0:00

Many of us have those stubborn

0:02

pounds that seem impossible to lose,

0:04

no matter how good we eat

0:06

or how hard we work out.

0:08

My solution is Plushcare. Plushcare is

0:10

a leading telehealth provider, with doctors

0:13

who are there for you day

0:15

and night, to partner with you

0:17

in your weight loss journey. They

0:19

can prescribe FDA-approved weight loss medications

0:21

like Wagovi and Zeppound for those

0:23

who qualify. Plus, they accept most

0:25

insurance plans. To get started, visit

0:28

plushcare.com/weight loss. That's plushcare.com/weight loss. The

0:36

Economist Yesterday,

0:40

Donald Trump was found guilty of falsifying

0:42

business records in the Hush Money trial

0:44

in New York. He has,

0:46

of course, promised to appeal. This

0:49

is an important verdict and a historic

0:51

moment. A felon is a

0:53

major party's presumptive nominee for the presidency.

0:57

It's also likely that this is the only

0:59

trial that will come to a conclusion before

1:01

November's election. We

1:03

have discussed the case on the show before,

1:05

most recently in our episode of April 19th,

1:07

and we will talk about it again. For

1:11

today, we're looking at a different issue that is

1:13

likely to have a bigger impact on the outcome

1:15

of the election, and which also

1:17

has a profound effect on

1:19

American women—the right to have an abortion.

1:22

You can listen to our reporting and analysis

1:24

of the verdict against Donald Trump on

1:27

today's episode of The Intelligence. Roe

1:32

v. Wade was argued twice before the Supreme

1:34

Court. The first time, in front

1:36

of only seven justices, Jay Floyd

1:38

argued for Texas. Defending

1:41

that state's abortion ban, he opened with

1:43

a joke about the two women who

1:45

were opposing counsel, Linda Coffey and Sarah

1:48

Weddington. Mr. Floyd said, When

1:56

the case was re-argued in front of a full

1:58

court the following year, Mr. Floyd said, Floyd

2:00

was replaced. The

2:03

Taxes Assistant Attorney, General Robert

2:05

Flowers. Took a more conciliatory tone

2:07

as he made what would be a

2:09

losing argument saying quote We don't envy

2:11

the court for having to make this

2:14

decision. Now

2:16

city years later, millions of voters

2:18

are taking the decision of abortion

2:20

rights into. Their own hands. With.

2:26

One hundred and fifty seven days to go

2:28

until the Twenty Twenty Four election. I'm Charlotte

2:30

Howard and Asus checks and balances from the

2:32

A. Tweet.

2:39

During. The

2:48

day what packed full of have

2:51

on the selection. Election

2:54

has access to host. Intended

3:03

to anything you the supreme. Court has control

3:05

of abortion back to the people and

3:07

their elected representatives. This November will be

3:10

the greatest part. Of what had

3:12

actually me some a class or trying

3:14

to run hard on the issue. And

3:16

hope Fallon initiative and swing states

3:19

will boost turn up. Will the

3:21

issue of abortion decide the. Outcome

3:23

of the Percent: So much of

3:25

what will the results mean Purposes:

3:27

I. With.

3:46

Me to discuss this are Sasha Not A who was

3:48

one of the authors of our briefing in this week's

3:50

issue of the Economists on This Hi Sasha, how you.

3:53

High shall. And address to

3:55

him also in Washington. I was in Washington last

3:57

week and I managed see sauce of Miss You.

4:00

I was sad about. Yes, my sister was

4:02

having a baby, so we left to meet

4:04

him and he's doing well, which is very

4:06

nice. That's a very good reason. Sasha,

4:09

tell us about the briefing this week.

4:12

It's been almost two years since the

4:14

Dobb decision. There are other abortion issues that

4:16

are now before the Supreme Court. What was

4:18

the subject of this week's cover

4:20

package? So this week, we looked at a

4:23

movement that was kind of triggered by the

4:25

Dobbs decision two years ago, and it's

4:27

this really inspiring

4:31

grassroots movement. It's not just

4:33

women, but it is women led, essentially

4:35

fighting back with petitions. So the topic

4:37

of the briefing is very much looking at

4:39

this movement that is aiming to change state

4:42

laws on abortion. And

4:44

through that lens, we're also looking at

4:47

what the topic of abortion and these

4:49

groups in particular might mean for the election. The

4:53

most obvious way that the issue of abortion might

4:55

have a big impact on the election is in

4:57

the states where there will

4:59

be referendums on the issue, where voters

5:01

will go and vote directly on ballot

5:04

measures that are related to abortion in

5:06

some way. In April, Stevie

5:08

Hertz, our U.S. audio correspondent who contributed

5:10

to this week's cover package, visited one

5:13

such state to see the launch of

5:15

this campaign. In

5:24

Orlando,

5:29

it's hard to escape

5:31

the House of Mouse.

