On abortion, some Michigan candidate claims conflict with records

• Two years after abortion drove Michigan voters to the polls, Donald Trump and other Republican candidates are softening stances
• In one Congressional race, a Democrat has also had to defend his support for abortion rights amid questions from critics
• New polling suggests abortion remains a top issue for Michigan voters

LANSING — Donald Trump is downplaying his past opposition to abortion as he seeks a return to the White House, and many Michigan Republicans are following suit. 

After the fall of Roe v. Wade, which Trump previously took credit for overturning, abortion policy should now be up to the states, according to the former president. 

Some Republicans who had long fought against legal abortion now say the issue is settled in Michigan, where voters in 2022 approved a ballot measure to enshrine abortion rights in the state Constitution.

Some GOP candidates have wiped anti-abortion policy proposals from campaign websites and voiced new support for exceptions they had previously opposed. 

Related:

• In a Michigan toss-up race, inflation has some voters ‘looking for a change’
• 2024 Michigan elections: RFK Jr. wins appeal to get off ballot
• Under Trump, GOP softens abortion stance. Some Michigan conservatives dismayed

In recent mailers promoting Trump, the state GOP argues it’s Democrats like Vice President Kamala Harris who have "extreme" positions on abortion. 

Democrats, meanwhile, contend Republicans cannot be trusted on the issue, warning that GOP candidates have supported national abortion bans in the past and could do so again if granted total power in Washington. 

Abortion rights drove Michigan voters to the polls two years ago, and a new survey suggests it remains one of the top issues for voters heading into the Nov. 5 general election.

Here is where Trump, Harris, their running mates and some of Michigan's highest-profile congressional candidates stand — and have stood in the past — on abortion access and reproductive rights.

Harris v. Trump

In the late 1990s, Trump said that while he hated “the concept of abortion,“ he was “very pro-choice” and would not ban abortion if elected president. Fast forward to the 2012 presidential cycle, and Trump told attendees of the Conservative Political Action Conference he identified as “pro-life.”

While in office, Trump was responsible for nominating three U.S. Supreme Court justices who later made up part of the 6-3 majority in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which effectively overturned years of precedent on abortion legislation under Roe in June 2022.

That same year, however, Republicans suffered heavy losses during the midterms, including failing to take the U.S. Senate that cycle. Trump’s stance on abortion policy then began to change. He lashed out against Republicans who he said “poorly handled” the issue of abortion by opposing exceptions to a total ban, even in the case of rape, incest or life of the mother. 

Harris, meanwhile, has maintained a more consistent view on abortion compared to Trump and even President Joe Biden, who she officially replaced at the top of the Democratic ticket in August.

While representing California in the U.S. Senate, Harris twice co-sponsored legislation that would have banned states from restricting abortion rights.

As a presidential candidate in 2019, Harris also supported an effort to require states get federal approval before enacting laws that could hamper abortion access, saying the country could not “tolerate a perspective that is about going backwards and not understanding women have agency.” 

More recently, Harris is believed to have made history by becoming the first sitting vice president to visit an abortion clinic. She toured a Minnesota-based Planned Parenthood in March 2024.

Harris says she supports putting “into law the protections of Roe v. Wade,” and remained vocal on protecting abortion access when running for reelection with Biden.

Vance v. Walz 

Among vice presidential candidates, Republican U.S. Sen. JD Vance of Ohio and Minnesota’s Democratic Gov. Tim Walz offer a stark contrast on abortion.

Vance described himself as being “100% pro-life” as a candidate in 2021.  He’s previously indicated support for a 15-week national abortion ban and implied, in past remarks, that victims of rape and incest should carry their pregnancies to term as “two wrongs don’t make a right.” 

He later said he supports “reasonable exceptions” for abortions — such as in the cases of rape and incest, or to protect the life of the mother.

Since Trump tapped him as his running mate, Vance has begun to soften his rhetoric, saying abortion policy should be left up to the states.

