Amy Coney Barrett, President Trump’s pick to replace the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the United States Supreme Court, signed onto an anti-abortion open letter in 2006 penned by an organization that believes life begins at fertilization, even when outside of a person’s womb.
The group’s views are so extreme that they even believe assisted reproductive methods like in vitro fertilization (IVF), which discards excess fertilized embryos, should be a criminal offense, The Guardian reported.
The open letter was produced as a full-page newspaper advertisement by an anti-abortion group called St. Joseph County Right to Life. Published in South Bend, Indiana, the ad included hundreds of signatures of support from individuals in a region of the state called Michiana (near the Michigan-Indiana border). Among the signers were Barrett and her husband, Jesse.
“We, the following citizens of Michiana, oppose abortion on demand and defend the right to life from fertilization to natural death. Please continue to pray to end abortion,” the ad said.
The ad also decried Roe v. Wade, the landmark decision legalizing abortion, as “barbaric” and a “raw exercise of judicial power.”
Speaking to The Guardian about the matter this week, Jackie Appleman, executive director of the St. Joseph County Right to Life, confirmed that the organization is indeed morally opposed to IVF.
“Whether embryos are implanted in the woman and then selectively reduced or it’s done in a petri dish and then discarded, you’re still ending a new human life at that point and we do oppose that,” Appleman said.
It isn’t clear whether Barrett subscribes to the same views on IVF, as what she signed didn’t explicitly address that issue. But her support of the group suggests that she’s willing to partner with organizations holding such extreme ideas in pursuit of an anti-abortion agenda.
IVF is an option common for individuals who are having difficulty getting pregnant. According to Pew Research, 33 percent of Americans have either used IVF to conceive a pregnancy or know someone who has. Since 1996, more than 1 million births have happened after a person used IVF to get pregnant.
A White House spokesman immediately responded to revelations of Barrett’s endorsement of the ad by suggesting that, regardless of her views on abortion or IVF, Barrett would be impartial.
“As Judge Barrett said on the day she was nominated, ‘A judge must apply the law as written. Judges are not policymakers, and they must be resolute in setting aside any policy views they might hold,'” White House deputy press secretary Judd Deere said.
Yet there are plenty of reasons for supporters of reproductive rights to be worried. Barrett, who was appointed in 2017 by Trump, has rendered a number of unfavorable opinions on abortion. There’s also reason to believe she would seek to overrule Roe v. Wade if afforded the opportunity to do so, given that Trump promised in 2016 to appoint a justice to the Supreme Court in 2016 who is opposed to the ruling.
“I think the best evidence of her position on Roe v. Wade is that President Trump has said he will only appoint justices who are committed to reversing Roe, and there’s no reason not to believe him,” Katie Watson, an attorney and bioethicist at Northwestern University’s Feinberg School of Medicine, said to NPR last month.
A recent NBC News/SurveyMonkey poll released earlier this week found most people would oppose ending abortion rights, with 66 percent saying they do not want to see Roe v. Wade overturned.
We’re not backing down in the face of Trump’s threats.
As Donald Trump is inaugurated a second time, independent media organizations are faced with urgent mandates: Tell the truth more loudly than ever before. Do that work even as our standard modes of distribution (such as social media platforms) are being manipulated and curtailed by forces of fascist repression and ruthless capitalism. Do that work even as journalism and journalists face targeted attacks, including from the government itself. And do that work in community, never forgetting that we’re not shouting into a faceless void – we’re reaching out to real people amid a life-threatening political climate.
Our task is formidable, and it requires us to ground ourselves in our principles, remind ourselves of our utility, dig in and commit.
As a dizzying number of corporate news organizations – either through need or greed – rush to implement new ways to further monetize their content, and others acquiesce to Trump’s wishes, now is a time for movement media-makers to double down on community-first models.
At Truthout, we are reaffirming our commitments on this front: We won’t run ads or have a paywall because we believe that everyone should have access to information, and that access should exist without barriers and free of distractions from craven corporate interests. We recognize the implications for democracy when information-seekers click a link only to find the article trapped behind a paywall or buried on a page with dozens of invasive ads. The laws of capitalism dictate an unending increase in monetization, and much of the media simply follows those laws. Truthout and many of our peers are dedicating ourselves to following other paths – a commitment which feels vital in a moment when corporations are evermore overtly embedded in government.
Over 80 percent of Truthout‘s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and the remaining 20 percent comes from a handful of social justice-oriented foundations. Over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors, many of whom give because they want to help us keep Truthout barrier-free for everyone.
You can help by giving today during our fundraiser. We have 4 days to add 310 new monthly donors. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.