5:37

Even the venue for an abortion rights protest in

5:39

a downtown park is a city-owned stage,

5:41

the Walt Disney Amphitheatre. On

5:45

a nearby lake, tourists in Petalows, Gork,

5:47

as protesters, carry giant models of

5:50

the female reproductive

5:56

system, constructed out of pool noodles.

6:00

that not supporting women's rights of small

6:02

dick energy and t-shirts label supporters' abortion

6:04

rights barbeats. For a

6:06

state with a six-week abortion ban, it's

6:08

surprisingly joyous. The

6:16

protest is a launch event for a

6:19

campaign aiming to enshrine a right to

6:21

abortion until viability in the Florida Constitution.

6:23

The Anna Fellows is dressed in hot

6:25

pink and is sporting a bedazzled golf

6:28

fighter. At 77, this is her first protest.

6:31

We don't want to go back. We want to

6:33

protect our daughters and our grandchildren. She

6:36

was part of an army of 10,000 volunteers that

6:38

helped collect over a million signatures to get

6:40

the amendment from the ballot. Ms

6:43

Fellows traveled 140 miles to be here today with her friend

6:46

Lisa Dan. But it's so

6:48

important because we're going backwards and we don't

6:51

need to do that. We're going to stand

6:53

up, we're going to fight, and we're going

6:55

to persevere for the rights for women, for

6:57

our daughters, for our granddaughters, and for the

6:59

future. It's not right to go backwards.

7:03

Florida is one of as many as 16 states

7:05

voting directly on abortion this year. A

7:07

lot of attention is likely to turn to

7:10

campaigns in Arizona and Nevada, where Democrats hope

7:12

the initiatives will bolster turnout in the key

7:14

swing states. But no state is

7:16

more important for people who actually need abortions

7:19

than Florida. Not only America's

7:21

third largest state, it's surrounded by states with

7:23

their own bands. It was once

7:25

and could be again, an island of abortion

7:27

access. We are unfortunately

7:30

going to see stories that are

7:32

absolutely devastating. Providers right now are

7:34

estimating that they will lose over

7:36

half of their patient visits. People

7:38

are passing these initiatives not because

7:40

they're dumb turnout mechanisms or because

7:42

they're increasing voter turnout in general.

7:44

People are voting for these initiatives

7:46

because they understand that abortion is

7:48

healthcare. Normal people no longer think

7:50

of this as a partisan issue.

7:53

Lauren Brinzel is the campaign manager for

7:55

the BALS initiative in Florida. What's

7:58

the definitive swing state in Florida? elections, the

8:00

state is now firmly read. But

8:03

that's not necessarily a problem for her ballot

8:05

initiative. Something that I think folks are surprised

8:07

by is that 35% of our signers for our petition

8:10

during phase one of our effort were

8:13

from Republicans and independents. We have always

8:15

led with we want to get politicians

8:17

out of these private health care decisions.

8:19

And we are being genuine when we

8:21

say that that refers to all politicians.

