Yes, JD Vance Lied About Abortion, And No, You Shouldn’t Trust Anything He or Donald Trump Says About Reproductive Rights

JD Vance outright lied about his calls for a national abortion ban during Tuesday night’s vice-presidential debate, falsely declaring he “never supported a national ban.” That is categorically untrue and yet another reason why no one should believe him or Donald Trump when they make promises about reproductive rights, which they will absolutely shred given the opportunity.

But, first, a quick fact-check regarding Vance’s debate claim. In 2022, while running for Senate in Ohio, Vance said on a podcast, “I certainly would like abortion to be illegal nationally.” During that same campaign, he stated on his website for all the world to see that he was “100 percent pro-life” and that he was in favor of “eliminating abortion.” In fact, those words were on Vance’s website until July of this year, when Trump announced the senator as his running mate.

X content

This content can also be viewed on the site it originates from.

Then there’s Trump, who all caps screamed to his followers on social media last night: “EVERYONE KNOWS I WOULD NOT SUPPORT A FEDERAL ABORTION BAN, UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES, AND WOULD, IN FACT, VETO IT, BECAUSE IT IS UP TO THE STATES TO DECIDE BASED ON THE WILL OF THEIR VOTERS (THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE!). LIKE RONALD REAGAN BEFORE ME, I FULLY SUPPORT THE THREE EXCEPTIONS FOR RAPE, INCEST, AND THE LIFE OF THE MOTHER.”

There are many reasons that no one should ever believe anything Trump says, including the fact that he is an incorrigible liar. On abortion specifically, a heaping dose of skepticism would be wise given that the man regularly brags about killing Roe v. Wade, which should inspire absolutely zero confidence in his alleged plans to veto a federal abortion ban.

But there’s also the matter of the very sneaky way Trump, Vance, and other Republicans have taken to talking about abortion bans. As abortion rights advocate Jessica Valenti has written, “Republicans know abortion bans are deeply unpopular, so they’ve come up with this cheap rhetorical trick to fool voters,” wherein they claim not to support bans but “minimum standards.“ In this context, “ban” means no abortions at any time for any reason, whereas the latter could mean something like no abortions after six weeks—which, of course, would effectively be a ban on abortion. For instance, when asked during an interview about Senator Lindsey Graham’s proposed 15-week abortion ban, Vance insisted it was not a ban at all but a “federal minimum standard.” As Valenti wrote following the debate: “Vance has adopted the anti-abortion redefinition of ‘ban’ that says the word means a prohibition on abortion in all cases, even when a woman’s life is at risk. Under this definition, there are no abortion bans in America! That switch up provides Republicans a lot of political cover: When Donald Trump says, for example, that he would veto a federal abortion ban, it simply means that he would veto a ban that has no exceptions for women’s lives.”

Andrea González-Ramírez, a writer for the Cut, asked the Trump campaign the following questions:

Does Trump support any sort of national minimum standard that includes exceptions for rape, incest, and life of the mother? If so, would that minimum standard be at 6 weeks, 12 weeks, 15 weeks, etc.?

Would he sign or veto a national minimum standard bill?

Does he support the use of the Comstock Act (18 U.S.C. § 1461) to restrict abortion? If not, would he commit not to direct the U.S. Department of Justice to enforce this law?*

Not surprisingly, the campaign did not answer any of those specific questions, instead saying in a statement: “President Trump has long been consistent in supporting the rights of states to make decisions on abortion and has been very clear that he will NOT sign a federal ban when he is back in the White House.” The refusal to say something like “no, Trump will not sign a bill preventing abortions after six weeks” should set off deafening alarm bells.

*Project 25, which is deeply tied to Trump despite his claims to the contrary, has said the Justice Department should invoke the Comstock Act to prosecute people who send abortion pills via the mail; it has also said the Food and Drug Administration should rescind its approval of mifepristone, one of the two pills necessary for medication abortions.

Vance comes out in favor of shouting fire in a crowded theater

X content

This content can also be viewed on the site it originates from.

Surprise: Another Trump ally (and campaign adviser) won’t admit Trump lost

X content

This content can also be viewed on the site it originates from.

Elsewhere!

Special counsel lays out evidence against Trump in Jan. 6 case

The Washington Post • Read More

Trump “resorted to crimes” to stay in office after 2020 loss, Jack Smith team says

NBC News • Read More

Helene sets off a scramble to keep voting on track in North Carolina

The Washington Post • Read More

Trump’s Insults to Harris’s Intelligence? Jokes, Lara Trump Claims.

NYT • Read More

Trump rejects 60 Minutes interview; Harris accepts

Axios • Read More

Republicans Don’t Believe In Climate Change—and Democrats Should Take It More Seriously

Vanity Fair • Read More

Political bettors hit the jackpot as court clears election markets for comeback

Politico • Read More

Adam Neumann’s Latest Project Is a WeWork Competitor

Bloomberg • Read More