Trump Doesn't Know What Mifepristone Is

8.8.24

Click to skip ahead: In Opposition Watch, anti-abortion groups are arguing for more abortion ‘reporting.’ In the States, news from Texas, Oklahoma and Florida. In Ballot Measure Updates, the attacks on democracy continue on in South Dakota. And in 2024, Trump gets tripped up by ‘mifepristone.’

---

Opposition Watch

Of all the anti-abortion tactics I worry about, it’s data collection and fake ‘reporting’ that keeps me up at night the most. Because it’s conservatives’ seemingly boring and mundane efforts that tend be underestimated. And it’s become increasingly clear to me that this is the strategy anti-abortion activists and lawmakers are throwing the most political weight behind—from Project 2025 and state-level attacks on privacy to data collection at crisis pregnancy centers.

There’s a reason that whenever you see an anti-abortion activist quoted in the media these days, they’re talking about data and abortion reports. They’re making their political and cultural case now, and laying the groundwork to preempt criticism.

Take, for example, what happened after #WeCount announced their new abortion numbers yesterday. Representatives from both Students for Life and the Charlotte Lozier Institute told Catholic news outlet OSV that the new abortion data was proof that the country needs a “national abortion reporting law.”

Kristi Hamrick from Students for Life said, “We need to protect life in law and in service.” And Tessa Cox from Charlotte Lozier claimed, “The lack of oversight enables abusers and endangers women.”

Anti-abortion groups know that tracking and compiling women’s private health data isn’t something that will go over particularly well with voters. So they’re doing what they always do: pretending that it’s all in women’s best interest. In fact, they claim, respecting patient privacy could be downright dangerous.

This is exactly what they did with waiting periods, medically unnecessary ultrasounds, and mandates that doctors give patients false information about the dangers of abortion—they called the restrictions “women’s right to know” laws.

We’re only going to see more of this, so make sure you’re keeping an eye on your local legislatures. If you start to see rumblings about abortion reporting, you’ll know what it’s about.

In the States

Since we’re already talking about the anti-abortion strategy around data and reporting, let’s start in Texas, where The Texas Tribune tells us how the country’s leading anti-abortion activist was placed on the state’s maternal mortality review committee. (Gee, I wonder why they’d want her there!)

As you likely remember, OBGYN Ingrid Skop travels state-to-state testifying in favor of abortion bans, and her ‘studies’ have been used in both legislation and lawsuits that have gone to the Supreme Court. (Those same papers have also been retracted.)

As Abortion, Every Day has reported before, Skop believes that children should be forced to give birth and that women with life-threatening pregnancies should be forced into c-sections or vaginal labor rather than easier and safer abortions. Just last month, Skop published a paper arguing that abortion is never necessary to save someone’s life or health and that “pregnancy rarely presents a risk to the mother.” Quite a claim from someone on a maternal mortality committee!

So it’s very much worth the time to read reporter Eleanor Klibanoff’s breakdown of how Skop was placed on the committee. The short version is that Kirk Cole, deputy commissioner for the Texas health department, put her there.

Let’s cut to the chase: Republicans wanted Skop on Texas’s maternal mortality committee because she’s already made clear she doesn’t believe abortion bans hurt women and because she’s ready to fabricate or skew data to ‘prove’ that it’s actually abortions killing women in the state. From AED’s reporting on Skop earlier this year:

“Skop believes that maternal mortality numbers are undercounting the number of deaths due to abortions. She’s even argued that maternal death statistics should include women who die by suicide after having an abortion. How would one establish a link? Well, if the way Texas defines abortion ‘complications’ is any indication, there wouldn’t need to be a connection at all.“

Meanwhile, I’m still fuming over Texas Gov. Greg Abbott telling CNN’s Jake Tapper that Democrats have a “zeal to try to kill young babies.” It’s not just that I’m so tired of Republicans’ ‘abortion up until birth’ claim—it’s that Abbott made the comments in response to a question about Texas’ rising infant mortality rate.

Oklahoma is big mad that they’re not getting federal Title X dollars, and they’re taking their case to the Supreme Court. We saw a similar fight happen when Tennessee lost millions in family planning funding. That’s because health centers getting federal dollars are required to at least tell patients that abortion is an option in other states—places like Oklahoma and Tennessee aren’t willing to do that.