8:23

The reality is that these decisions should

8:25

be between a medical provider and their

8:28

patient. We've been very honest that this

8:30

is the only pathway there isn't a

8:32

candidate campaign in the state of Florida

8:34

that can rectify this situation. Since

8:37

the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade and

8:39

scrapped a constitutional right to an abortion in

8:41

Dobbs versus Jackson Women's Health, six

8:43

states have voted directly on the issue. Some votes

8:46

were looking for more protections for women, others

8:49

greater restrictions. Some, like Florida's, were

8:51

started by citizens collecting signatures, others

8:54

by legislatures. But in each

8:56

of those, including in red and purple

8:58

states like Michigan, Ohio and Kansas, abortion

9:01

access has won out. In

9:03

Florida, though, the initiative needs 60% of

9:05

the vote to pass, a

9:07

higher bar than any of those states. Miss

9:10

Branczel, the campaign manager, is still taking

9:12

some lessons from them, though. One,

9:14

it shows that the vast majority of people support

9:16

access to abortion, even in states where they were

9:18

not trying to get to a high 50% threshold,

9:21

they got there and they were running campaigns to get

9:23

to 50%. So for us, it's a campaign that needs

9:25

to get to 60 and it's planning

9:27

for 60. That's incredibly exciting because it shows

9:29

that the support is there. You

9:32

don't need to win in Ohio by 7% and

9:35

they did. I think also

9:37

these initiatives were run by

9:39

people who really care about patients and doctors. So

9:41

you saw that the messaging was focused on patients

9:44

and doctors, and that is an ethos that we

9:46

want to carry over into this campaign. The

10:00

Rights Campaign. The. Pro Choice side

10:02

expects to spend sixty eight million dollars by

10:04

the end of the year, about the same

10:07

as Democrats spent in Twenty Twenty two defending

10:09

a competitive senate seat in Nevada. And

10:11

it may well be needed. Polls. Are limited

10:14

but so far show the abortion right side

10:16

well shy of with me. When.

10:18

Michigan held it's referendum in Twenty

10:20

Twenty two. Fifty seven percent voted

10:22

in favor of protecting abortion. Even

10:24

a sixty three percent Brody supported

10:26

the procedure. Rate similar to

10:28

Floridians. At the University

10:31

Central Florida, that strand of ambivalence

10:33

is clear. Needed

10:35

an off season supple game on

10:37

a cool night. She didn't seem

10:39

apathetic. High doses of avoiding of

10:41

of it over research. One

10:45

students had heard. Revising

10:49

of. The

10:52

mothers and was able. To.

10:54

Say he still wasn't sure if he'd vote he

10:56

doesn't keep up with them. So.

11:08

To recap, the dogs decision, and

11:10

Twenty Twenty Two eliminated the constitutional

11:12

right to an abortion and left

11:14

it to states. Ten aside this

11:16

issue, and since then, there has

11:19

been this remarkable divergence and state

11:21

policy. Let's start with a recap

11:23

of states where legislatures had. For

11:25

years, right? been preparing for the end

11:27

of row. How did they move to

11:29

limit access Asa? Will.

11:31

They states were indeed kind of

11:34

ready for this moment and say

11:36

about a dozen had trigger lose

11:38

that started straight away right after

11:41

dogs and in effect have meant

11:43

that. By now one in

11:45

three women. Of reproductive

11:47

age in American lives in a

11:49

state with either a complete ban

11:51

or a near complete ban Say

11:53

the effects. Of sense, the

11:56

anti abortion states or other antiabortion.

11:58

Legislatures has been. Varied, a

12:00

profound as expected. And at the

12:03

same time you seen. More. Liberal

12:05

states getting the opposite direction. sexy

12:07

enshrining a right to abortion and

12:09

improving access. What the net impact of

12:12

what is this has been is actually been

12:14

quite surprising. Abortion has actually. Gone up

12:16

in total in America since dogs

12:18

which is of the not what

12:20

the movement calling for rose oversight

12:23

was hoping for. And. So

12:25

dress. There's a lot of activity in the past. Two

12:27

years, right? What? Are. We expecting

12:29

or what are you expecting in

12:31

November. So I'm expecting Democrats to

12:33

continue to leap on the issue.

12:35

They've already made it one of

12:37

the central point to their campaign.

12:39

I expect Republicans to continue to

12:41

run away from the issue. You've

12:43

already seen Donald Trump try to

12:45

not accept responsibility for what happened

12:47

as a result of the justices

12:50

that he pointed to the Supreme

12:52

Court. You'll see that dynamic play

12:54

out basically constantly. You also have

12:56

the opportunity for these rights to

12:58

be enshrined in. More states as a

13:00

result of referenda and democrats are hoping that

13:02

that will boost turn out for them and

13:04

improve their chances. In a year in which

13:06

Joe Biden doesn't appear to be winning, he

13:09

doesn't appear to be doing particularly well That

13:11

this might have a kind of the point

13:13

of fact on his chances in the same

13:15

way that. People. Thought that the

13:18

two thousand and four state referenda campaign

13:20

on gay marriage might have helped George

13:22

W. Bush when comfortable reelection against John

13:24

Kerry which was the last time that

13:26

a Republican won the popular vote. So.

