Mother Jones published an excellent article by Reverend Rob Schenck about how he became a leader of the Christian nationalist movement and why he decided to leave it. He recalls when real estate developer and playboy Donald Trump was first introduced to the world of evangelicals. And he describes his own role in connecting rich donors to Republican Supreme Court justices.
Reverend Schenck begins:
In 2014, at an elegant gala inside the Supreme Court’s gilded Great Hall, a tuxedoed Justice Clarence Thomas turned to me and voiced his approval for my work. I glanced over to where Chief Justice John Roberts and his wife, Jane, were entertaining two of my associates, trustees of the Supreme Court Historical Society, a private, nongovernmental entity for which Roberts served as honorary chair. At that moment, I knew the secretive operation I had run, aimed at emboldening Thomas and his conservative colleagues to render the strongest possible decisions in favor of our right-wing Christian agenda, had succeeded.
My organization, Faith and Action in the Nation’s Capital, had created an initiative we called “Operation Higher Court” that trained wealthy couples as “stealth missionaries,” befriending Thomas and his wife, Ginni; Samuel and Martha-Ann Alito; and Antonin and Maureen Scalia—lavishing them with meals at high-end restaurants and invitations to luxurious vacation properties. Alongside these amenities, our ministry offered prayers, gift Bibles, and the assurance that millions of believers thanked God for the decisions this trio of justices rendered on abortion, health care, marriage, and gun ownership….
But Reverend Schenck began to understand that his activities and beliefs were toxic to democracy. What triggered his change? Perhaps it was his late-in-life doctoral studies, when he read about the German Christian movement in the 1930s, which supported the Nazi party. He wrote: One of the most respected Bible scholars of that period, Paul Althaus, declared Hitler’s ascent to the chancellorship to be a “gift and miracle from God.”
He was shaken by his research. He began to change his views. He wondered whether Christian evangelicals in the U.S. were on the same dangerous path.
Following the insurrection of January 6, when Christian banners, Bibles, and prayers in Jesus’ name appeared in the assault on the Capitol, I felt even greater urgency in warning my fellow evangelicals of the grave danger Trump and his MAGA cult posed to Christianity and US democracy.
My change of course so late in life has been painful, disorienting, and costly. Besides losing decades-long friendships and enduring menacing threats, my wife and I have faced a significantly reduced income. I’ve even driven Uber to cover household expenses. One night, I picked up an organizer of the National Prayer Breakfast, an event in which I had once played a significant role. I was wearing a mask and said little, but then, with trepidation, I realized I would be dropping him at the home of a congressman I had worked with closely for more than 20 years. When my passenger got out, I was relieved to have gone unrecognized. Still, I’ve never questioned the decisions that brought me to that moment.
In my third conversion, I realized that when religion is placed at the service of a political party, it corrupts both. To claim that one political figure uniquely represents God’s will for the body politic is a form of anti-Christian idolatry. To elevate one set of spiritual beliefs above another and do it by force of law removes a nonnegotiable tenet of evangelical faith—free will. We are born again when we choose to believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, not when we’re forced to do so.
Because it is immoral, I believe Christian nationalism is inevitably doomed. But in the meantime, the pain, suffering, and injury it will inflict will be enormous—just consider women facing difficult pregnancies, trans children seeking care, librarians attacked for certain books. “We want to fill our culture again with the Christian spirit. We want to burn out all the recent immoral developments in literature, in the theater, and in the press—in short, we want to burn out the poison of immorality, which has entered into our whole life and culture as a result of liberal excess.” This may sound familiar—maybe some overheated Republican talking points. In fact, it’s what Adolf Hitler promised the German people in 1933.
One of the best passages appears on pp. 14-15, where the judge writes:
“It is not for a legislator, a judge, or a Commander from The Handmaid’s Tale to tellthese women what to do with their bodies during this period when the fetus cannot survive outside the womb any more so than society could–or should–force them to serve as a human tissue bank or to give up a kidney for the sake of another.”
The state can no longer enforce its ban on abortion that took effect in 2022, a Fulton County judge said Monday, allowing the procedure again to be performed in Georgia after a doctor detects fetal cardiac activity.
