Skip to content Skip to footer

Trump Reportedly Favors Nationwide Abortion Ban, Despite Previous Claims

Trump has publicly opposed abortion bans, maintaining that such proposals aren’t tactically sound for Republicans.

Former President Donald Trump departs a pre-trial hearing in a hush-money case at Manhattan Criminal Court on February 15, 2024, in New York City.

Donald Trump has reportedly been telling people in his close circle that he favors the idea of a nationwide abortion ban, despite remaining relatively quiet about his support of abortion bans in public, a new report finds.

According to New York Times reporting by Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan published Friday, Trump is telling advisers and allies that he backs a 16-week federal abortion ban, particularly because it’s a round number. “Know what I like about 16?” Trump once told a source. “It’s even. It’s four months.”

As abortion access in the U.S. has been plunged into chaos over the past several years due to the Supreme Court’s overturn of Roe v. Wade, Trump has been mum on abortion and even criticized a six-week abortion ban signed by Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R), reportedly due to his belief that embracing a staunch anti-abortion stance is a bad tactic for Republicans.

Still, this report on Trump may not be entirely straightforward. Indeed, experts have pointed out that Republicans purporting to back a less restrictive — but still extremely dangerous — abortion ban, like Trump’s apparent suggestion of a 16-week ban, is a tactic to make them seem more moderate on the issue, even though abortion bans are far right proposals as a principle. Meanwhile, The Times, as well as Haberman and Swan, have been criticized before for being friendly to Trump and his team in order to access insider information.

However, what is notable is that Trump is reportedly in favor of a nationwide ban, even as he has insisted in the past in public that he isn’t. Just in September, in an interview with NBC, Trump claimed that he wouldn’t sign a 15-week ban if one passed Congress — but, if The Times’s reporting is true, he has directly contradicted this statement in private.

If Republicans were to coalesce behind a more restrictive ban, as they have floated in the past and as Republicans at the state level have passed and signed into law, it’s entirely possible that Trump would sign the bill; after all, Trump has already bought into and repeated right-wing disinformation on abortion in the past.

In speeches, he has criticized Democrats over abortion and has loudly spouted that Democrats support “late-term abortion, ripping babies straight from the mother’s womb, right up until the very moment of birth” — using a misleading term to describe very rare procedures that are typically done as a result of the parents’ or fetus’s health, or because the pregnant person was unable to access an abortion earlier, which typically affects poorer people.

A 15- or 16-week nationwide abortion ban would have devastating effects across the country. Previously-introduced legislation in Congress by Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) would have medical providers imprisoned for performing banned abortions, while states would no longer have the option to codify abortion rights.

Fifteen weeks is typically when fetal abnormalities first become detectable, meaning that pregnant people’s health would be endangered by being forced to continue carrying the fetus, and Graham’s ban would not allow exceptions for abnormalities. And while the bill technically contains “exceptions” for rape and incest, it also places hurdles for patients to obtain an abortion under those circumstances — in addition to the fact that exceptions have rarely been granted in states with supposed exceptions so far.

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. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.