13:28

Want to get into the political implications

13:31

of this a bit later, but to

13:33

dwell for a moment on this movement

13:35

itself? One of the things I was

13:37

struck by. And your reporting, Sasha is.

13:39

Both. That. Democrats are keen

13:42

to jump on this for obvious reasons,

13:44

but also how remarkably non partisan the

13:46

movement. Itself is can you

13:48

give us a bit more

13:50

color on. Who. These people

13:52

are and what their strategy is in

13:55

different states. Most. Of

13:57

these people are normal people. a

13:59

lot in. incredibly annoyed with politicians

14:01

in general, not just with Republican politicians,

14:03

and feel like it's essentially

14:06

upon them to take matters

14:08

into their own hands, which is literally what

14:10

they're doing by carrying around these clipboards and

14:13

gathering signatures from their neighbours,

14:15

friends, giving up their weekends because they

14:17

believe very, very strongly that the government

14:19

has no business in this issue. You

14:21

asked about the movement strategy. I mean,

14:23

I think one of the things that

14:26

makes it so fascinating and also probably

14:28

one of the reasons why it's been

14:30

quite under covered is that

14:32

it's grassroots. It's very, very local.

14:34

So although when you put all the

14:36

pieces together, you see a movement. But

14:38

when you zoom in, you just see

14:40

local groups of people coming up

14:42

with whatever strategy works best

14:45

in their neighbourhood. And

14:47

so it's we're talking about sort

14:49

of tens of thousands of volunteers.

14:51

And they have one goal, which

14:53

is to gather enough signatures so

14:55

that the people in their states

14:57

in November can take a vote

15:00

on usually a constitutional amendment.

15:02

It's slightly different per state, but

15:05

usually constitutional amendment to protect or

15:07

to enhance or to have

15:10

a right to an abortion. And in

15:12

most cases, it's up to viability. So

15:14

that's 24 weeks. I

15:17

think it is also shrewd to not

15:19

align oneself with a party. Right. I

15:21

mean, Florida is not going to be

15:23

a democratic victory. So a close alignment

15:26

with Joe Biden's campaign would be problematic

15:28

for the organizers. And indeed, I think

15:30

that they've tried to keep the campaign

15:32

at arm's length there. And also fundamentally,

15:34

this is a libertarian argument that's being

15:36

made about who has the right to

15:38

control health decision. And if you

15:40

want to win in places like

15:43

Kansas, which has already happened, or

15:45

Ohio or in Montana, where there

15:47

might also be a referendum, you

15:49

need to make these kinds of libertarian

15:51

arguments. You can't make the kind of

15:53

conventional, comfortably coastal arguments that Democrats might

15:56

intrinsically leap towards. And I think that

15:58

we've seen already the success of that

16:00

approach, and I think you will probably see it as well

16:02

in November. So, it's interesting to think

16:04

about the grassroots movement to

16:07

protect abortion rights compared with

16:09

what has largely been a grassroots

16:11

movement that's many decades old to

16:13

limit abortion rights. What

16:16

is that very well-established

16:18

anti-abortion movement looking like these

16:20

days? I mean,

16:22

I think they're struggling, to be

16:25

honest. There's a really interesting symmetry

16:27

between what's happening now, post-dobs, with

16:30

the grassroots-led pro-abortion

16:32

movement, compared

16:34

to the anti-abortion movement that

16:36

existed in the 60s but really had this

16:38

national target after Roe. Their

16:41

presence in states that are

16:43

likely to have referendums, Florida's a good

16:45

example, it's quite a stale old

16:47

tactic of just showing more fetuses and all

16:50

the things they've done for a very long time.

16:52

I think one of the reasons

16:54

why they struggle is that the Republicans

16:56

aren't quite as enthusiastically supporting them as

16:58

they have in the past, and so

17:01

they're slightly on their own. That

17:04

raises an interesting question. Who is funding

17:06

this stuff? So, for the

17:08

pro-abortion movement, clearly there's

17:10

a huge number of people who

17:12

are mobilized and feel personally invested

17:15

in this issue. But it costs

17:17

money, right? Is it just small

17:19

dollar donations, or who's providing the

17:21

cashier? It's massively expensive.

17:23

I mean, as much as we might celebrate all

17:25

this, we shouldn't be naive about how much this

17:27

costs. Small dollars don't get you there.