Fulton County Superior Judge Robert McBurney issued an order Monday that said abortions must be regulated as they were before Georgia’s 2019 law took effect in July 2022 — meaning the procedure is again allowed up until about 22 weeks of pregnancy.
Fulton County Superior Court Judge Robert McBurney wrote in his order that “liberty in Georgia includes in its meaning, in its protections, and in its bundle of rights the power of a woman to control her own body, to decide what happens to it and in it, and to reject state interference with her healthcare choices.”
Judd Legum of Popular Information tells the sad story of what happened to sex education in Florida. Responding to Ron DeSantis, the legislature passed a bill declaring what must be taught and what cannot be taught, in accord with the ideology of rightwing Republicans, not science. The law requires districts to have their sex Ed curriculum approved by the state. Large numbers of students are getting no sex education at all. That may be what DeSanths wants.
Legum writes:
In May 2023, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis (R) signed Florida House Bill 1069, a law that requires sex education classes in the state to conform to right-wing ideology. Specifically, the law requires all sex education classes to teach students that sex is binary, “either male or female,” even though that is inaccurate. It also mandates that students are instructed that sex is defined exclusively by “internal and external genitalia present at birth,” and these sex roles are “binary, stable, and unchangeable.” This requirement erases the existence of trans and nonbinary people. Schools also must “teach abstinence from sexual activity outside of marriage as the expected standard for all school-age students” and “the benefits of monogamous heterosexual marriage.”
To enforce these new rules and other aspects of the DeSantis administration’s political agenda, HB 1069 also requires “all materials used to teach reproductive health” to be approved in advance by the Florida Department of Education (FDE) or use textbooks pre-approved by the state. Previously, sex education curricula were approved by district school boards. Florida parents can opt-out of sex education lessons on behalf of their children.
The FDE instructed school districts to submit their materials for sex education by September 30, 2023. The school districts met the deadline, but the FDE never responded. Florida counties were placed in a no-win situation as not teaching sex education, a mandatory course, at all is a violation of state law.
Several Florida school districts — including Hillsborough, Orange and Polk Counties, three of Florida’s largest — decided not to teach sex education at all during the 2023-24 school year, the Orlando Sentinel reported. Other counties, including Broward and Seminole Counties, taught sex education classes without getting the legally required approval.
Legum reviewed a copy of the training materials for reviewers of district plans. Among other things, it requires these “experts” to watch for the following criteria:
The “experts” are directed to evaluate all materials on 11 separate criteria, some inscrutable. For example, all materials must be evaluated on the criteria of “Male and Female Reproductive Roles,” “Principles of Individual Freedom,” “Critical Race Theory,” and “Social Justice.”
Please open the link to learn more about how the Florida Department of Education trains reviewers of district plans.
Kavitha Surana of ProPublica wrote the story of what happened to Amber Nicole Thurman. She died because it was illegal in Georgia to give her the care she needed when she needed it. She didn’t have to die. The anti-abortion Republican legislators in her state killed her. The “pro-life” movement killed her. The conservative majority on the U.S. Supreme Court killed her. Governor Brian Kemp killed her. Shameful!
She’d taken abortion pills and encountered a rare complication; she had not expelled all of the fetal tissue from her body. She showed up at Piedmont Henry Hospital in need of a routine procedure to clear it from her uterus, called a dilation and curettage, or D&C.
In her final hours, Amber Nicole Thurman suffered from a grave infection that her suburban Atlanta hospital was well-equipped to treat.
But just that summer, her state had made performing the procedure a felony, with few exceptions. Any doctor who violated the new Georgia law could be prosecuted and face up to a decade in prison.
Thurman waited in pain in a hospital bed, worried about what would happen to her 6-year-old son, as doctors monitored her infection spreading, her blood pressure sinking and her organs beginning to fail.
It took 20 hours for doctors to finally operate. By then, it was too late.
The otherwise healthy 28-year-old medical assistant, who had her sights set on nursing school, should not have died, an official state committee recently concluded.
Tasked with examining pregnancy-related deaths to improve maternal health, the experts, including 10 doctors, deemed hers “preventable” and said the hospital’s delay in performing the critical procedure had a “large” impact on her fatal outcome.
Their reviews of individual patient cases are not made public. But ProPublica obtained reports that confirm that at least two women have already died after they couldn’t access legal abortions and timely medical care in their state.