In Oklahoma’s case, the Department of Health and Human Services wants programs in the state to give patients the number to a national hotline that provides information about all types of family planning, including abortion. Republican leaders in the state are arguing to the Supreme Court that the requirement is “discrimination.”

The state also points to the Court’s decision to overturn Roe, writing that “HHS’s regulation foists upon Oklahoma a requirement concerning an issue that has been recognized as specifically reserved to the people to address in Dobbs.” I’ll keep you updated as I find out more.

Meanwhile, Salon reports that since Florida’s 6-week abortion ban took effect, abortion access as been in chaos both in and out of the state. Abortion funds across the country are hearing from a much greater influx of patients, and a representative from the D.C. Abortion Fund says that their call rate of people from Florida went up by a whopping 200% in just one month. Remember, up until recently, Florida was a regional abortion hub and one of the states with the biggest increases in abortions.

Also in Florida, lawyer and medical student Aryana M. Gharagozloo writes in the Miami Herald about encountering a patient whose fetus had a fatal abnormality—a term Republicans define in the vaguest way possible so that doctors are too afraid to provide abortions:

“Our patient was forced to carry to term, endure the hardships and not immaterial risks of labor, and witness her baby die on its second day of life. Would her case qualify as a ‘fatal fetal abnormality’? Was her baby’s death ‘imminent’ enough for legislators?”

Quick hits:

• Gothamist on the news that Planned Parenthood clinics in New York will no longer serve patients after 20 weeks;

• Ohio gave more than $22 million to crisis pregnancy centers since Dobbs;

• The 19th on how Wisconsin providers are preparing for an influx of Iowa patients;

• And Raw Story on the desperate move by North Carolina gubernatorial candidate Mark Robinson, who revealed his wife’s abortion in a campaign ad.

Ballot Measure Updates

The anti-abortion war on democracy continues on, this time in South Dakota, where the state Supreme Court has reversed a ruling that dismissed an anti-abortion lawsuit that asked the court to remove a pro-choice amendment from the ballot. In other words, anti-abortion activists might be able to stop voters from having a direct say on abortion.

The Life Defense Fund claims that petitioners for the abortion rights measure broke several rules when collecting signatures, accusations that Dakotans for Health denied. But that’s not what this lawsuit is really about. As is the case with every other legal challenge we’ve seen against pro-choice ballot measures, this group simply wants to ensure that abortion never makes it in front of voters.

Because they know that when abortion is on the ballot, abortion wins. From Rick Weiland of Dakotans for Health:

“This is just an ongoing effort by the Life Defense Fund and the right-to-life lobby to stop and impede voters’ right to weigh in on this measure, and they continue, and have for almost 18 months, to do everything that they can think of, now, to kick it off the ballot.”

2024

Let’s be very clear: Donald Trump has no idea what mifepristone is. Check out this exchange the disgraced former president had with NBC News reporter Garrett Haake. Haake asked Trump whether, if elected, he would direct the FDA to revoke access to mifepristone. His answer? Unintelligible:

“Sure, you could do things that will be, would supplement. Absolutely. And those things are pretty open and humane. But you have to be able to have a vote, and all I want to do is give everybody a vote and the votes are taking place right now as we speak. There are many things on a humane basis that you can do outside of that, but you also have to give a vote and the people are going to have to decide.”

The Washington Post took this answer to mean that Trump is open to making the FDA repeal approval of abortion medication. Now, I believe that is 100% true—he’ll enact Project 2025 without a moment’s notice. But with this particular answer, it seems obvious to me that he was just talking out of his ass and didn’t understand the word ‘mifepristone.’

Something similar happened in May, when Trump was asked about contraception: He clearly didn’t know what the word meant, and his answer caused a big news response about how Trump was open to banning birth control Again, I believe he’ll do whatever the anti-abortion movement wants, and this doesn’t make him any less dangerous—but then and now, it’s pretty obvious that he’s ignorant and confused.

If you need a palate cleanser: Axios and ABC News and the Associated Press all covered Tim Walz’s abortion stance, while Rolling Stone calls the vice presidential candidate an “unapologetic champion” for abortion rights.