Wicker Defends States’ Role in Abortion Decisions

This summer marks two years since the U.S. Supreme Court struck down Roe v. Wade's federal abortion standard. Their decision did not spell the end of abortion in the country. Instead, it gave states the decision-making authority over this contentious matter.

Since then, Americans on all sides of the abortion debate have been able to lobby for their position in state legislatures and ballot initiatives.

As a result, some states, like Mississippi, have reduced abortion services while increasing care for mothers and families. Meanwhile, other states have become more pro-abortion.

Instead of letting states decide through bottom-up discussions, the president has been forcing top-down mandates on the states. I have been working to keep that authority in state hands.

President Tries To Find Pro-Abortion Workarounds

After the Supreme Court's ruling, leaders at the Department of Defense (DOD) began looking for excuses to implement the president's pro-abortion agenda. They manufactured a crisis, claiming that the end of Roe would weaken military readiness and harm service member retention.

The DOD began offering a policy meant to facilitate abortion for service members - all on the taxpayer's dime.

It is illegal to use public funds for abortion, and the administration's behavior was a thinly-veiled effort to guarantee federal support for the procedure. There is also no crisis. I forced the DOD to reveal the facts about their policy. They admitted that it was used only 12 times, indicating that there was no risk to readiness or retention.

Biden Administration Targets Pro-Life Centers

Other presidential officials have worked to secure abortion access at the federal level.

The Secretary of Health and Human Services, Xavier Becerra, already had a history of targeting pro-life pregnancy centers when he worked for the government of California. In his new role in Washington, he has continued his crusade. He issued a plan to withhold grant funding from pregnancy centers or programs that provide alternatives to abortion.

The secretary's pro-abortion agenda motivated him. In addition to pregnancy care, these centers provide numerous services, all of which meet the goals of the government's grant program.

I have joined a bicameral group of lawmakers to express our opposition to Secretary Becerra's idea. Numerous pro-life organizations endorsed our efforts. So far, we have kept that plan from going into effect.

President's Abortion Agenda Endangers Patients

The Biden administration has been so determined to expand abortion access that it has proceeded with policies even when those actions put women and girls at risk.

After Roe was overturned, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) loosened restrictions on a drug called mifepristone, which performs what are known as chemical abortions.

The FDA warns that taking mifepristone will cause roughly one in 25 women to visit the emergency room. Because of this danger, the drug was originally brought to market on the condition that it be taken in the presence of a doctor. The FDA did away with that requirement, leaving some women alone when complications arise.

A group of doctors sued the FDA for taking these risks, and I helped file a legal brief in support of their case. The Supreme Court ultimately ruled that the doctors were not able to bring the lawsuit. Though we lost this battle, we will continue fighting.

While the Biden administration continues pursuing its pro-abortion agenda, pro-life advocates will continue doing what we have always done: working through our legislative and legal systems to promote a culture of life.

Public link

Please use the above public link if you want to share this noodl on another website.