There are almost certainly others.
Committees like the one in Georgia, set up in each state, often operate with a two-year lag behind the cases they examine, meaning that experts are only now beginning to delve into deaths that took place after the Supreme Court overturned the federal right to abortion.
Thurman’s case marks the first time an abortion-related death, officially deemed “preventable,” is coming to public light. ProPublica will share the story of the second in the coming days. We are also exploring other deaths that have not yet been reviewed but appear to be connected to abortion bans.
Doctors warned state legislators women would die if medical procedures sometimes needed to save lives became illegal.
Though Republican lawmakers who voted for state bans on abortion say the laws have exceptions to protect the “life of the mother,” medical experts cautioned that the language is not rooted in science and ignores the fast-moving realities of medicine.
The most restrictive state laws, experts predicted, would pit doctors’ fears of prosecution against their patients’ health needs, requiring providers to make sure their patient was inarguably on the brink of death or facing “irreversible” harm when they intervened with procedures like a D&C.
“They would feel the need to wait for a higher blood pressure, wait for a higher fever — really got to justify this one — bleed a little bit more,” Dr. Melissa Kottke, an OB-GYN at Emory, warned lawmakers in 2019 during one of the hearings over Georgia’s ban.
Doctors and a nurse involved in Thurman’s care declined to explain their thinking and did not respond to questions from ProPublica. Communications staff from the hospital did not respond to multiple requests for comment. Georgia’s Department of Public Health, which oversees the state maternal mortality review committee, said it cannot comment on ProPublica’s reporting because the committee’s cases are confidential and protected by federal law.
The availability of D&Cs for both abortions and routine miscarriage care helped save lives after the 1973 Supreme Court ruling in Roe v. Wade, studies show, reducing the rate of maternal deaths for women of color by up to 40% the first year after abortion became legal.
Such stories have been at the center of the upcoming presidential election, during which the right to abortion is on the ballot in 10 states.
But Republican legislators have rejected small efforts to expand and clarify health exceptions — even in Georgia, which has one of the nation’s highest rates of maternal mortality and where Black women are three times more likely to die from pregnancy-related complications than white women.
When its law went into effect in July 2022, Gov. Brian Kemp said he was “overjoyed” and believed the state had found an approach that would keep women “safe, healthy and informed.”
After advocates tried to block the ban in court, arguing the law put women in danger, attorneys for the state of Georgia accused them of “hyperbolic fear mongering.”
Two weeks later, Thurman was dead.
Thurman and her son in a photo she posted on social media the year before her death Credit: via Facebook
Thurman, who carried the full load of a single parent, loved being a mother. Every chance she got, she took her son to petting zoos, to pop-up museums and on planned trips, like one to a Florida beach. “The talks I have with my son are everything,” she posted on social media.
But when she learned she was pregnant with twins in the summer of 2022, she quickly decided she needed to preserve her newfound stability, her best friend, Ricaria Baker, told ProPublica. Thurman and her son had recently moved out of her family’s home and into a gated apartment complex with a pool, and she was planning to enroll in nursing school.
The timing could not have been worse. On July 20, the day Georgia’s law banning abortion at six weeks went into effect, her pregnancy had just passed that mark, according to records her family shared with ProPublica.
Thurman wanted a surgical abortion close to home and held out hope as advocates tried to get the ban paused in court, Baker said. But as her pregnancy progressed to its ninth week, she couldn’t wait any longer. She scheduled a D&C in North Carolina, where abortion at that stage was still legal, and on Aug. 13 woke up at 4 a.m. to make the journey with her best friend.
On their drive, they hit standstill traffic, Baker said. The clinic couldn’t hold Thurman’s spot longer than 15 minutes — it was inundated with women from other states where bans had taken effect. Instead, a clinic employee offered Thurman a two-pill abortion regimen approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, mifepristone and misoprostol. Her pregnancy was well within the standard of care for that treatment.
Getting to the clinic had required scheduling a day off from work, finding a babysitter, making up an excuse to borrow a relative’s car and walking through a crowd of anti-abortion protesters. Thurman didn’t want to reschedule, Baker said.
