As political disputes go, the latest fight over in vitro fertilization featured something we don’t often see: a slow burn.
Ten days ago, the Alabama Supreme Court ruled that frozen embryos are actual people, but while this was a historic and regressive first, it did not immediately spark a national uproar. But in the days that followed, especially after the University of Alabama at Birmingham suspended its in vitro fertilization treatments, the story gradually made its way to the political fore.
By late last week, Republican officials were scrambling to put out a fire they were clearly afraid of. The National Republican Senatorial Committee practically begged the party’s candidates to publicly support IVF — they soon after did exactly that — and Donald Trump, after ignoring the story for days, issued multiple statements positioning himself as an IVF cheerleader.
Much of the House Republican conference, including House Speaker Mike Johnson, also issued statements touting their enthusiastic support for IVF.
Part of what made this notable was watching GOP officials panic, fearing the party would once again find itself at odds with public attitudes over reproductive health care. But even more important was the biggest flaw in the Republican Party’s defense. The Washington Post reported:
Prominent congressional Republicans are coming out in support of in vitro fertilization days after the Alabama state Supreme Court ruled that frozen embryos are people and therefore that someone can be held liable for destroying them. But many of the same Republicans who are saying Americans should have access to IVF have co-sponsored legislation that employs an argument similar to the one the Alabama Supreme Court used in its ruling.
The legislation is called the “Life at Conception Act,” and it defines a “human being” to “include each member of the species homo sapiens at all stages of life, including the moment of fertilization or cloning, or other moment at which an individual member of the human species comes into being.” As the Post’s report noted, the bill would also provide equal protection under the 14th Amendment “for the right to life of each born and preborn human person.”
The goal, of course, would be to impose a national abortion ban at the federal level, but in practical terms, legal and policy experts have argued persuasively that if an embryo is an actual person at “the moment of fertilization,” the proposal would almost certainly prohibit IVF treatments under federal law, were it to pass and receive a presidential signature.
With this in mind, quite a few Republicans quickly found themselves in a bind. Rep. Michelle Steel, for example, issued a statement that read, “As someone who struggled to get pregnant, I believe all life is a gift. IVF allowed me, as it has so many others, to start my family. I believe there is nothing more pro-life than helping families have children, and I do not support federal restrictions on IVF.”
What the Californian didn’t mention is that the Life at Conception Act is sponsored by 125 House members — and she’s one of them. Reps. Nancy Mace of South Carolina and David Schweikert of Arizona also issued statements endorsing IVF, despite having co-sponsored previous versions of the Life at Conception Act.
What’s more, there was a related bill being championed by Senate Republicans, though it specifically included provisions intended to protect IVF. (Whether those provisions would be sufficiently effective is a subject of some debate.)
With all of this in mind, the White House is on the offensive.
“Republican officials think they can obfuscate their way out of their support for these extreme policies. But spin is not a time machine,” press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said in a new memo. “No attempt to ‘rebrand’ can change the fact that their true colors are on the record. They have spent decades trying to eliminate the constitutional right to choose and undermine reproductive freedom everywhere.”
This issue isn’t going away. The House Majority PAC, which aligned with Democratic politics, issued a memo late last week, shining a spotlight on Republicans from competitive districts who supported the Life at Conception Act. The PAC said it can “guarantee that their support will be used against them over paid media in competitive House districts across the country this fall.”