J.D. Vance Flails Trying to Explain Trump’s Surprise IVF Announcement
Even Donald Trump’s number two can’t seem to make heads or tails of his recent comments on in vitro fertilization.
Speaking with CNN on Friday, Ohio Senator J.D. Vance couldn’t cook up a reasonable explanation of the Republican presidential nominee’s sudden flip-flop on IVF access, which included saying that “right from the beginning” he was “always for IVF” and suggesting that government funding or insurance companies should cover the procedure.
“How would this work if a state—and you believe that states should have the right to make these decisions—if a state bans IVF, but Donald Trump says he wants to guarantee and/or pay for IVF for everyone who wants it, how would that work?” asked CNN’s John Berman.
“I think it’s such a ridiculous hypothetical,” Vance started. “Alabama, which is maybe the most conservative state in the entire union, has actively protected fertility access and fertility treatments. There’s no state in the union, whether a right-wing state or a left-wing state that I think is trying to ban access to fertility treatments.”
That is, however, not true. Earlier this year, the Alabama Supreme Court issued a devastating decision that classified single-celled, fertilized eggs as children, effectively stalling IVF access across the state. In a desperate bid to salvage votes, Alabama Republicans then passed a law to shield IVF providers from lawsuits or criminal charges relating to the death of embryos. Even still, legal experts have warned that while the new law helps clinics, there’s a long way to go in actually protecting fertility treatments for patients.
At the national level, Senate Republicans—including Vance—near-unanimously voted against a bill in June that would have enshrined IVF access across the country.
“You also voted against a measure that would have guaranteed access to IVF around the country, so it’s possible, right?” asked Berman, pointing to potential future restrictions on the family development procedure.
“Well, no, two things John: First of all, yes, a court made that decision in Alabama and like the next second, the Alabama state legislature fixed that problem and ensured women had access to these fertility treatments,” Vance said. “And all that I voted on, John, was for religious liberty.”
“I don’t want Christian hospitals or Christian charities to be forced to do something that they don’t want to do,” Vance continued. “We have multiple Republican measures that support fertility treatments, support IVF, but don’t require Chrsitian hospitals or other religious organizations to violate their conscience.”
Trump has worked to soften his anti-choice position in recent weeks and appeal to women’s rights activists in an effort to draw more voters to his campaign—but his renewed rhetoric won’t change the practical effects of his presidency, not least of all instilling a hyper-conservative Supreme Court that overturned Roe v. Wade, which Trump has proudly taken credit for. In 2023, the former president also claimed that he should be celebrated for every single state abortion ban.
BERMAN: How would this work if a state bans IVF, but Trump says he wants to pay for IVF for everyone who wants it, how would that work?
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) August 30, 2024
JD VANCE: I think it's such a ridiculous hypothetical
B: You voted against guaranteeing access to IVF
VANCE: I voted for religious liberty pic.twitter.com/sU6ARpmBmw