At the clinic, Thurman sat through a counseling session in which she was told how to safely take the pills and instructed to go to the emergency room if complications developed. She signed a release saying she understood. She took the first pill there and insisted on driving home before any symptoms started, Baker said. She took the second pill the next day, as directed.
Deaths due to complications from abortion pills are extremely rare. Out of nearly 6 million women who’ve taken mifepristone in the U.S. since 2000, 32 deaths were reported to the FDA through 2022, regardless of whether the drug played a role. Of those, 11 patients developed sepsis. Most of the remaining cases involved intentional and accidental drug overdoses, suicide, homicide and ruptured ectopic pregnancies.
Baker and Thurman spoke every day that week. At first, there was only cramping, which Thurman expected. But days after she took the second pill, the pain increased and blood was soaking through more than one pad per hour. If she had lived nearby, the clinic in North Carolina would have performed a D&C for free as soon as she followed up, the executive director told ProPublica. But Thurman was four hours away.
On the evening of Aug. 18, Thurman vomited blood and passed out at home, according to 911 call logs. Her boyfriend called for an ambulance. Thurman arrived at Piedmont Henry Hospital in Stockbridge at 6:51 p.m.
ProPublica obtained the summary narrative of Thurman’s hospital stay provided to the maternal mortality review committee, as well as the group’s findings. The narrative is based on Thurman’s medical records, with identifying information removed. The committee does not interview doctors involved with the case or ask hospitals to respond to its findings. ProPublica also consulted with medical experts, including members of the committee, about the timeline of events.
Within Thurman’s first hours at the hospital, which says it is staffed at all hours with an OB who specializes in hospital care, it should have been clear that she was in danger, medical experts told ProPublica.
Her lower abdomen was tender, according to the summary. Her white blood cell count was critically high and her blood pressure perilously low — at one point, as Thurman got up to go to the bathroom, she fainted again and hit her head. Doctors noted a foul odor during a pelvic exam, and an ultrasound showed possible tissue in her uterus.
The standard treatment of sepsis is to start antibiotics and immediately seek and remove the source of the infection. For a septic abortion, that would include removing any remaining tissue from the uterus. One of the hospital network’s own practices describes a D&C as a “fairly common, minor surgical procedure” to be used after a miscarriage to remove fetal tissue.
After assessing her at 9:38 p.m., doctors started Thurman on antibiotics and an IV drip, the summary said. The OB-GYN noted the possibility of doing a D&C the next day.
But that didn’t happen the following morning, even when an OB diagnosed “acute severe sepsis.” By 5:14 a.m., Thurman was breathing rapidly and at risk of bleeding out, according to her vital signs. Even five liters of IV fluid had not moved her blood pressure out of the danger zone. Doctors escalated the antibiotics.
Instead of performing the newly criminalized procedure, they continued to gather information and dispense medicine, the summary shows.
Doctors had Thurman tested for sexually transmitted diseases and pneumonia.
They placed her on Levophed, a powerful blood pressure support that could do nothing to treat the infection and posed a new threat: The medication can constrict blood flow so much that patients could need an amputation once stabilized.
At 6:45 a.m., Thurman’s blood pressure continued to dip, and she was taken to the intensive care unit.
At 7:14 a.m., doctors discussed initiating a D&C. But it still didn’t happen. Two hours later, lab work indicated her organs were failing, according to experts who read her vital signs.
At 12:05 p.m., more than 17 hours after Thurman had arrived, a doctor who specializes in intensive care notified the OB-GYN that her condition was deteriorating.
Thurman was finally taken to an operating room at 2 p.m.
By then, the situation was so dire that doctors started with open abdominal surgery. They found that her bowel needed to be removed, but it was too risky to operate because not enough blood was flowing to the area — a possible complication from the blood pressure medication, an expert explained to ProPublica. The OB performed the D&C but immediately continued with a hysterectomy.
During surgery, Thurman’s heart stopped.
Her mother was praying in the waiting room when one of the doctors approached. “Come walk with me,” she said.
Until she got the call from the hospital, her mother had no idea Thurman had been pregnant. She recalled her daughter’s last words before she was wheeled into surgery — they had made no sense coming from a vibrant young woman who seemed to have her whole life ahead of her:
“Promise me you’ll take care of my son.”
