Twice-divorced Trump’s new running mate wants to restrict divorce

No one goes into a marriage hoping for a divorce. It's an unhappy end to what should be a source of happiness. However, like abortion, divorce is a personal choice—one that is sadly sometimes necessary to protect life or health. And divorce, like abortion, is something that conservative Republicans are now trying to take away. Among conservatives, there’s a longing for a time when divorce was both difficult and shameful. Divorce, especially no-fault divorce, has long been fingered by some conservatives as the root of many, if not all, evils. Some of the worst in Congress, like Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley, have advocated the idea of ending no-fault divorce. Now those conservatives think they have their champion in Donald Trump’s running mate, JD Vance, who insists that women should be locked into "even violent" marriages. In 1969, the first no-fault divorce law in the United States was signed by a divorced former actor turned governor of California, Ronald Reagan. Over the next forty years, no-fault divorce laws spread across the United States, with New York being the last state to sign on, in 2010. These laws ended a period in which any party filing for divorce had to not simply give some reason for the dissolution of marriage—like adultery, cruelty, or abuse—but also provide evidence to support these claims. Some couples would even risk faking adultery or subject themselves to unnecessary moves to achieve a divorce. In many cases, women facing domestic violence would be blocked by the financial or social costs of mounting a case for divorce, or forced to stay with abusers by judges who didn’t accept their pleas. The result of no-fault divorce was immediately visible, not just in an increase in divorce but also in a sharp decrease in domestic violence. States where no-fault divorce laws were passed saw around a 30% drop in domestic violence between 1976 and 1985. In addition, the number of women murdered by domestic partners decreased by 10%. Even suicide among women declined once no-fault divorce made it possible to dissolve failed marriages without an extended legal fight and public shame. But among conservative Christians, no-fault divorce was looked on as an enormous mistake. The Heritage Foundation, authors of the authoritarian Project 2025 agenda, have railed against no-fault divorce for decades, arguing that parents of children under 18 should not be allowed to divorce without proving it wouldn’t be harmful to the children or arguing more recently that it “was no-fault divorce, not same-sex marriage, that first redefined marriage in the United States.” According to Heritage, “No-fault divorce stripped marriage of its durability and security. Instead, marriage lasts until feelings depart or spouses decide it’s no longer allowing them to ‘live their best life.’” Somehow, they view using state power to keep people in a relationship that they no longer want as a good thing. As Salon reports on Tuesday, Vance has been among those with the harshest view of divorce, taking a position that might sound extreme even to extremists.  Speaking to an audience at Pacifica Christian High School in Southern California, Vance called no-fault divorce “one of the great tricks … that the sexual revolution pulled on America.” According to Vance, ending marriages that were “maybe even violent” somehow harmed the children more than suffering through those violent marriages. JD Vance says women should stay in violent marriages “for the sake of their kids” pic.twitter.com/zqM15Aqhvm— Biden-Harris HQ (@BidenHQ) July 15, 2024 The result of no-fault divorce, Vance said, was that people were not "doggedly determined to stick it out” as they had been during his grandparent’s generation. Note that this is coming from the same man who wrote a book saying that his “family tradition” was poverty. Getting out of relationships involving unhappiness and abuse might not have changed that, but it certainly could not have hurt. Spurred on by right-wing Christian groups, anti-divorce legislation is now spreading through red-state legislatures just as anti-abortion and anti-LGBTQ rights bills did earlier. Proposals in Louisiana, Nebraska, Oklahoma, and Texas would eliminate no-fault divorce in those states. Missouri currently does not allow women to seek a divorce while pregnant, even when trapped in an abusive relationship.  While Project 2025 doesn't explicitly call for an end to no-fault divorce, members of its advisory board and the primary authors at the Heritage Foundation have made that call.  Like abortion, divorce is an issue that should be settled by individuals, not the state. No one should be forced to enter into a marriage they don’t want. And no one should be forced to stay. No-fault divorce has saved lives. But the same thing was true of safe, legal abortion. Those deaths aren’t an issue for the men who are more interested in imposing their idea of morality on those who do not agree. As for Donald Trump, wh