Vance has also softened on use of the abortion-inducing medication Mifepristone. In 2023, he was one of 40 Republicans who signed a letter asking the U.S. Justice Department to enforce the Comstock Act — a long-dormant 1873 law which bans mailing abortion-inducing drugs.

Walz, meanwhile, has long been supportive of abortion access. Immediately after the fall of Roe, Minnesota was the first state to pass a law protecting abortion rights. Walz signed that bill, which established “a fundamental right to reproductive health,” in January 2023. 

He also signed off on a bill shielding Minnesota health care workers and patients from abortion-related prosecution in other states, as well as OK’d repeals of various anti-abortion laws in the state, including doing away with a mandatory 24-hour waiting period.

Rogers v. Slotkin, U.S. Senate

In the race for Michigan's hotly contested open U.S. Senate seat, Democratic U.S. Rep. Elissa Slotkin and Republican Mike Rogers also have clearly contrasting histories on abortion policy. 

Rogers, who previously served in Congress, said in his 1994 campaign that he only supported abortions to save the life of the mother. He later co-sponsored legislation to define human life as beginning at conception and supported a national abortion ban beginning at 20-weeks of pregnancy.

In 2003, Rogers co-sponsored legislation to withdraw federal approval of the abortion-inducing medication Mifepristone. He co-sponsored that same legislation again two years later, also backing an amendment to bar the U.S. Department of Agriculture from allocating any funds towards the medication.

Fast forward to his current campaign, and Rogers is now echoing Trump’s position that abortion policies should be left up to the states.  A year ago, as he began his campaign, Rogers told reporters he would not support any national abortion policies that would be “inconsistent with Michigan law.”

Slotkin, meanwhile, has maintained steady support for abortion-related policies and proposals since first elected in 2018.

The Holly lawmaker has voted in favor of past legislation that establishes a right for health care providers to provide abortion, bars individuals from interfering with a person’s ability to access an out-of-state abortion and bans any form of government from restricting access to abortion. 

In early 2023, Slotkin also voted against legislation requiring health care workers to provide care for “a child who survives an abortion or attempted abortion.” 

She additionally signed onto a letter urging the U.S. Department of Defense and U.S. Department of Homeland Security to “extend and enhance” abortion and reproductive health care services to servicemembers the year prior.

Hudson v. Scholten, 3rd Congressional District

In Michigan’s competitive 3rd Congressional District race, incumbent Democrat Hillary Scholten of Grand Rapids has advocated for abortion rights while Republican challenger Paul Hudson of East Grand Rapids has said he thinks the issue is “settled in Michigan.”

Hudson, an attorney, has said little else about abortion. He was backed by anti-abortion group Right to Life of Michigan when he ran for the state Supreme Court in 2022 but said at the time that he had not made “any commitments to anyone on any policy matters.”

Scholten, elected in 2022, is vocally supportive of abortion-related policies, saying she “will always be a steadfast supporter of a woman’s God-given ability to make her own healthcare decisions.” 

In 2023, she was one of more than 200 co-sponsors on a bill that promoted access to abortion services and called for health care providers to carry out abortion services "without harmful or unwarranted limitations or requirements." 

That bill would have restored national protections for abortion similar to those that had existed under Roe. 

Barrett v. Hertel, 7th Congressional District

In one of Michigan’s most competitive congressional races, Republican Tom Barrett of Charlotte and Democrat Curtis Hertel of East Lansing have a history of sparring on abortion rights when both served in the state Senate. 

Barrett describes himself as a “consistent pro-life state legislator” and in Lansing sponsored or co-sponsored proposals to ban abortion after the detection of a “fetal heartbeat,” ban dilation and evacuation procedures and a resolution supporting enforcement of a dormant 1931 abortion ban should Roe be overturned, which it later was. 

In a 2019 debate in the Michigan Senate, Barrett characterized dilation and evacuation abortions as  “gruesome and barbaric,” sparking criticism from Hertel, who called that characterization “dangerous in a state where we have doctors and women being threatened as they are trying to receive basic health care.”