Thurman and her son in a selfie she posted online in 2020, two years before her death Credit: via Facebook
Candi Miller’s health was so fragile, doctors warned having another baby could kill her.
But when the mother of three realized she had unintentionally gotten pregnant in the fall of 2022, Georgia’s new abortion ban gave her no choice. Although it made exceptions for acute, life-threatening emergencies, it didn’t account for chronic conditions, even those known to present lethal risks later in pregnancy.
At 41, Miller had lupus, diabetes and hypertension and didn’t want to wait until the situation became dire. So she avoided doctors and navigated an abortion on her own — a path many health experts feared would increase risks when women in America lost the constitutional right to obtain legal, medically supervised abortions.
Miller ordered abortion pills online, but she did not expel all the fetal tissue and would need a dilation and curettage procedure to clear it from her uterus and stave off sepsis, a grave and painful infection. In many states, this care, known as a D&C, is routine for both abortions and miscarriages. In Georgia, performing it had recently been made a felony, with few exceptions.
Due to Georgia’s harsh abortion law, she did not get the routine care that would have saved her life. She was killed by the law.
Candi Miller with her husband and her two children.
Joyce Vance is a lawyer. She served for eight years as US Attorney for the Northern District of Alabama, appointed by President Barack Obama. She blogs at Civil Discourse. This post could be subtitled “Ladies, Don’t Worry your pretty little head about ‘rights.”
She writes:
This is what was on Trump’s mind at 11:49 p.m. last night.
What did he intend? Were patriarchal family-man types supposed to read it to their wives and daughters while they did chores and prepared meals? It certainly reads that way. You can easily imagine Trump hoping these men would say to the women in their lives: You’re worse off and less healthy than you were four years ago; less safe, more depressed, less happy. Or maybe American women are just supposed to take Trump’s word for it.
Women celebrate in Washington DC after Joe Biden wins the presidency in 2020
Trump thinks women can be told that they are less confident about the future than they were four years ago and they will simply accept it. Women will get on Truth Social, read his post, and think, I don’t need to worry anymore because Donald Trump will fix all of that.
These women are looking pretty happy about not-Donald Trump
Donald Trump to women: If you will just listen to Donald Trump, the national nightmare you are enduring will be over.
Winning ticket
Donald Trump also wants you to know, if you’re a woman voter, that you won’t have to think about abortion anymore if he’s president. Why? Apparently, because abortion will be one less right to worry about since you won’t have it anymore. Say goodbye to what remains of your control over your health care. But it will be okay, Donald Trump tells you: It will make you happy.
Trump says in one breath that there are “powerful exceptions” to his abortion bans while also saying that the status of a woman’s right to an abortion is up to her state. Many of those states don’t have exceptions for the mother’s health or have passed laws criminalizing abortion so doctors are afraid to provide care to women until it’s too late. In some of those states, attorneys general are threatening to prevent women from leaving the state to obtain abortion care or to prosecute them for doing so.
“I will protect women at a level never seen before,” Trump concludes. “They will finally be healthy, hopeful, safe, and secure. Their lives will be happy, beautiful, and great again.” He writes it with all the fervor of a man envisioning a future that is part “Stepford Wives” and part “The Handmaid’s Tale.” Trump: You will be happy. Your life will be beautiful. It will be that way because I say so. It is not up to you.
That’s the future Donald Trump has in store for American women.
Donald Trump is a lunatic. I don’t say that casually. His post from last night was a stark reminder of what it’s like to live in Donald Trump’s America. I’m sure you all remember it—waking up in the middle of the night to check Twitter for news of unfolding disasters. Had he praised a dictator, enacted a Muslim ban, separated children from their parents at the border, called white nationalists “decent people”? What would be next? Don’t worry your pretty little heads about that, he’s telling women now.
We are 45 days away from the election. We all know the assignment. We are never ever getting back together with Donald Trump. Never ever.
In 2020, early exit polls showed Biden winning the votes of 57 percent of women. A majority of American women were eager to end Trump’s power over their lives. If the best argument Trump has to convince those women to vote for him is that they’ll lose more rights while he tells them to be happy about it, well, good luck with that.
Here’s some better advice for women:
It’s okay to vote for Kamala Harris, even if you’re a lifelong Republican voter.
