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[SCBills]

Trump is correct on this. 
 

It’s also fascinating to live in Atlanta, a red/purple state with a heartbeat ban, yet it’s rarely a discussion state-wide.

 

Just goes to show how values line up differently around the country.

 

I’m from NY, and certainly realize that abortion is a bigger issue in the Northeast for whatever reason.  
 

But down south, we have extremely strict laws in state like Georgia, South Carolina and Florida.. but nobody really makes it a big issue and people keep moving to these states in droves. 

[B-Man]

 

 

OF COURSE NOT, THEY SEE THE ISSUE AS THEIR LAST-HOPE DISTRACTION: 

 

Democrats Don’t Want You to Know How Moderate Trump’s Abortion Stance Is. 

 

“To the extent Trump adjusted at all, he moved to the middle. Biden has spent the last few decades moving to the extreme Left on abortion (and Israel, for that matter, although that’s much more recent). What does that tell us about the GOP and Democrat coalitions?”

 

https://hotair.com/headlines/2024/04/10/democrats-dont-want-you-to-know-how-moderate-trumps-abortion-stance-is-n3786244

 

 

 

 

[Tiberius]

1 hour ago, B-Man said:

 

 

OF COURSE NOT, THEY SEE THE ISSUE AS THEIR LAST-HOPE DISTRACTION: 

 

Democrats Don’t Want You to Know How Moderate Trump’s Abortion Stance Is. 

 

“To the extent Trump adjusted at all, he moved to the middle. Biden has spent the last few decades moving to the extreme Left on abortion (and Israel, for that matter, although that’s much more recent). What does that tell us about the GOP and Democrat coalitions?”

 

https://hotair.com/headlines/2024/04/10/democrats-dont-want-you-to-know-how-moderate-trumps-abortion-stance-is-n3786244

 

 

 

 

LOL!!! That's funny! 

 

Think Trump will win Arizona? 

 

Ya, me neither 

[B-Man]

20 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

 

 

Someone answered without reading the article (again)

 

 

From October 2023.

 

 

Trump Stakes Out Middle Ground in Abortion Wars. 

 

“The abortion wars aren’t over, and the likely result won’t look much like what either camp is imagining today. Donald Trump understands this, as shown in his recent offer to bring both sides together for a compromise. Does anyone else?

 

A few lefty pundits do, which is why you see New York Times columns reassuring readers that yes, Donald Trump is still rabidly anti-abortion.

 

https://www.newsweek.com/theres-room-middle-ground-abortion-wars-opinion-1832165

 

[daz28]

Does anyone know if red states are saying that abortion is murder, or if they just break social mores?  Caution, this is a trap.  

[Pokebball]

11 minutes ago, daz28 said:

Does anyone know if red states are saying that abortion is murder, or if they just break social mores?  Caution, this is a trap.  

My red state doesn't, in fact,talk

[BillStime]

3 minutes ago, Pokebball said:

My red state doesn't, in fact,talk

 

Oh.  I guess just the blue parts, do.

 

3 hours ago, Pokebball said:

The area of my state hit the worse was uneducated democrats. It wasn't party affiliation. It wasn't education. It was location / geographic (the further you were from access to healthcare, the worse it was).

 

lmao

 

 

[Pokebball]

6 minutes ago, BillStime said:

 

Oh.  I guess just the blue parts, do.

 

 

The blue parts don't talk either. But they do sing the blues

[4th&long]

 

[daz28]

1 hour ago, Pokebball said:

My red state doesn't, in fact,talk

Ok, I guess if we're going to play the silly game of, 'I pretended I couldn't understand your question, because I didn't want to have to answer it', I'll rephrase it:

 

Does anyone know if LAWMAKERS IN red states are saying that abortion is murder, or if they just break social mores?  

 

I removed the trap warning, so I may as well get to the gist.  trumps(and the SCOTUS) 'stated position' is that different states will be allowed to define what a "person" is differently, and that what will be considered a murder in some states, will be a medical procedure in others.  To quote Irv, what a mess.  

Edited April 10 by daz28

[4th&long]

If things were left up to the states trump would not be in the ballot in about 12 states!

[Pokebball]

17 minutes ago, daz28 said:

Ok, I guess if we're going to play the silly game of, 'I pretended I couldn't understand your question, because I didn't want to have to answer it', I'll rephrase it:

 

Does anyone know if LAWMAKERS IN red states are saying that abortion is murder, or if they just break social mores?  

 

I removed the trap warning.  

I think that rhetoric is certainly used. In your opinion, is "the taking of a human life" equivalent to "abortion is murder"?

