Don’t be gaslighted: JD Vance is an anti-abortion extremist

JD Vance, Donald Trump’s vice presidential pick, didn't mention abortion in his big speech at the Republican National Convention on Wednesday. In fact, it barely came up at the convention. That’s because Republicans have been looking at the polls showing what a political loser their position is. The word has obviously gone out to stay silent; the last thing they need is for Americans to know where they stand on the issue.

But on Thursday, Trump’s would-be VP helpfully cleared up the mystery. Speaking to an audience of the forced-birth faithful, Vance immediately reassured them that, of course, they would always have a place in the Trump administration. 

On Wednesday, The Washington Post also reported on Vance’s efforts to enforce the Comstock Act, the 19th-century “zombie” law that the right has championed as a backdoor effort to ban nearly all abortions—and not just in Republican-led states but nationwide. Last year, Vance and 40 of his Republican colleagues penned a letter to the Department of Justice urging enforcement of Comstock to prohibit the distribution by mail of mifepristone (the “abortion pill”). In that letter, Vance and his congressional colleagues likened the distribution of mifepristone to “mail order-abortion operations.” This follows statements Vance made in 2022, when he declared he “would like abortion to be illegal nationally.”

So yes, for the record, Vance is an anti-abortion extremist. But just how extreme is he? Well, for one thing, he wants to give law enforcement and prosecutors the ability to discover and track anyone who seeks abortion or reproductive care. 

When the conservative majority on the Supreme Court overruled Roe v. Wade, many Americans mistakenly believed it represented the final step in Republicans’ agenda to curtail the reproductive rights of women and anyone else who can become pregnant. But for the fanatics who comprise the core of the forced-birth lobby, the reality was that the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization ruling was merely the beginning of a far more invasive plan of control and surveillance, one in which pregnancy itself would be subject to state scrutiny.

However, the Biden administration understood the far-reaching impact of Dobbs and the religious right’s plans to exploit it, even if the general public did not.

In April, the Department of Health and Human Services issued a final rule to expand HIPAA protections to reproductive care. In other words, it protects the medical records of pregnant people from the scrutiny of law enforcement operating on behalf of anti-abortion legislators, prosecutors, and their collaborators. For example, the rule prevents local district attorneys from ascertaining whether someone traveled to another state to terminate their pregnancy. Without access to medical records, prosecuting those people and any medical providers who may have assisted them becomes far more difficult.

But shortly after the rule was proposed last year, 28 members of Congress—all of them Republicans—signed onto a letter demanding the rule’s immediate repeal. One of those Congress members? Ohio Sen. JD Vance.

The text of the letter betrays no doubts about its authors’ intentions:

The Proposed Rule unlawfully thwarts the enforcement of compassionate laws protecting unborn children and their mothers, and directs health care providers to defy lawful court orders and search warrants.

The Proposed Rule creates special protections for abortion that limit cooperation with law enforcement, undermine the ability to report abuse, restrict the provision of public health information, and erase the humanity of unborn children. The Proposed Rule would interfere with valid state laws protecting life, arbitrarily permit abortionists to disclose protected health information (PHI) to defend themselves while silencing others, and unlawfully infringe on Congressional power.

As Josh Marshall wrote in Talking Points Memo on Tuesday, allowing police and prosecutors to easily access a person’s medical history for this reason dovetails with state laws intended to criminalize the procedure and, ultimately, incarcerate (and potentially execute) those who end their pregnancy. This new rule stymies the efforts of zealous prosecutors in states like Alabama and Texas who don’t want citizens leaving their state to receive abortion care denied to them by their home state.

As Marshall points out, for such prosecutions to succeed, “You need to know and be able to prove when a woman was pregnant and then, before the end of normal gestation, stopped being pregnant.” Since those who sought an abortion are assumed to be noncooperative with such a prosecution, using the tools of the state against them presents the most effective means of establishing intent. This can be accomplished in part by reference to their menstrual cycles as reported to their ob-gyns (who may find themselves under legal threat if such data isn’t turned over). 

Vance, who has argued against rape and incest exceptions, has recently prevaricated on his abortion position, much like Donald Trump has. This election-year gaslighting, however, is belied by the extreme position of the letter that Vance signed. As Marshall points out, the fact that the Ohio senator was among only eight in his chamber to sign the letter—despite a rabidly anti-abortion Senate GOP caucus—is clear evidence of his intense animosity toward those seeking abortion care. 

As Veronica Riccobene, Helen Santoro and Joel Warner write for The Lever, Vance’s campaign refused to comment whether a Trump-Vance administration would rescind the HHS rule. But no response is necessary. Project 2025—the blueprint for a Trump-Vance administration—calls for the Department of Health and Human Services to “maintain a biblically based, social science-reinforced definition of marriage and family."

Also, as reported by Lindsey McLendon of the Center for American Progress, Project 2025 plan threatens district attorneys who won’t enforce draconian abortion bans, saying they “could face federal lawsuits, removal from office, or potentially criminal prosecutions.” As McClendon notes, under Project 2025 “a top priority will certainly focus on ensuring abortion bans are enforced to the fullest extent.”

Most Americans may be unaware of the level of right-wing fanaticism currently being mustered against reproductive rights. But for the many anti-abortion extremists operating behind the scenes, Trump and now Vance are the key to achieving their most fervent, unrealized hopes, which is why they will come out in force to vote for the Republican ticket in 2024.

But the choice is just as existential for those who do not want to turn control of their personal lives over to these extremists. Right now, there is only one real avenue of defense against these extremists: voting for Democrats.

Campaign Action