If you don’t want to, you don’t have to tell anyone the truth about who you voted for.
Women should be able to make their own choices about their healthcare, and they shouldn’t have to watch their daughters suffer and even die because of Donald Trump’s abortion bans. Woman and their families should have access to IVF. Try telling men they can’t get lifesaving medical care, or even a prescription for Viagra, and see how far that gets you. Don’t vote for someone who treats you like a second-class citizen.
Donald Trump is losing women from inside of his fold. It’s not just Liz Cheney and the never Trumpers. Dawn Roberts, the Iowa state co-chair of the Nikki Haley’s campaign and a lifelong Republican, endorsed Kamala Harris, telling The Des Moines Register, “My husband, Steve, often questioned why the U.S. has never had a female president. I think the time is now and Kamala Harris is the person to lead our country into the future.”
Iowan Harris supporter Dawn Roberts, lifelong Republican
Donald Trump complains that Kamala Harris is too joyful, that she laughs too much. Trump thrives on a dark vision of America in chaos, casting himself in the role of faux superhero coming to save us all. He benefits from fearmongering. Trump made the deliberate choice to talk about “American carnage” in his inaugural address in 2020. As he loses votes among women, Trump resorts to telling us what to think and how to feel. It has nothing to do with our well-being and everything to do with helping him win the election. Sorry Donald. We are not going back.
At Governor DeSantis’ insistence, Florida enacted one of the toughest abortion bans in the nation. Abortion is banned in the state at six weeks of pregnancy. Very few, if any, women know they are pregnant at six weeks. Advocates for reproductive rights immediately began mobilizing to fight the abortion ban. They drafted a proposed amendment to the state constitution that would protect a woman’s right to an abortion. Despite DeSantis’ opposition, they gathered signatures, fought legal battles, and got the measure on the November ballot, where it is called Amendment 4.
The Orlando Sentinel reports on the latest state plot to deceive voters:
Florida health officials reiterated Thursday that state law allows abortions at any point in pregnancy to save the life of the mother, responding to concerns that Florida’s new six-week abortion ban is tying doctors’ hands and putting women in danger.
The state’s “provider alert” said abortions can be performed “to save the pregnant woman’s life or avert a serious risk of substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function.”Failing to provide that “life-saving treatment” could constitute medical malpractice, the Florida Agency for Health Care Administration and the Florida Department of Health warned in a notice to providers distributed by email and social media.The notice was released a day after several doctors supporting Amendment 4 — which would enshrine abortion rights into the state constitution — said in news conference that the exceptions in Florida’s abortion ban aren’t real exceptions.
“These so-called exceptions are a mirage,” said Dr. Jerry Goodman, a Sarasota-based OB-GYN, who spoke at the pro-Amendment 4 event on Wednesday. “Patients face overwhelming legal and procedural and logistical hurdles making accessing care nearly impossible, particularly at three ‘o clock in the morning when these emergencies often arise.”Florida’s abortion ban, which went into effect May 1, has exceptions up to 15 weeks for pregnancies resulting from rape, incest, or human trafficking, or if a “fatal fetal abnormality” is detected, the notice added. The memo included a line in bold that “a miscarriage is not an abortion.”
Abortions are permissible for women who experience premature rupture of membranes, as well as ectopic or molar pregnancies, all of which are serious complications, according to the memo.
But several doctors supporting Amendment 4 said at the news conference that the state’s abortion exceptions could be hard to meet. For instance, the law requires women who are raped to provide legal documentation, such as a police report, a barrier that the doctors said can delay care or block access.
The state’s ban has sparked fear and led to confusion over what constitutes a serious health risk under Florida’s “narrow medical exceptions,” according to a report from Physicians for Human Rights released on Tuesday.
“Several clinicians described cases of being required by their hospitals to wait until patients become ‘sick enough’ to qualify for care,” the report found.
A physician who performs an illegal abortion could face a third-degree felony charge punishable by up to five years in prison and a $5,000 fine.
State officials said they issued the notice in response to “misinformation” about Florida’s abortion laws.
Their guidance comes as voters prepare to take up Amendment 4, which would overturn the state’s six-week ban and protect abortion access up until viability, typically defined as about 24 weeks of pregnancy. If approved by at least 60% of voters in November, it also would guarantee abortion access “when necessary to protect the patient’s health, as determined by the patient’s health care provider.”
