Anti-abortion advocates have long held that granting personhood rights to fetuses and embryos would guarantee a national abortion ban. But now, some House Republicans are arguing that’s not the case.
At least nine Republicans in competitive House races have co-sponsored the Life at Conception Act at one point in their congressional careers. The bill would grant rights under the 14th Amendment from “the moment of fertilization” and has no exceptions, but it does say that a woman cannot be prosecuted “for the death of her unborn child.”
But because the bill does not have the word “abortion” in it, some Republicans are arguing it’s not actually a ban at all.
At a recent debate for Iowa’s 1st District, Christina Bohannan, the Democratic candidate, went after Rep. Mariannette Miller-Meeks for backing the bill, saying that it “bans all abortions across the country with no exceptions at all.” Miller-Meeks, in response, said that was “untrue” because “the Life at Conception Act as I understand, if I recall correctly, didn’t mention abortion.” Her campaign did not respond to NOTUS’ request for comment.
Trending
In Nebraska’s 2nd District, GOP Rep. Don Bacon’s most recent position is that he supports the state’s 12-week abortion ban. But his challenger, Democratic state Sen. Tony Vargas, said during a debate that Bacon was “hiding his position” after co-sponsoring the Life at Conception Act three different times.
“The bill he’s referring to doesn’t even mention the word abortion in it,” Bacon said. He added that, instead, the legislation is simply “a statement of principle that the unborn child has rights.” Bacon’s campaign did not respond to NOTUS’ request for comment.
If the Life at Conception Act is not a total federal abortion ban, that may be a surprise to the bill’s latest lead sponsor, Rep. Alex Mooney of West Virginia, who argues it is.
“The Life at Conception Act would require protection for the preborn under the 14th Amendment,” Mooney said in a press release when he reintroduced the bill this past January. “As a result, preborn babies would be entitled to legal protection under the Constitution as enforced by the states. This legislation would also set a standard for promoting and encouraging a culture of life.”
Mooney’s office did not respond to NOTUS’ request for comment.
The bill’s use of the 14th Amendment was similar to the argument made by some anti-abortion advocates supporting Roe v. Wade in 1973 — that the 14th Amendment inherently made abortion illegal.
In their ruling on Roe, the Supreme Court justices ultimately disagreed and said that the 14th Amendment “does not include the unborn,” but if it did, they wrote at the time, abortion would not be allowed in the U.S. because “the fetus’ right to life would then be guaranteed.” In the 2022 Dobbs v. Jackson decision overturning Roe, the justices found that the Constitution does not have abortion protections, but did not answer whether it grants protections to fetuses or embryos.
Former GOP Rep. Yvette Herrell, who is challenging Democratic Rep. Gabe Vasquez in New Mexico, also cosponsored the Life at Conception Act, but said in a recent ad that she “will not support a national abortion ban.” When asked by the Santa Fe New Mexican about the discrepancy, her campaign said the personhood bill was a “messaging bill that acknowledges that babies have the constitutional right to life before they are born.”
Paul Smith, a spokesperson for Herrell, told NOTUS she “would not vote for a federal abortion ban,” but did not clarify whether she would again support the Life at Conception Act.
Of the nine vulnerable Republicans who have previously co-sponsored the Life at Conception Act, only two, Reps. Scott Perry and Michelle Steel, did so this congressional term. Steel ultimately withdrew her co-sponsorship over concerns that the bill could restrict IVF but Perry remains a cosponsor. He told NOTUS in an emailed statement that he “respect[s] the sanctity of all human life, while supporting exceptions for rape, incest, and the life of the mother,” although he did not elaborate on the Life at Conception Act’s lack of exceptions.
Abortion has increasingly become politically tricky for Republicans in the aftermath of the Dobbs decision. Reps. David Schweikert, David Valadao and Mike Garcia were all previously co-sponsors of the bill but were not during the 118th Congress. (Former Rep. Mayra Flores was also previously a co-sponsor and running again this year).
Even as these House Republicans try to distance themselves from the Life at Conception Act, the belief that the 14th Amendment could extend protection to fetuses is still held in the Republican Party’s platform, which says “that the States are, therefore, free to pass Laws protecting those Rights.”
While anti-abortion advocates have criticized former President Donald Trump for cutting decades-old language calling for a federal abortion restriction from the platform, they also cautiously celebrated that it kept language saying that “the 14th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States guarantees that no person can be denied Life or Liberty.”
Bills to grant personhood rights to fetuses have been introduced multiple times in Congress. The Life at Conception Act was first introduced in 2004 by the late Sen. James Inhofe and has been reintroduced in Congress at least 15 times since.
GOP strategist Liz Mair told NOTUS that even as some Republicans try to argue that the bill is not a ban, “it sounds likely to function as an abortion ban or be interpreted as one.”
“I imagine they’re trying to argue it’s a protection against abortion,” she added. “As usual, the devil is in the details and legislative drafting is really tricky, but I suspect people who previously backed this and now don’t, may be realizing that the drafting isn’t likely to be interpreted the way the people who talked them into co-sponsoring it indicated it would be.”
—
Oriana González is a reporter at NOTUS.
Author
