In May, Biden sent a statement to Senate Democrats promising he would sign the WHPA into law.
In the letter, the president condemned “extreme” abortion restrictions happening at the state level.
“State laws designed to restrict access to abortion have increased at an alarming rate recently — in Texas, Mississippi, and many other states around the country,” the letter read.
The president called on Congress to eliminate “unwarranted and inappropriate restrictions” and “unjustified burdens on commerce” preventing women from obtaining abortions.
In response to Jensen’s interaction with the president, news outlet Mediaite accused pro-lifers of “adopt[ing] the false talking point that Democrats don’t believe in any limits at all because they won’t name a specific time limit” on abortion.
Democrats voted unanimously for the WHPA in the Senate earlier this year, with the exception of West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin.
During the 2022 midterm election season, the majority of Democrat candidates have adopted the WHPA and the codification of Roe v. Wade as their official policy stance on abortion.
Democrat candidates have also dodged questions from the media when asked if they support any abortion restrictions.
Roe v. Wade ‘invalidated’ all abortion restrictions
Further, Biden’s claim that Roe v. Wade had allowed for restrictions on abortions is misleading, according to Alexandra DeSanctis, a fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center.
“Roe v. Wade and its companion case, Doe v. Bolton, invented an essentially unlimited constitutional right to abortion, invalidating all state laws in place protecting unborn children,” DeSanctis said in a statement to CNA.
(Story continues below)
Subscribe to our daily newsletter
At Catholic News Agency, our team is committed to reporting the truth with courage, integrity, and fidelity to our faith. We provide news about the Church and the world, as seen through the teachings of the Catholic Church. When you subscribe to the CNA UPDATE, we'll send you a daily email with links to the news you need and, occasionally, breaking news.
As part of this free service you may receive occasional offers from us at EWTN News and EWTN. We won't rent or sell your information, and you can unsubscribe at any time.
The Supreme Court’s Doe v. Bolton decision, which became part of Roe’s legal framework, broadly defined risks to a patient’s health to include “all factors — physical, emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman’s age.”
As pro-life group, Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, explains, “this sweeping health exception is meant to be construed broadly [with] the effect of making abortion available throughout all of pregnancy.”
“Under Roe, Doe, and, later, Planned Parenthood v. Casey, courts struck down pro-life law after pro-life law, some of which didn’t even restrict abortion at all but merely attempted to protect women’s health and safety when seeking abortions,” DeSanctis said.
“Until Dobbs, it was nearly impossible to enact laws protecting unborn children, even after they are old enough to survive outside the womb,” she added.
Carolyn McDonnell, litigation counsel at Americans United for Life, told CNA that “the Roe court concocted an arbitrary trimester test,” which meant that “there were virtually no restrictions on abortion.”
“Roe was unworkable since the day it was decided,” she said.