MANCHESTER, N.H. — Sen. Tim Scott on Thursday declined to take a position on whether abortion medication should remain legal in America, telling reporters in New Hampshire that he believed “the courts are on their way to solving the problem” — a reference to the conflicting legal rulings over the use of the key abortion drug known as mifepristone that have created confusion and uncertainty about access across the country.
The South Carolina Republican, who announced on Wednesday that he was launching a presidential exploratory committee, offered a series of vague answers about the extent to which he would curtail abortion access during a visit to New Hampshire. His comments illustrate the potentially difficult path ahead for the GOP White House contenders in an election cycle when Democrats intend to once again make abortion a central issue in the campaign.
After a midterm election in which Republicans struggled in key races where Democrats sought to tap into anger over the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, which had guaranteed a constitutional right to abortion, the debate is once again dominating the political landscape after federal judges in two states ruled on separate cases involving mifepristone.
U.S. District Judge Matthew J. Kacsmaryk in Texas blocked the Food and Drug Administration’s approval of the abortion pill mifepristone, siding with antiabortion groups. In a separate opinion, a judge in Washington state ruled that the drug is safe and effective and ordered the FDA to preserve “the status quo” and retain access in 17 states. Late Wednesday, a federal appeals court partially blocked the Texas ruling but set restrictions on the pill that could limit access, leading the Biden administration to announce Thursday that it will immediately ask the Supreme Court to intervene.
Many elected Republicans have avoided weighing in on the issue. They are caught in a political bind between appeasing conservative activists who are pushing for greater restrictions and the risk of alienating more-moderate voters and independents who believe the GOP has gone too far in restricting abortion access state by state.
Scott is one of the many potential GOP presidential contenders testing how to navigate that policy issue. The political path the senator from South Carolina is charting could complicate matters, given his desire to build from an evangelical base in Iowa, but also to demonstrate that he could have broader appeal to moderates and independents in a general election than former president Donald Trump or Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, who has also taken steps toward a likely White House bid.
When asked whether he supports a ban on abortion medication during a gaggle with reporters outside the Red Arrow Diner in Manchester on Thursday, Scott replied that he believed the courts would resolve the problem: “The latest rulings — there’s contradictory rulings from different judges, and you’re starting to see that play out, and I think we have that we have to have confidence in our judiciary.”
He told the New Hampshire television station WMUR in a Thursday morning interview that he would sign a bill creating a ban on abortion after 20 weeks of pregnancy if that legislation came to his desk at the White House, stating that the country needs to have a “federal limit on how far we can go” with abortions.
But when asked a short time later outside the diner whether he would support a federal ban on abortion, Scott replied that he is “100 percent pro-life” and said that “one of the challenges that we have, we continue to go to the most restrictive conversations without broadening the scope.”
When a reporter followed up by noting that he had indicated his support for a 20-week ban — and that he had previously supported a bill that would have penalized doctors with a prison term of up to five years if they performed the procedure after 20 weeks — he did not address his position on penalties for doctors.
“The question I was asked earlier about the 20-week-limit — it makes total sense to me,” Scott replied, noting that he had a high school friend who was born at 22½ weeks in 1965. “We should certainly always side with a culture that preserves and appreciates and respects life. And one of the things that we’re talking about is how do we do that? I certainly think that the 20-week threshold is not a question in my mind at all.”
A day earlier in Iowa, Scott did not offer a clear answer to repeated questions in an interview with CBS News about whether he supports the 15-week national ban on abortion that was proposed last year by his South Carolina colleague, Republican Sen. Lindsey O. Graham. He again demurred by stating that he was “100 percent pro-life.” That legislation would have included exceptions in cases of rape or incest, or to save the life of the mother.
An aide to Scott did not respond to questions from The Washington Post earlier this week about what the senator’s position would be on ending abortion access after six weeks, a proposal that just passed the Florida legislature and that DeSantis has indicated that he would sign.
Scott repeatedly told reporters that America is having the wrong conversation about abortion, insisting that the discussion should focus more on whether Democrats would place any limits on abortions late in the term.
“I think we’re just having the wrong conversation,” he said Thursday.