[daz28]

6 minutes ago, Pokebball said:

I think that rhetoric is certainly used. In your opinion, is "the taking of a human life" equivalent to "abortion is murder"?

That rhetoric IS used.  I added this to my last post, as I thought I'd get no takers:

 

I removed the trap warning, so I may as well get to the gist.  trumps(and the SCOTUS) 'stated position' is that different states will be allowed to define what a "person" is differently, and that what will be considered a murder in some states, will be a medical procedure in others.  To quote Irv, what a mess.  

8 minutes ago, 4th&long said:

If things were left up to the states trump would not be in the ballot in about 12 states!

They decided that Congress must enforce the Constitution.  Ironically, they then took the case to decide if the immunity clause is self-executing.  Iow, they're saying they can be hypocrites any time they want, and it's their right.  

[njbuff]

1 hour ago, 4th&long said:

If things were left up to the states trump would not be in the ballot in about 12 states!

 

[B-Man]

 

Criticism from the right.

 

 

HMM. EVEN IF SO, BIDEN IS NO LINCOLN. 

On Abortion, Donald Trump Goes The Way Of Stephen A. Douglas.

BY: JOHN DANIEL DAVIDSON

 

 

Former President Donald Trump declared this week that abortion should be left to the states, that there should be no federal abortion legislation because “this is all about the will of the people,” and “whatever they decide must be the law of the land.” He released a video stating his position on Monday and reiterated it later in the week.

 

By taking this stand, that abortion should not be a federal issue, Trump has not just betrayed his pro-life supporters but taken the side of Stephen A. Douglas over Abraham Lincoln. He has insisted that popular sovereignty, not moral principle, should decide the abortion question, just as Douglas insisted popular sovereignty in the new federal territories must decide the slavery question.

 

https://thefederalist.com/2024/04/11/on-abortion-donald-trump-goes-the-way-of-stephen-a-douglas/

 

 

 

.

 

 

[B-Man]

 

As most of you know, abortion is sucking up most of the headlines in the legacy media at the moment despite there being no significant federal legislation or pending Supreme Court cases addressing the topic.

 

That's because the Democrats are running on abortion for this year's elections, lacking any other positive achievements to point to.

 

But what about Donald Trump? He hasn't been quiet on the subject, but his current position isn't making many people in the staunchly pro-life movement happy. He is being decried by some of his former supporters for a number of comments he's recently made. But will that cost him at the polls in November? National Review suggests that it potentially could, but when you pull back the lens a bit, it seems unlikely.

 

 

Trump's position on abortion is fairly basic and it's one that has been enthusiastically pushed forward by conservative analysts who are fighting to ensure that the GOP doesn't suffer yet another embarrassing loss to the most unpopular president of the modern era. The Supreme Court returned the abortion question to the states and that is where it belongs. Trump is taking credit for placing several of the justices that overturned Roe, which is what the pro-life crowd claimed they wanted for decades. Now he's ready to move on and let the Constitution serve as our guide. 

 

https://hotair.com/jazz-shaw/2024/04/11/has-trump-filed-for-a-divorce-from-the-pro-life-movement-n3786308

 

 

.

[B-Man]

 

 

 

                             

 

 

.

[BillsFanNC]

 

[BillStime]

Bunch of fkn frauds 

 

 

[The Frankish Reich]

On 4/11/2024 at 7:06 PM, B-Man said:

or pending Supreme Court cases

The Alt Media nails it again!

 

https://www.wpr.org/news/heated-arguments-at-the-supreme-court-in-newest-abortion-case

 

that one was argued, umm, yesterday. So it is understandable that someone or something called "jazz-shaw" wasn't aware of it when that hotair article was posted two weeks ago.

 

But wait a minute, we've also got this one!

 

https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/03/supreme-court-appears-likely-to-allow-abortion-drug-to-remain-available/

 

Argued in March, before Mx. Jazz-Shaw started pecking out an incredibly stupid article!

 

And you tell me the Mainstream Media is biased so you have no choice but to trust the Stupid Media.

[daz28]

7 hours ago, BillStime said:

Bunch of fkn frauds 

 

 

The pro-lifers don't even have any leg to stand on besides religion, which they won't even admit is the REAL reason they want bans.  Simply ask them if they think it's murder.  If they say yes, then that means that any restrictions AT ALL would be legalized murder.  That has absolutely no grounds in law whatsoever.  We barely even have any executions for multi-murderers, but we'd have a law that said the fetus can be 'murdered', because of other people's irresponsibility.  Also, the idea of state's rights ISN'T to have different scattered very important social issues throughout the country adjudicated differently.  States right's is meant to allow states to have freedom to have separate laws that are beneficial to/for THEIR particular state.  Otherwise, why even have a UNITED states.