Trump has said abortion is a state issue. His judicial picks could shape it nationally for decades
As President Donald Trump pushes the Senate to confirm his federal judicial nominees, a review by The Associated Press shows that roughly half of them have revealed anti-abortion views, been associated with anti-abortion groups or defended abortion restrictions.
Trump has offered shifting positions on the issue while indicating he wants to leave questions of abortion access to the states. But his court nominees will have lifetime appointments and be in position to roll back abortion access long after the Republican president leaves the White House.
Bernadette Meyler, a professor of constitutional law at Stanford University, said judicial nominations 'are a way of federally shaping the abortion question without going through Congress or making a big, explicit statement.'
'It's a way to cover up a little bit what is happening in the abortion sphere compared to legislation or executive orders that may be more visible, dramatic and spark more backlash,' she said.
Of the 17 judicial nominees so far in Trump's second term, at least eight have argued in favor of abortion restrictions or against expanded abortion access. No such records could be found for the other nine, nor did the AP review find evidence that any of Trump's judicial nominees support increased access to abortion.
'Every nominee of the President represents his promises to the American people and aligns with the US Supreme Court's landmark ruling,' a White House spokesman, Harrison Fields, said in a statement that referenced the 2022 decision overturning the constitutional right to abortion established in Roe v. Wade. 'The Democrats' extreme position on abortion was rejected in November in favor of President Trump's commonsense approach, which allows states to decide, supports the sanctity of human life, and prevents taxpayer funding of abortion.'
Trump's first term also had an enduring impact on the courts, appointing 234 judges. By the end of that term, more than one-quarter of active federal judges were nominated by Trump, including three Supreme Court justices who helped overturn Roe v. Wade.
In his second term, all but five of his 17 nominees are from states that went for Trump in 2024 and where Republicans have pushed severe abortion restrictions. Among them, four nominees are from Missouri and five are from Florida.
Here is a look at the nominees who have tried to reduce abortion access or have advocated for restrictions. They did not respond to requests for comment:
Whitney Hermandorfer, who has been confirmed to the 6th US Circuit Court of Appeals, has built much of her relatively short career as a lawyer around challenging former President Joe Biden's policies related to abortion and transgender rights. She challenged a federal law requiring employers to provide workers with reasonable accommodations to get abortion care, as well as Title X regulations that required providers who receive funding through the program to give information about abortions to patients if asked.
Hermandorfer defended Tennessee's abortion ban, one of the strictest in the country, in court and tried to dismiss a lawsuit from doctors seeking clarification on exemptions to the ban. She said abortion deserves special scrutiny because 'this is the only medical procedure that terminates a life.'
Maria Lanahan, a district court nominee in Missouri, helped write the state's complaint in a lawsuit that had sweeping national implications for access to medication abortion. The case challenged the FDA approval of the abortion pill mifepristone despite decades of evidence showing the drug is safe and effective.
The lawyer supported Missouri's effort to strip Planned Parenthood of state Medicaid funding and defended the state's abortion ban after a group of clergy sued, arguing it violated the state constitution's protections for religious freedom.
Jordan Pratt, a nominee for the US District Court for the Middle District of Florida, called abortion a 'barbaric practice' and 'one of the most severe invasions of personal rights imaginable' in an amicus brief supporting Florida's 15-week abortion ban. The state now bans the procedure at six weeks.
In 2025, Pratt struck down a Florida law that created a judicial waiver program for minors seeking to have abortions without parental consent. The lawyer also worked for the Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative legal organization that opposes abortion and has sued to reverse the FDA approval of mifepristone.
John Guard, also nominated to fill for the same district, defended Florida's then-15-week abortion ban in court as the state's chief deputy attorney general.
Joshua Divine, a deputy solicitor general of Missouri who is nominated to be a district judge in the state, is currently representing Missouri in a case challenging the FDA approval of mifepristone. Divine co-authored the lawsuit, which includes misinformation about medication abortion, including that it 'starves the baby to death in the womb.'
In his college newspaper, Divine described himself as a 'zealot' for the anti-abortion movement, referred to abortion as 'the killing of an innocent, genetically unique human being' and argued that life begins at fertilization.
He also stepped into a prominent role in the fight over abortion rights in the state after Missouri voters approved an abortion rights amendment in 2024. That amendment did not immediately override state laws. It left it up to abortion rights groups to ask courts to knock down abortion restrictions they believed were now unconstitutional. During the ensuing legal battles, Divine represented the state in defending a host of abortion restrictions.
Chad Meredith, Trump's nominee to the US District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky, defended the state's abortion ban and other restrictions while he was the state's chief deputy general counsel. That included a law requiring doctors to perform ultrasounds and describe images to abortion patients.
Bill Mercer, a Republican state lawmaker in Montana who is nominated for a US District Court judgeship in the state, has repeatedly supported anti-abortion bills.
Those include ones that sought to ban abortion after 20 weeks of pregnancy; require a 24-hour waiting period and mandatory ultrasounds for abortion patients; require parental notification for minors to get an abortion; prohibit the use of state funding for abortions; prohibit certain insurance policies from covering abortions; and restrict what types of medical professionals can dispense medication abortion.