Dr. Chelsea Daniels, a Miami-based provider, also urged voters to support Amendment 4. She said she has seen patients with nonviable pregnancies who have been turned away from care.
“I saw a patient a few weeks ago who came to me with four ultrasounds from four different clinics showing a nonviable pregnancy and she was still carrying this pregnancy when she came to me,” Daniels said.
Opponents argue Amendment 4 is vague and misleads voters by failing to define key terms like “viability” and “healthcare provider.” A group called Physicians Against Amendment 4 denounced the measure at an event earlier this month in Orlando, calling it “overreaching,” “too permissive” and “irresponsible.”
Gov. Ron DeSantis and state officials have been under fire from critics who accuse them of unlawfully using taxpayer resources to try to sway the results of Amendment 4. The agency launched a webpage earlier this month, proclaiming that existing Florida law “protects women” while the initiative enshrining abortion rights into the state constitution “threatens women’s safety.”
It also released a “public service announcement” video that includes information about Florida’s abortion laws and an assurance that “Florida cares about women and families.”
Two lawsuits have been filed challenging the agency’s webpage, and Florida Democrats have pushed for a criminal investigation.
Florida law stipulates that “no employee in the career service” shall “use the authority of his or her position to secure support for, or oppose, any candidate, party, or issue in a partisan election or affect the results thereof.”
State officials, though, say the website is informational and complies with that law.
About the same time, a Florida judge ordered an ob-gyn doctor in Orlando to pay a $10,000 fine for performing 193 abortions after the law passed and was caught up in litigation. The doctor and the clinic where she worked tried to get information from the state about when he law went into effect. Getting no response, the doctor continued to provide abortions. The judge acknowledged that the doctor and the clinic unknowingly violated the law but decided that they broke the law and needed to be punished. The clinic was fined $193,000, a fine of $1,000 for each abortion.
Courage and independent thinking show up at unexpected times and unexpected places. That was the case today in North Dakota, where a judge overturned the state’s near-total ban on abortion. It was the second time he had thrown out the ban. After the first time, the legislature revised the ban and passed it again.
A North Dakota judge overturned the state’s near-total abortion ban on Thursday, saying that the State Constitution protected a woman’s right to abortion until the fetus was viable.
“The North Dakota Constitution guarantees each individual, including women, the fundamental right to make medical judgments affecting his or her bodily integrity, health and autonomy, in consultation with a chosen health care provider free from government interference,” wrote Judge Bruce Romanick of the district court in Burleigh County.
The judge, who was elected to his position, also ruled that the law violated the State Constitution’s due process protections because it was too vague in how it defined exceptions to the ban.
The decision is almost certain to be appealed. And while the judge’s order means that abortion will become legal soon, the procedure will remain unavailable because the only clinic in the state has closed, according to the Center for Reproductive Rights, which brought the suit in 2022 on behalf of that clinic.
The Red River Women’s Clinic, the state’s last remaining provider of abortion services, closed in August 2022 and relocated to Moorhead, Minnesota.
When Project 2025, the definitive guide to Trump’s second term, began to generate negative reactions, Trump claimed he was taken by surprise. All of a sudden, he played dumb about Project 2025: He said he didn’t know who was behind it and had barely heard about it.
Donald Trump and his campaign may have disavowed it, but don’t think for a moment that Project 2025 is going anywhere. A newly released hidden camera interview with one of the project’s authors, who also served in Trump’s Cabinet, reveals that the Republican nominee has “blessed it.”
First, a little background.
Project 2025, the MAGA blueprint to completely overhaul the federal government, is being spearheaded by the Heritage Foundation, the daddy of conservative think tanks, with input from more than 100 other right-wing organizations. “The Mandate for Leadership 2025: The Conservative Promise,” the official title, consists of four pillars:
A 900-page policy guide for a second Trump term
A playbook for the first 180 days, consisting of 350 executive orders and regulations that have already been written
A LinkedIn-style database of potential MAGA personnel
A “Presidential Administration Academy,” a training guide for political appointees to be ready on day one
On July 24, Russell Vought, Trump’s former director of the Office of Management and Budget, Project 2025 author and Republican National Convention policy director, met with two people he thought were potential donors to his conservative group, Center for Renewing America. They were actually working for a British nonprofit trying to expose information about Project 2025. The two secretly recorded the two-hour conversation.