17:29

So, for the pro-abortion side,

17:31

it's, I guess, the funds you

17:34

would probably expect. So, it's Planned

17:36

Parenthood, particularly it's campaign arm, has

17:38

put a lot of dollars

17:40

in this. The ACLU has

17:42

dark money funds, like JB

17:44

Pritzker's fund has supported several

17:46

states, particularly swing states that

17:48

have ballot initiatives. Adrice,

17:50

in many ways, this groundswell

17:53

that you see underway

17:55

that seems quite nonpartisan and

17:59

yet very well- organized, very purposeful and

18:01

very effective would seem to

18:03

be democracy at work.

18:06

Are there limitations to it

18:09

in general and specifically for

18:11

this issue? There are limits

18:13

if the idea is reconstituting rows state

18:15

by state. That won't happen in part

18:17

because not every state has a kind

18:20

of ballot initiative that allows voters

18:22

to impose their view over the

18:24

state legislature. That's one

18:26

limit. The second is that passage

18:29

of referenda doesn't necessarily mean that

18:31

the governor and state legislature, if

18:33

they're minded to disagree, will faithfully

18:36

execute the will of the people. So

18:38

you've seen that in Florida with less

18:40

contentious referendum that gave felons the

18:42

right to vote. That really hasn't played

18:45

out in reality because of implementing rules

18:47

about repaying fines and whatnot. So there

18:49

are other points that could be raised.

18:51

But on the whole, I think it

18:54

sends a very powerful signal about the

18:56

kind of popular desire for these abortion

18:58

rights to be enshrined in law. And

19:01

I think it also perhaps gives

19:04

support to the argument that's

19:06

been made repeatedly for the past few

19:08

decades, which is that Roe

19:10

versus Wade by taking the decision out

19:12

of the hands of the states and

19:15

putting it as a constitutional right kind

19:17

of froze in time this

19:19

debate and that if the

19:21

court had not intervened at that time to

19:23

set the standard that it did, that maybe

19:26

we would have seen this popular movement play

19:28

out decades ago and we would have arrived

19:31

by consensus to a

19:33

position that was basically nationally

19:35

pro-abortion. Okay, let's leave it there. We

19:38

are going to get into the politics of

19:40

this, how abortion might impact

19:43

the outcome of the election in November. But

19:46

first, can you each tell me what

19:48

you've enjoyed recently from our coverage? Sasha, let's

19:50

start with you. From last

19:52

week's issue, I absolutely loved our

19:54

colleague, Kerrien's article about the baby

19:56

bust. I thought it was absolutely

19:58

fantastic. I really

20:00

enjoyed Adam O'Neill's dispatch from the

20:03

Libertarian Party convention, which just

20:05

had a lot of fun, colorful details.

20:07

And you know, a lot of people showed up. Donald

20:09

Trump was there trying to get the endorsement. He didn't

20:11

get it. There's a lot going on in that piece

20:13

and I recommend that people read it. I

20:15

think that it's a great piece and Adam also

20:18

brought back an awful lot of very nice

20:20

buttons to wear from the conference there. I highly

20:22

recommend you come and give them a look, Charlotte,

20:24

when you're next in town. You guys do

20:26

have a lot of good campaign, Fag, I'll say

20:28

that. Sasha Nadrice just

20:31

highlighted coverage in The Economist

20:33

itself. This episode of Checks

20:35

and Balance is free to listen to,

20:37

but to listen to all episodes of

20:39

this show and others, you do need

20:41

a subscription to Economist Podcast Plus

20:43

or to The Economist itself. A

20:46

subscription to Podcast Plus gives you access to

20:48

shows like Money Talks about business and finance.

20:51

We have special limited series, including a new

20:53

one coming up called The Modi Raj,

20:55

which is about Narendra Modi, one

20:57

of the world's most powerful men

20:59

and what his rise means for India and

21:01

the world. To sign up, go

21:04

to economist.com slash podcast plus or

21:06

just search for Economist Podcast. Daniela

21:11

Raz is a U.S. correspondent and data

21:13

journalist at The Economist. For

21:15

this week's cover package, she dove

21:17

into what we know about, quote

21:19

unquote, abortion voters and the presidential

21:22

election. I started by asking

21:24

her how Democrats are hoping abortion

21:26

will affect the outcome of the

21:28

race. So there are

21:30

basically two ways that the Democrats are going

21:32

to be hoping that abortion affects the election.

