Republican Disaster. Roe v. Wade may be reversed.
For 50 years Republicans promised to end abortion, but they couldn't. Soon they likely can.
They have a problem.
The problem for Republicans comes from the fact that Americans are more nuanced and moderate on the issue of abortion than are the activists in the anti-abortion movement. Abortion opponents have had fifty years to nurture a body of single-issue voters with a sacred duty to end abortion.
Their goal was to put in place judges who would reverse Roe v. Wade and then to enact laws banning abortion, perhaps at conception, perhaps at six weeks when a form of fetal heartbeat can be detected, even for pregnancies resulting from rape and incest.
The anti-abortion movement had a hothouse environment to define its principles, free of real-life consequences. The movement proposed "personhood" laws, which defined the fertilized egg as a person. The movement proposed an Unborn Child Dignity Act requiring death certificates for miscarriages at any point after conception. The movement proposed murder prosecutions for women having an abortion. The cause went beyond important. It was God's will. This takes it out of the realm of politics and compromise.
There is a large squishy middle ground on the issue among the broader public. They want what Bill Clinton urged, that abortions be "legal, safe, and rare." With Roe v. Wade in effect they could largely ignore the issue. Now they cannot.
Republican politicians have overwhelmingly pledged their support to the anti-abortion movement and united the GOP to the "right to life" cause. They could preach to the activist choir without need to satisfy moderates in the broader public or bother with nuance or moderation, because the laws were for show, not implementation. States with Republican majorities enacted activist-pleasing measures and put them on the shelf as "trigger laws," that would be operational the moment the Supreme Court ends Roe v. Wade.
Ending Roe v. Wade will put abortion front and center in elections in every statewide and legislative district. In some places abortion bans will be popular. There will be news stories coming out of those red states about botched abortions, about women struggling to travel, of problem pregnancies, of bans on certain contraception systems. These will serve as red flag warnings to voters in the swing states and legislative districts.
The Virginia gubernatorial contest in 2021 reveals the problem a Republican candidates will face. Glenn Youngkin won a narrow victory by casting himself as a reasonable moderate, not an ideological extremist, and someone at arms length from Trump. Democratic candidate Terry McAuliffe claimed Youngkin would "ban all abortions" and used the GOP party line on abortion to hammer Youngkin. Youngkin understood the peril and denied he opposed all abortions. Still, he refused to be pinned down about his position. He would not say whether he supported or opposed the Texas "fetal heartbeat" abortion ban.
He was trying to finesse this. His website had no comment on the abortion issue. Virginia Public Radio, reporting on the election, wrote:
Youngkin avoided giving the activists details about his anti-abortion agenda. He told them that focusing on the topic could alienate independent voters that he needs to win the election. Youngkin assured the activists he is not “squishy” on abortion and that, ”When I’m governor and have a majority in the House, we can start going on the offense.”
In Virginia and around the country, the fear of what Youngkin might do was theoretical. Nothing much could happen. It was just signaling tribe, not policy. Post Roe v. Wade, GOP candidates like Youngkin are exposed. Most are on record. If someone defines abortion as murder, how can one compromise?
The anti-abortion crowd expects results. "End abortion" is the GOP version of "Defund the Police." It is the kind of phrase that sounds good to people deep in their own bubble, and it motivates single-issue people, but it is toxic for politicians trying to win broad support.
Chief Justice Roberts understands that the Court is about to give Democrats a potent weapon against GOP politicians. Five of his colleagues don't care.