In the video posted on CNN, Vought described the project as the “tip of the America First spear.” He said that after meeting with Trump in recent months, the former president “is very supportive of what we do.” The project would create “shadow agencies” that wouldn’t be subject to the same scrutiny as actual agencies of the federal government. Vought also told members of the British nonprofit that he was in charge of writing the second phase of Project 2025, consisting of the hundreds of executive orders ready to go on day one of a new administration.
When asked how the information would be disseminated, his deputy said it would be distributed old-school, on paper. “You don’t actually, like, send them to their work emails,” he said, to avoid discovery under the Freedom of Information Act.
Last week, ProPublica, an investigative journalism nonprofit, obtained more than 14 hours of training videos, which are part of Project 2025’s effort to recruit and train tens of thousands of right-wing appointees to replace a wide and deep swath of current federal civil servants.
“We need to flood the zone with conservatives,” said Paul Dans, who was in charge of Project 2025 until he was fired because it’s become such a headache for Trump. “This is a clarion call to come to Washington,” Dans said in 2023.
Project 2025 is not a new plan; it has been in the works for decades. The first version was published just after Ronald Reagan took office in 1981. In 2015 the Heritage Foundation gave the incoming Trump administration the seventh iteration. Should you think that Trump and his cronies know nothing about any of this, the Heritage Foundation boasted that Trump instituted 64% of the policy recommendations in that document, including leaving the Paris Climate Accords.
Trump has tried and largely failed to distance himself from Project 2025. Perhaps because two high-ranking members of his administration were directors of the project. On Truth Social, Trump posted, “I know nothing about Project 2025. I have no idea who is behind it….” As for those training videos, most of the speakers in them are former Trump administration officials.
Many of Project 2025’s recommendations are deeply unpopular with Americans. A survey conducted by YouGov found that almost 60% of respondents opposed several big tenets, including: eliminating the Department of Education, giving tax cuts to corporations, ending the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare), and changing the law to allow the president to fire civil servants.
It is difficult to convince voters that the project’s policy recommendations are real because they are so radical. Anat Shenker-Osorio, a political strategist, spoke about the challenges of discussing Project 2025 with focus groups on the podcast “The Wilderness.”
“When we actually cut and paste verbatim from the Heritage document, people are like, that’s a bunch of bull****. Like, why did you make that up? And what is wrong with you? And why are you lying to us?” she said.
To that end, here are just a few of the most democracy-threatening suggestions, verbatim:
On child labor: “With parental consent and proper training, certain young adults should be allowed to learn and work in more dangerous occupations.”
On education: “Federal education policy should be limited and, ultimately, the Federal Department of Education should be eliminated.“
On climate change: “Climate-change research should be disbanded … The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) should be broken up and downsized.”
On LGBTQ+ rights: “The next secretary should also reverse the Biden Administration’s focus on ‘LGBTQ+ equity,’ subsidizing single-motherhood, disincentivizing work, and penalizing marriage, replacing such policies with those encouraging marriage, work, motherhood, fatherhood, and nuclear families.”
On families: “Families comprised of a married mother, father, and their children are the foundation of a well-ordered nation and healthy society … The male-female dyad is essential to human nature and … every child has a right to a mother and father.”
Not to mention several highly publicized recommendations on abortion and women’s rights that are an effort to return to America of the 1950s.
The architects of and adherents to Project 2025 want a white, heterosexual Christian nation. The ideals of our 250-year-old form of government, in which majority rules, are anathema to them. They want to inflict their beliefs on everyone, representative democracy be damned.
I cannot state it strongly enough: Project 2025, with Donald Trump at the helm, is the greatest existential threat to American democracy in recent history. And make no mistake, should Trump win in November, he will usher in many if not most of the project’s recommendations.
Perhaps Project 2025 should be referred to as Project 1925. In Trump’s mind, that was the time that America was “great,” and they want to go back to that era of low taxes, no abortions, white Christian male domination, no civil rights laws, low taxes, and a very limited federal government.
Diane Ravitch's blog 