21:34

And the first one is going to be

21:36

through turnout, which is where

21:38

abortion rights basically motivate people who otherwise

21:41

wouldn't have voted. And then

21:43

the other one is through persuasion. So

21:45

that's where some Republicans or independents

21:47

who want to protect abortion rights

21:50

think that protecting abortion rights requires

21:52

voting for Democrats at the top of

21:54

the ticket. Now, if we

21:57

look back to the midterms, Democrats

22:00

Democrats are probably right that the

22:02

ballot over abortion rights helped stave

22:04

off some major Republican gains during

22:06

the midterms. And basically,

22:08

Democrats are going to be hoping that

22:10

there's a similar dynamic that plays out

22:12

in November, and it definitely could, although

22:14

probably to a lesser extent. And

22:17

is that just because more time has passed, or

22:20

why is the issue less salient

22:22

or top of mind? So,

22:25

one issue is obviously, yes, that it's just potentially

22:28

going to be a less salient issue now

22:30

that we're not sort of in the immediate

22:32

aftermath of the ruling, when it really animated

22:34

voters and was super top of mind. The

22:36

other issue is that turnout is just

22:39

generally far higher during general elections than

22:41

midterm elections. So, many of these kind

22:43

of dobs voters who turned out in

22:45

2022 strictly to vote

22:47

for abortion rights candidates and these

22:49

referendums might have turned out anyway

22:51

in the general election. And so, in a general

22:54

election, when there are just more voters, their effect

22:56

is going to be dimmed. So,

22:58

that's an interesting point on turnout. The other

23:01

component of what you said had to do

23:03

with persuasion. And beneath that,

23:05

in turn, is a question of how

23:07

much this really matters as an issue

23:09

compared with the economy or the border

23:11

or other issues that might be

23:13

the reason why someone shows up on election day.

23:16

Is there evidence that Republicans who

23:18

really do worry about access to

23:21

abortion will indeed swing to dems,

23:23

that abortion for them is

23:26

more important than any of the other issues that

23:28

might propel them to vote for Donald

23:30

Trump over a Joe Biden? What

23:33

we have to support this idea

23:35

that Republican voters might have voted

23:38

for Democrats in order to save

23:40

abortion is just a

23:42

couple of academic papers that found

23:44

some correlations using survey data

23:46

over time. So, researchers both

23:48

at Caltech and at UC San Diego

23:50

in two separate papers found that a

23:53

small number of Republicans Who

23:55

viewed abortion as an important issue were more likely to

23:57

vote for Democrats in 2022 than they did in the

23:59

last few years. They were two years prior

24:01

know it's really hard to assess persuasion

24:04

because I for stuff, we don't really

24:06

know whether these registered republicans are simply

24:08

be registered as such or if they're

24:11

actually are republicans and it feels

24:13

impossible to know why somebody changed their

24:15

votes. You can only sort of

24:17

triangulate what may have happened using survey

24:19

data over time, and so there is

24:22

some evidence for that, but it's a

24:24

bit less persuasive than the turnout

24:26

argument. To. Answer the question. I'm persuasion

24:28

a be really helpful to have. More

24:30

numbers on. Who. The

24:32

people are who really care

24:35

about abortion access. Where

24:37

they are: are they in swing states?

24:39

Are they only people who would be

24:41

voting for Joe Biden? anyway? Are there

24:43

a sizable number of independents who care

24:45

about this? a lot above all other

24:47

issues. What does the data tell us.

24:50

So. In. Terms of respondents saying

24:52

it's their most important issue, that's only

24:54

about seven percent, and the vast majority

24:57

of those are women. About half of

24:59

them are living in suburban areas. Something

25:01

like two thirds of them voted for

25:03

Joe Biden and Twenty Twenty and majority

25:06

Those people are democrats the summer Independence

25:08

and Republicans. But I would say that

25:10

you don't have to think that abortion

25:12

is your most important issue for it

25:15

to be part of what you consider

25:17

when you go to the ballot box.

25:19

And we know that young voters. And

25:22

women voters care disproportionately so. For instance,

25:24

when Michigan had an abortion referendum on

25:26

the ballot in the Twenty twenty two

25:28

midterms, the use turn out in the

25:31

states surged. It was thirty seven percent,

25:33

which was the highest nationwide, and far

25:35

exceeded the twenty three percent that we

25:37

saw. an average. Across the country, There's.

