The irony is not lost on me that this anniversary of the Roe v. Wade decision comes just two days after the inauguration of the man who triggered its downfall: Donald Trump.
Since the conservative U.S. Supreme Court justices he appointed helped strip us of this fundamental right two and half years ago, Republicans have been faced with the fierce outrage of American voters across the political spectrum. They heard enough to fake policy shifts on the issue publicly – scrubbing their websites of their support for restrictions, attempting to walk back out-of-touch views on care, and even removing explicit calls for a national abortion ban from their party’s platform for the first time in 40 years.
Simply put, Republicans have learned that their opposition to abortion is politically dangerous. But while Donald Trump and Republicans at the state-level now know better than to talk about the issue publicly during their terms in office, that doesn’t mean they won’t try to further undermine our rights now that they have solidified power.
Don’t take my word for it; just look at the facts. Because while Republicans were spouting these claims about moderation leading up to Election Day, they were simultaneously taking extreme measures to push care out of reach. With attention diverted to conversations about the Democratic ticket, they snuck harsh restrictions into must-pass budget bills, blocked a series of bills that would have protected patients traveling to get care and doctors providing that care, obstructed efforts to reinstate the protections of Roe, and more.
Republicans have wasted no time in pushing their real agenda post-election either. In Missouri, they’ve already filed numerous bills to overturn Amendment 3, a ballot initiative passed by a majority of voters in support of abortion access. In Indiana, they’ve introduced a new bill that would push care further out of reach for rape survivors. In Texas, Attorney General Ken Paxton has even filed a first-of-its-kind lawsuit against a New York doctor for providing care to a Texas resident, which could set a dangerous precedent for any patient who needs care from out-of-state.
