Why does so much of the media refuse to accept that Republicans want to ban abortion nationally?
By 
Roe v. Wade, contrary to the expectations of so many pundits, was flatly overruled. Two of the three largest states in the country have passed near-total bans on abortion. And yet major reporters insist on downplaying Republican ambitions to ban aboriton while also straightforwardly adopting the misleading framing of the anti-abortion lobby:
The debate around a national abortion ban also needs to include another nuance: that abortion foes believe there already IS an abortion ban–the Comstock Act–that Trump could enforce day 1 in every state in the country, & that at least 2 SCOTUS justices & JD Vance agree. https://t.co/vPjUGKjqi2— Mary Ziegler (@maryrziegler) July 28, 2024
When you can an abortion ban a “restriction” you’re pushing a very open anti-abortion propaganda op.
More importantly, the Comstock Act theory is critically getting traction in Republican circles important here — a second Trump administration would not need Congress to act to initiate a national ban on abortion. And if you’re confident that the Dobbs Court would disagree after it just declared (in a lawless opinion engineered to to give Trump specifically the broadest immunity possible) that the president had near-total immunity for performing illegal acts, I’m not sure what to tell you.
And even if a Republican trifecta “only” passes a 15-week ban — which would still mean women being unable to secure abortions necessary to preserve their health, having miscarriages investigated, being forced to risk sepsis before they can abortion an abortion, etc. in all 50 states — it should be obvious that this is an unstable equilibrium — they won’t be satisfied until virtually all abortions are illegal, as we’ve already seen in Florida. Reporters and pundits insisting against all evidence that they don’t really mean it is critical to their strategy, and there are always a lot who are happy to oblige under the false flag of “nuance.”