The procedure is predominantly done after medical problems with the fetus are detected, or to eliminate tissue left over after a miscarriage.

Barrett has attempted to downplay how important abortion could be in this year’s election. Unlike 2022, when he ran and lost for the same seat against Slotkin, there is no abortion rights proposal on the Michigan ballot, and “my opponent is not a woman,” he told the Washington Examiner. 

Hertel, meanwhile, has tried to center abortion rights in his campaign. He hosted a reproductive roundtable event this week and said he is running for congress to "codify abortion rights into federal law," among other things.  

Hertel voted against various abortion restrictions in the Michigan Legislature and worked as Gov. Gretchen Whitmer’s director of legislative affairs when lawmakers repealed the state’s 1931 abortion ban.

During a joint candidate forum with Barrett in May at the Lansing Country Club, Hertel said the idea “that my kids will be less free than my wife or my mother” due to the fall of Roe “certainly disturbs me.”

Junge v. McDonald Rivet, 8th Congressional District

With the impending retirement of U.S. Rep. Dan Kildee in Michigan’s 8th Congressional District, Democratic state Sen. Kristen McDonald Rivet of Bay City and Republican Paul Junge Grand Blanc are both vying for a shot at the seat.

Each has a limited, but public, track record on abortion policy. 

Junge, a former Trump administration official, at one point was openly against abortion, saying during his 2020 run for Congress the U.S. Supreme Court had “made up rights” when it initially decided Roe in 1973.

He listed “defending the right to life” as a top campaign issue in both his 2020 and 2022 campaigns, which he lost, but has since removed any reference to abortion on the policy page of his campaign website. 

Junge recently told The Detroit News he still opposes abortion but would not support any Congressional action that directly conflicts with Michigan’s abortion rights amendment. He also said he now supports exemptions for rape and incest he previously opposed.

A first-term state Senator, McDonald Rivet voted to repeal Michigan’s now-dead 1931 ban on abortion. She also co-sponsored related legislation to repeal misdemeanor penalties associated with advertising or publishing literature regarding recipes for abortion-inducing medication.

McDonald Rivet additionally voted in favor of Michigan’s Reproductive Health Act which, among other things, repealed various regulations and building codes for facilities providing abortions.  

James v. Marlinga, 10th Congressional District

Republican U.S. Rep. John James of Shelby Township will again take on Democrat and former judge Carl Marlinga of Mount Clemens later this year for a chance to represent voters in Michigan’s 10th Congressional District. The race was one of the closest in the country two years ago. 

Unlike Michigan’s other Democratic congressional nominees, Marlinga faced a unique hurdle in his primary, as a fellow Democrat questioned whether he'd been sufficiently supportive of abortion rights in the past. 

As Macomb County Prosecutor in 1998, Marlinga's office was involved in a delayed decision on whether to allow a family to travel to Kansas and obtain an abortion for their 12-year-old daughter, allegedly a victim of incest via her brother.

In a 2012 survey, Marlinga said he shared a similar judicial temperament to the conservative U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, who was integral in helping overturn Roe in 2022, and the late Justice Antonin Scalia.

Marlinga has said the 1998 abortion decision was delayed to allow for a psychological exam of the child. As a judge, he’s said he was a “strict constitutionalist” like Thomas, but he supports abortion rights. If elected, he’s said he’ll work to “codify the projections of Roe into federal law.”

James, the first-term Republican, has previously referred to himself as “100% pro life,” in 2018 compared abortion to “genocide” and in 2022 said through a spokesperson he did not support exceptions for rape or incest.

While in Congress, James voted in favor of a bill requiring health care workers to provide care for “a child who survives an abortion or attempted abortion.”

But more recently, James has said Michigan voters “already decided” the issue of abortion rights and has suggested Democrats are pointing to his past comments for political reasons. 

“Despite the fear mongering that you hear on the left,” he told a Detroit television station, “the fact of the matter is that abortion is enshrined in our Constitution.”