Eight years ago, the eve of the Iowa caucuses presented a surreal tableau of then-candidate Donald Trump‘s foray into presidential politics.
In Dubuque, amongst the roar of his private jet flying overhead, Trump launched attacks against rival Ted Cruz before a theatrical Q&A session with unlikely endorser Jerry Falwell Jr. The scene, complete with popcorn vendors, mirrored a spectacle rather than a serious political event.
Donald Trump (Credits: ABC News – The Walt Disney Company)
At the time, many viewed Trump’s candidacy as a sideshow, doubting his sincerity, especially considering his past pro-choice stance. However, his subsequent actions as president, advocating for a 20-week abortion ban and appointing anti-abortion judges, including three to the Supreme Court, proved otherwise. His efforts suggested a commitment to restricting abortion access nationwide.
Trump Shows Apathy Towards State Efforts, Including Pregnancy Surveillance
Fast forward to a recent interview with TIME’s Eric Cortallessa, where Trump’s stance on abortion takes a surprising turn. Contrary to expectations, Trump now embraces a nihilistic approach, advocating for a patchwork system where states dictate their own abortion policies. This laissez-faire attitude signals a departure from his previous stance and underscores a new belief in state autonomy on the issue.
Trump’s indifference extends to potential state measures like tracking pregnancies or prosecuting individuals who defy abortion bans, asserting that such decisions lie solely with the states. This approach mirrors the patchwork nature of gun rights or car insurance regulations, where states retain autonomy.
However, Trump’s stance on federal regulation of abortion medication remains unclear. Despite promises to provide an answer, he has deferred, indicating a lack of interest or commitment to federal intervention on the issue.
Trump (Credits: The Hill)
This shift in Trump’s position raises questions about his sincerity and motives. While he once flirted with extreme rhetoric on abortion, he now appears disinterested in federal intervention, leaving the issue to states.
However, his allies, accustomed to his previous stance, may resist this new approach, preferring anti-abortion judicial nominations and restrictive regulations.
Trump’s newfound passivity on abortion rights reflects a departure from his usual assertiveness, opting to watch from the sidelines as states cross their own paths on the issue. It’s a surprising stance from a figure known for his central role in political theatrics.
