The Democrats’ presumptive presidential candidate, Kamala Harris, will likely make abortion a central theme in her campaign, assuming Democrats don’t unilaterally decide to replace her like they did with Joe Biden. If Harris focuses on the issue of abortion, Americans must understand precisely how extreme she is on this critical issue.
The issue of abortion played an essential role in recent elections and is likely to play a role in the upcoming presidential election, especially in the minds of women. To date, Donald Trump has taken the correct approach, which is to defer to the states on this issue in accordance with the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization, where the Court decided that each individual state should decide the issue of abortion.
Biden strongly disagreed with the Dobbs decision and promised to restore the protections previously afforded by Roe v. Wade. Harris has taken an even more extreme view than Biden, despite her insincere efforts to “soften” her stance. For example, as reported by CBS News, in a September 2023 interview with “Face the Nation,” moderator Margaret Brennan asked Harris what week abortion access should be cut off. Harris did not answer the specific question but repeatedly stated that "the protections of Roe v. Wade” need to be reimplemented. According to Harris, “We're not trying to do anything that did not exist before June of last year."
These claims are disingenuous and do not align with her voting history and previous comments.
For example, when she was a presidential candidate in 2019, Harris argued that any state that had a history of restricting the abortion rights protected by Roe v. Wade would require federal approval before implementing new abortion laws. In other words, such laws would need the blessing of the federal government and its stamp of approval before they could be implemented.
In 2021, House Democrats passed the Women’s Health Protection Act of 2021 (the “Act”). The Act was a dangerous and far-reaching abortion bill that Democrats tried to mask as an effort to codify Roe v. Wade. In reality, the Act gave abortion providers unfettered discretion to conduct abortions and provided little to no protection to the unborn. A detailed discussion of the Act can be found here.
After the Senate defeated the Act, Harris, who supported the Act, released a statement where she reiterated her position that it was crucial to elect pro-choice leaders at all levels of government because Republicans were seeking to “criminalize and punish women for making decisions about their own body.”
Subsequently, in 2023, the Republican-led House passed the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act. According to this legislation, any infant born alive after an attempted abortion is a "legal person for all purposes under the laws of the United States." The bill passed 220-210, and the 210 “no” votes all came from Democrats. In other words, nearly every Democrat in the House voted against a bill protecting an infant born alive from being aborted. The bill imposed certain obligations on doctors that many would consider humane in nature. As reported by Fox News, in accordance with the bill:
Doctors would be required to care for those infants as a "reasonably diligent and conscientious health care practitioner would render to any other child born alive.’
Following that level of care, doctors would be required [to] admit those infants to a hospital for further care. Any violation of this standard would result in fines and imprisonment for up to five years or both.
Harris opposed the bill. In a tweet in January of last year, Harris referred to the bill as “extreme” and said that Republicans were jeopardizing the right to reproductive health care and trying to control women's bodies.
Harris entirely missed the mark, and her message was nonsensical and misguided. The bill had nothing to do with reproductive health or controlling women’s bodies. Instead, it had everything to do with protecting babies that were born alive. The fact that Harris (and almost all Democrats) opposed this bill further reflects how extreme Harris is on this issue.
These examples are but a few of many that reflect how extreme Harris is on the issue of abortion. Based on her previous comments and her voting history (including her voting history as a senator), it appears that the sanctity of human life takes a back seat to a woman’s unfettered right to abort a child.
Many Americans disagree with this extreme approach. If Harris wants to make this a rallying cry for her supporters, she will have to defend her indefensible and extreme record on this issue.
On the other hand, Trump should stay the course and continue to defer to the Supreme Court’s ruling.
Mr. Hakim is an attorney and columnist. His articles have been published in The Washington Examiner, The Daily Caller, The Federalist, American Thinker, and other online publications. He has also appeared on OANN’s Tipping Point, Newsmax, Steadfast and Loyal Podcast with Allen West, and Real America’s Voice. The views expressed herein are the author’s own and do not constitute legal advice.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member