Jennifer Mascott, a lawyer in the White House Counsel's Office and a Trump nominee to the 3rd US Circuit Court of Appeals, has spoken repeatedly about abortion law in panels and interviews.
After the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, Mascott in an interview on 'Fox News Live' disagreed with the argument that the decision undermined the court's legitimacy. She said abortion issues are 'more appropriately decided' by the states, elected officials in Congress and people in their local communities.
Anti-abortion groups are optimistic based on Trump's early nominees Anti-abortion groups said it is premature to make broad conclusions about whether the nominees would help carry out their policy goals but that they were optimistic based on the names they have seen so far.
'We look forward to four more years of nominees cut from that mold,' said Katie Glenn Daniel, director of legal affairs for the national anti-abortion organization SBA Pro-Life America.
Kristi Hamrick, spokesperson for Students for Life, said she was hopeful the administration will continue nominating those 'who will respect the rule of law.'Abortion rights advocates said Trump is embedding abortion opponents into the judiciary one judge at a time.
Mini Timmaraju, president of the national abortion rights organization Reproductive Freedom for All, said the courts, until now, have largely been an effective option for advocates to challenge state abortion bans and restrictions.
'This just feeds into this larger strategy where Trump has gotten away with distancing himself from abortion — saying he's going to leave it to the states while simultaneously appointing anti-abortion extremists at all levels of government,' she said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Indian Express
5 minutes ago
- New Indian Express
Harvard and Trump administration are nearing settlement including a $500 million payment
WASHINGTON: Harvard University and the Trump administration are getting close to an agreement that would require the Ivy League university to pay $500 million to regain access to federal funding and to end investigations, according to a person familiar with the matter. The framework is still being sorted out with significant gaps to close, but both sides have agreed on the financial figure and a settlement could be finalized in coming weeks, according to the person who spoke to The Associated Press on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations. Harvard declined to comment. The agreement would end a monthslong battle that has tested the boundaries of the government's authority over America's universities. What began as an investigation into campus antisemitism escalated into an all-out feud as the Trump administration slashed more than $2.6 billion in research funding, ended federal contracts and attempted to block Harvard from hosting international students. The university responded with a pair of lawsuits alleging illegal retaliation by the administration after Harvard rejected a set of demands that campus leaders viewed as a threat to academic freedom. Details of the proposed framework were first reported by The New York Times. A $500 million payment would be the largest sum yet as the administration pushes for financial penalties in its settlements with elite universities. Columbia University agreed to pay the government $200 million as part of an agreement restoring access to federal funding, while Brown University separately agreed to pay $50 million to Rhode Island workforce development organizations. Details have not been finalized on where Harvard's potential payment would go, the person said. The Republican president has been pushing to reform prestigious universities that he decries as bastions of liberal ideology. His administration has cut funding to several Ivy League schools while pressing demands in line with his political campaign. None has been targeted as frequently or as heavily as Harvard, the richest US university with an endowment valued at $53 billion. More than a dozen Democrats in Congress who attended Harvard cautioned against a settlement on Aug. 1, warning the university it may warrant 'rigorous Congressional oversight and inquiry.' Capitulating to political demands, they said, would set a dangerous precedent across all of higher education.
Indian Express
5 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Daily Briefing: Tariffs, talks and tightropes
Good morning, Let me take you back to 2004 for a moment. You're in the theatre, watching Shah Rukh Khan's Main Hoon Na, and just when you thought the movie was over, it cuts to another song and dance sequence. One by one, not just the cast but even the usually behind-the-scenes crew appear on screen, dancing to 'Ye Fizaein'. Three years later, Farah Khan would do it again with Om Shanti Om, asking crew members to walk down the red carpet. It's all a bit silly, but wildly entertaining. These end-credit sequences also serve a bigger purpose of interrogating the way films — and capitalism itself — are structured. Contributing writer Aamatullah Rajkotwala writes in the latest 'Fresh Take' that these end-credit scenes challenge the capitalistic tendency of 'commodity fetishism', when a product is valued more than the labour which produced it. Do we then dare call Farah Khan an accidental Marxist? On that note, let's get to today's edition. In the next two weeks, India will engage key partners Russia and China. On August 21, External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar will visit Moscow to meet his Russian counterpart Sergey Lavrov, paving the way for President Vladimir Putin's potential visit to India. Crucially, Putin is set to meet US President Donald Trump in Alaska tomorrow. New Delhi will watch their talks closely. If Putin and Trump reach a framework for ending the war in Ukraine, India could avoid the additional 25 per cent US tariff linked to its Russian oil purchases. On August 18, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi will visit India for talks with National Security Advisor Ajit Doval ahead of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation summit in China later this month, which Prime Minister Narendra Modi is slated to attend. Tightrope: These engagements are part of New Delhi's