The Department of Justice launched the Reproductive Rights Task Force earlier this week in an attempt by the Biden administration to thwart state abortion restrictions.
The task force. which is headed by Associate Attorney General Vanita Gupta, will mobilize the DOJ to try to continue making abortion accessible in all 50 states even though the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in its decision on Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health and returned the regulation of abortion back to the states.
In describing the mission of the task force, Gupta said,
“As Attorney General Garland has said, the Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision is a devastating blow to reproductive freedom in the United State. The Court abandoned 50 years of precedent and took away the constitutional right to abortion, preventing women all over the country from being able to make critical decisions about our bodies, our health, and our futures. The Justice Department is committed to protecting access to reproductive services.”
The task force will monitor and evaluate any state and local actions that:
The Reproductive Rights Task Force will also work with “reproductive service providers, advocates, and state attorneys general.” The task force will also encourage lawyers to take up the cases of patients and abortion providers and work with Congress to pass abortion legislation.
Attorney General Merrick Garland has been highly critical of the Supreme Court’s decision in the Dobbs case. “The Supreme Court has eliminated an established right that has been an essential component of women’s liberty for half a century — a right that has safeguarded women’s ability to participate fully and equally in society,” he said. “And in renouncing this fundamental right, which it had repeatedly recognized and reaffirmed, the Court has upended the doctrine of stare decisis, a key pillar of the rule of law.”
One of Garland and the Biden administration’s frequent assertions is that Mifepristone, commonly called “the abortion pill,” is safe and cannot be banned by states. According to some doctors, however, the pill has had no effective studies performed and is pushed by population control advocates. These doctors argue that Mifepristone is not safe.
The pro-abortion Guttmacher Institute has found that 54 percent of abortions are induced by pills, meaning that if Garland is able to prevail with this task force, states that have banned abortion would be unable to restrict the drug responsible for the majority of abortions.
Not everyone agrees with that assertion, however. Roger Severino, vice president of domestic policy at the Heritage Foundation, said,
“The states that are protecting unborn life concede that abortion drugs are exceedingly good at what they’re designed to do. So they are not questioning the efficacy of these drugs based on the FDA judgment. They’re using the FDA findings to say yes, these drugs we agree do kill unborn life. That’s what they’re designed to do. And that’s why they should not be used in those pro-life states.”
Stephen Billy, vice president of state affairs for Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, has stated that the organization will work with partners to fight the new federal effort to interfere in state laws. A legal battle is almost certain to ensue.
The DOJ continues to act as a political organization, targeting anyone who questions leftist views. The Biden administration politicized the FDA when it lifted the already weak restrictions on Mifepristone, including allowing women to receive the pill by mail without going to see a doctor. Prior to the Dobbs ruling, states have required that women visit a doctor before receiving the drug, and many states will likely move to ban it regardless of the DOJ’s warnings.
This is another example of the federal government attempting to trample states’ rights and force them to permit abortion regardless of what the people of their state say. States should force this issue in the courts and have the right to ban the drug within their jurisdiction.
Garland’s statement is troubling for two reasons. Garland, who is not only Attorney General but was once a nominee for the Supreme Court, shows either a lack of understanding or a denial of the Constitution. It should be clearly stated again that the Court did not deviate from the Constitution nor did it remove a right guaranteed by the Constitution. What it did was restore the right of voters to govern themselves.
Roe v. Wade was a woefully unconstitutional decision where the Court unilaterally created the right to an abortion — a decision that was reserved for legislatures.
Also concerning was his statement that implies that women are only equal and fully able to participate in society if they have the right to kill their child. Garland seems to imply that a woman who experiences an unplanned pregnancy is somehow no longer a functioning member of society. This is a flawed view of personal responsibility, as well as of children. Children do not prevent women from participating as equal members of society. Do they add responsibility and change priorities? Yes, of course, but Garland’s statement is a slap in the face to all women, particularly mothers who not only don’t become helpless slaves who are looked down on when they have children but who continue to have impactful careers and contribute to their families and communities.
The view espoused by Garland and many others shows that they do not understand womanhood. The ability to become pregnant and have a baby is not a curse, it is a blessing. In Genesis 3:20, directly after she had given him the forbidden fruit to eat and the two were cursed, Adam named his wife Eve, “because she was the mother of all the living.” In John 16:21 Jesus spoke of a woman forgetting the sorrow of childbirth due to the joy she feels after a child has been born into the world. Women have the blessing of carrying and bringing new life to the world. This is a unique blessing given to women and should be seen as such.