25:40

Somebody Different variables. That.

25:43

Will come into play to state the

25:45

obvious on election Day. What?

25:47

Are some of the big factors

25:49

that you think about as you

25:51

consider. How important abortion will

25:53

be in determining the next

25:55

president? So. He said

25:58

there's so many times on this podcast. That

26:00

it is true that the election is gonna

26:02

be very close if you look at Arizona.

26:04

It was decided by something like ten thousand

26:06

votes last time, so we know that even

26:08

small things can tip states one way or

26:11

another. In some sense, if this is a

26:13

low turnout election than abortion can play a

26:15

big girl. And the outcome Because the voters

26:17

who are going to show up November to

26:19

protect abortion are going to make a larger

26:21

share of the electorate benefit. With a high

26:24

turnout elections. and in a high turnout election,

26:26

their effect would be drowned out by other

26:28

voters. We know that there's little interest. In

26:30

the selection. the other thing

26:32

I think is that just

26:34

strategically. The Democrats have

26:36

more voters to tap into here than

26:39

republicans do Like if you are so

26:41

strongly against abortion that it's a deciding

26:43

factor in your votes. You've been voting

26:45

republican anti abortion candidates for years now,

26:48

whereas Democrats can kind of tap into

26:50

the people who support the shades of

26:52

grey. And they do want women to

26:54

have access the don't think late. Term. Abortions should

26:56

be allowed. There's basically much more room

26:59

for Democrats to maneuver than for republicans.

27:01

is kind of bought themselves into a

27:03

corner in some way into in a

27:05

close election. That's an important tool and

27:07

I guess and important weapon for Democrats.

27:19

Suit. Certain. On

27:22

a macro level. Twenty.

27:25

Twenty Two, The midterms, There.

27:27

Was a. Notably.

27:29

Broad agreement as much as such.

27:31

consensus. Does exist. And the weekend election?

27:33

that abortion really. Helps Democrats perform much

27:36

better than people might have thought

27:38

before. That it was an issue that

27:40

really swayed the electorate. Towards

27:43

Democrats. Is that going to

27:45

be true this time around? Trees. Are

27:48

think it'll continue to have a positive effect

27:50

on democratic chances for Biden for the Senate

27:52

candidates and down bowed as well. But I

27:55

think it's also important to remember that and

27:57

Twenty Twenty Two, you had a lot add

27:59

candidates that basically Donald Trump handpicked who were

28:01

saying that they were going to deny elections

28:04

and whatnot. I think that also weighed against

28:06

democratic chances and Biden himself was not at

28:08

the top of the ballot. so those factors

28:10

I think are worth taking into account. I

28:13

think if you add on these up as

28:15

much as anyone can do that several months

28:17

out, you do still end up with a

28:19

net positive effect for democrats, but I don't

28:22

think it'll be the kind of decisive blow

28:24

that one might have expected. On the other

28:26

hand, marginal votes are what matter and in

28:28

very close elections. So. I think that this is

28:31

probably the most important want to pay attention to out

28:33

of all the ones that he could be pay, it

28:35

has to. Yeah, I think that make sense.

28:37

and one of the things I've been interested

28:39

in is how democrats are trying to take

28:41

this issue and run with that Because in

28:44

some ways this is the ultimate anti. Wank.

28:47

Issue A Democrats often talk about programs that

28:49

acts of policy. That help people sometimes

28:51

and really meaningful ways, but which are

28:53

nevertheless hard to explain. Their unemotional abortion

28:55

is the opposite of that. It as

28:58

an issue Tom says of this are

29:00

all rats and among many voters there's

29:02

this benefit at least politically to loss

29:04

of or isn't that people have a

29:06

really strong reaction to something being taken

29:09

away from them in. This instance the

29:11

right to an abortion. So. Sasha.

29:13

How are Democrats trying to

29:15

seize on Nes in their

29:17

messaging. Of. I've been struck

29:19

with his base. Just. How

29:21

big that betting? On. This topic

29:23

and in the share of ads that's

29:25

going to abortion that really kind of

29:28

passing the house on this topic split

29:30

in terms of the message they're trying

29:32

to send. I think they've made a

29:34

very sensible decision to not make Joe

29:36

Biden a spokesperson on this is not

29:39

very popular. What is popular is just

29:41

selling women who have suffered on the

29:43

best of what happens. Whether that's like.