multi-alignment foreign policy, but it will be careful not to be seen as part of an 'anti-Western' grouping. India has often portrayed itself as non-Western, and not anti-Western. Beijing has been seeking an India-Russia-China trilateral meeting, but New Delhi has so far refused to participate. Trumponomics: These geopolitical churnings gained urgency in the face of Trump's steep tariffs. Trump has raised duties on all trading partners, pushing the average import tariff to 15–20 per cent from 3 per cent in January. While the broader economic impact is yet to show, inflationary signs are emerging. How has the US avoided the worst of Trumponomics? Read my colleague Anil Sasi's report. Pak hand: Amid New Delhi's strained ties with Washington DC, Pakistan has improved its relationship with the US under Trump. Army Chief Syed Asim Munir has visited the US twice on high-level trips in less than two months. While Pakistan's army has long exercised de facto control over the country's governance, Munir's emergence as Pakistan's numero uno figure on the international stage is unprecedented. The first batch of Agniveers, part of the new Agnipath recruitment scheme, is set to complete their four-year term by 2026-end. Sources have told The Indian Express that discussions are underway to increase the retention of Agniveers after their performance in Operation Sindoor was found to be 'excellent'. Why does the Army want more manpower, and what could be the potential changes for Agniveers? Read our report. Drug bust: Mephedrone, a synthetic drug, has emerged as a key challenge for enforcement agencies in recent years. In the last five years alone, investigators have seized mephedrone worth Rs 9,522 crore from Maharashtra. At the heart of the drug network, which stretches to the UAE and Turkey, is believed to be mastermind Salim Dola, a wanted figure in the narcotics trade and linked to the Dawood Ibrahim gang. The Mumbai Crime Branch says it is closer than ever to apprehending Dola. Here's how they connected the dots to reach the drug lord. Balancing act: The Ajit Pawar-led Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) finds itself in an uneasy position in its alliance with the BJP and Shiv Sena in Maharashtra. Recent moves by the Deputy Chief Minister, Pawar, including support of the Qureshi community against self-styled cow vigilantes and questioning orders to shut meat shops on Independence Day, are seen as efforts to project the NCP as unwaveringly secular. Zeeshan Shaikh explains what necessitates Pawar's balancing act, and whether it has worked. 🎧 For more on the cow vigilante issue in Maharashtra, tune in to today's '3 Things' podcast episode. Mounting troubles: Can a mountain of coal go missing? Authorities in Meghalaya are faced with a bizarre problem. Almost 4,000 metric tonnes — that's 40 lakh kilograms — of illegally mined coal in the South West Khasi Hills district has gone missing. Was it 'swept away by heavy rain' as excise minister Kyrmen Shylla suggested? The issue, at the centre of a political firestorm, even reached the Meghalaya High Court, which formed a one-member panel to monitor coal mining in the state. Imagine the Indian government, the American CIA and the British MI5 working together. No, this isn't the plot of a Netflix thriller. In the late 1950s, the trio teamed up to carry out a clandestine operation to spy on the communists in Kerala. I leave you with this column by Paul McGarr, author and lecturer, that has fascinating details on the operation. That's all for today, folks! Until tomorrow, Sonal Gupta
Indian Express
5 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Trump revokes Biden-era order on promoting US economic competition
US President Donald Trump on Wednesday formally revoked a 2021 directive issued by his predecessor Joe Biden to promote competition in the US economy, the White House confirmed. The official order states: 'By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered: Section 1. Revocation. Executive Order 14036 of July 9, 2021 (Promoting Competition in the American Economy), is hereby revoked.' The statement also clarifies that the revocation does not impair existing legal authorities of federal agencies, and will be implemented in accordance with applicable laws and 'available appropriations', and does not create any 'enforceable rights.' Biden's 2021 order was designed to stop unfair corporate practices. His administration said these included things like excessive airline fees and large mergers that raise prices for consumers. The policy was a major effort supported by advisers connected to Senator Elizabeth Warren, who helped set up the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) during Barack Obama's presidency. The CFPB is a government agency meant to protect people from unfair treatment by banks, credit card companies, and other lenders. Trump has long opposed the CFPB and announced plans to reduce its staff by 90%. Consumer advocates say cutting back the agency's work has already cost Americans about $18 billion in extra fees and lost compensation from corporate wrongdoing, according to a June study by the Student Borrower Protection Center and the Consumer Federation of America. As reported by Reuters, the DOJ welcomed Trump's decision, saying it fits with its 'America First Antitrust' approach. Antitrust laws are designed to prevent companies from getting too much market power and blocking fair competition. The DOJ said this new direction would focus on encouraging free markets and avoid what it called Biden's 'overly prescriptive and burdensome approach.' It also plans to simplify the review process for mergers under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Act and bring back more targeted consent decrees – legal agreements used to stop or prevent certain business practices without a trial. Meanwhile, Hannah Garden-Monheit, who directed competition policy under Biden, accused Trump of abandoning protections for small businesses and workers. 'This shows President Trump's claim he would 'Make America Competitive Again' was a sham. Instead of enforcing the competition laws, he's throwing Main Street businesses and workers under the bus while doing favors for the rich and powerful,' she said, as per Reuters. (With inputs from Reuters)
