‘Am I OK with it?’: JD Vance dodges question about his stance on women traveling freely for abortions
After previously stating that there should be a “federal response” to prevent women from traveling to get abortions, J. D. Vance refused to clarify his current stance on the issue.
As Donald Trump’s running mate, Vance’s stance on abortion has been of interest leading up to Election Day. Although Trump has claimed he will leave abortion rights in the states’ power, Vance previously called for a nationwide abortion ban. Additionally, he has repeatedly advocated for no exceptions to abortion laws, even in cases of rape and incest. Recently, he has attempted to walk back many of his previous claims and insisted he now agrees with Trump’s stance. During the U.S. vice presidential debate, Vance stated that he wanted to win back America’s “trust” on the topic of abortion. However, contradicting himself and claiming to have changed hasn’t done much to reassure Americans. Many suspect he’s simply saying what he must to win the election, leaving them uncertain what he’ll do if he and Trump get into office.
To add to the uncertainty, Vance noticeably avoided answering a question about his thoughts on women traveling for abortions. Given that he proposed one of his most chilling ideas in relation to the topic, his question-dodging is concerning.
J.D. Vance refuses to say he’s “OK” with women traveling for abortion
During an interview with The New York Times, the interviewer attempted to get Vance to clarify his abortion stance, bringing up his past comments about a nationwide abortion ban and federal response to stop women traveling for abortions. He launched into an explanation about how his remarks were made during a different time and how he’s focused on trying to “get trust back” on the topic. He confirmed that winning back trust does not mean he is “moderating” his position on abortion, but instead, is trying to make it “easier for young women to choose life.”
Finally, the interviewer asked outright, “So you are OK with women traveling to another state to get an abortion? That is something that you would like to see preserved in this country?” While she was looking for a “yes or no” answer, Vance avoided answering. Instead, he went back to the concept of the states choosing their own abortion policies. He stated, “Am I OK with it? I don’t think that’s the right way to look at it. I’m OK with the states making these decisions, even if they make decisions that JD Vance or Donald Trump might not make.” However, he refused to say that he was explicitly OK with women traveling for abortions. He wouldn’t even say he wasn’t OK with it, but that he had to accept it just as he must accept individual states’ policies.
Meanwhile, his avoidance of the question is significant, given his past comments on traveling for abortion. In 2022, he made a bizarre, baseless claim that George Soros-funded planes were loading up “disproportionately Black women to get them to have abortions in California.” He then claimed it was “creepy” that women were traveling for abortions and that a “federal response” was needed to stop it from happening. Vance also suggested states should ban their residents from getting an abortion in another state, stating, “Hopefully, we get to a point where Ohio bans abortion in California, and the Soroses of the world respect it.”
His past comments are frightening because what he’s proposing is impossible without severely restricting women’s rights and freedom. What would a “federal response” or Ohio banning abortion in California for its residents look like? Most likely, it would involve forcing women to prove they’re not pregnant before being permitted to travel, denying pregnant women the right to travel out of state, and partaking in surveilling and monitoring of women to ensure they’re not traveling to get an abortion. Anti-abortion states have already been trying to pass laws banning pregnant women from traveling out of state for abortions, though they’ve been shot down for infringing on the right to interstate travel protected by the Supreme Court. Yet, Vance suggested preventing women from traveling for abortion at a “federal” level.
Not only that, but he won’t clarify his current stance on women traveling for abortion. Accepting each state making its own policies and accepting women traveling freely for abortions are two very different things, and it’s frightening Vance failed to say he would accept or protect the rights of the latter.
Have a tip we should know? tips@themarysue.com