29:45

A horrific miscarriage that wasn't managed

29:47

well because they lived in a

29:49

band. States, or whether that's discovering

29:52

very late in a pregnancy that

29:54

they had a a seat. As

29:56

with. A horrible, fatal

29:59

illness. and not being able

30:01

to get care. Showing

30:03

those women, then saying Trump

30:06

did this, and then finally saying this

30:08

can get worse if he is reelected because he

30:11

will go for a federal ban.

30:13

It's quite an effective strategy and they're

30:15

going very, very big on that. You're

30:17

seeing that in the dollars they're spending

30:19

since the midterms, they've spent five times

30:21

what the Republicans have spent on

30:24

ads that are in some way about

30:26

abortion. That's a huge shift actually for

30:28

both parties. Republicans have almost

30:31

gone silent on this subject. Of every

30:33

dollar, only five cents now goes to

30:35

abortion ads for them, whereas for Dems

30:37

it's over 33 cents. It shows how much

30:39

they're betting on it and how

30:42

much they're kind of riding the

30:44

coattails of this issue, which finally

30:46

inserts some potential energy into fairly

30:48

low energy campaign otherwise. Yeah, you

30:51

mentioned Joe Biden in passing there,

30:53

but of course he's a devout

30:55

Catholic and has been historically not

30:57

the most ardent defender of abortion rights

31:00

and there's been a swing

31:02

here. Adri Sasha mentioned that Republicans

31:04

have been largely

31:07

silent on this and I want to dwell

31:09

on that a bit more because Republicans have,

31:11

of course, historically depended on opposition to Roe

31:14

as a way to turn out voters. There

31:17

were some Republican politicians who were

31:19

very plainly anti-abortion as a matter

31:21

of faith. There's no reason to

31:23

think it's not genuine that someone

31:25

like a Mike Pence has, for

31:27

him, deeply felt moral objections to this.

31:30

Then there were other Republicans who

31:32

were anti-abortion as a matter of

31:34

politics. Donald Trump is someone who is quite

31:37

open, I think, about not viewing abortion

31:39

as an issue that is

31:41

a matter of faith or morality,

31:43

but he wanted anti-Roe justices as

31:45

a way to serve a broad

31:47

constituency within the Republican Party. How

31:50

do you see Republicans' political strategy shifting

31:53

in the post-dobs era? So

31:56

I think you've seen a recognition

31:58

among the pragmatic wing

32:00

of the Republican Party that, you know, the dog

32:03

has caught the car. And although

32:05

opposition to Roe, which sets the

32:07

limit of abortion at something like

32:10

24 weeks, fetal

32:12

viability, that opposition to that standard

32:14

was relatively popular. The way that

32:16

Republican states have carried out abortion

32:19

policy after Roe, not only banning

32:21

abortion entirely in the case of

32:24

even rape or incest or fetal

32:26

abnormalities, but going after even more

32:28

things, going after the

32:30

shipment of abortion drugs, going

32:32

after IVF to some extent,

32:34

going after contraception even, that's

32:36

extremely, extremely unpopular. And so

32:38

the true believers, I think,

32:41

are true believers and do actually want to

32:43

go all the way. And you see that

32:45

among a faction, but the allure of the

32:47

alliance has really faded. And you see that

32:50

with Donald Trump statements running away from this

32:52

issue, you see that with Carrie Lake, who

32:54

surprised me incredibly by opposing the imposition of

32:56

an abortion ban in Arizona and saying that

32:58

she was in favor of child allowances, all

33:01

these kind of nice democratic things. It was a

33:03

very strange moment. I think the Republican

33:05

strategy is going to be the same as it

33:07

was in 2022, which was to basically stay silent

33:09

on this issue as much as possible. There is

33:11

another point though, to keep in mind, which is

33:14

that as good an election as Democrats

33:16

had in 2022 relative to expectations,

33:19

simply copying and pasting those results in 2024

33:23

would still be very bad for Democrats. Republicans

33:25

won the popular vote by three points. So

33:27

I think it's also important to acknowledge the

33:29

reality, which is that a lot of Americans

33:31

are going to vote for Republicans despite the

33:34

lived experience of these issues as well. You

33:36

pointed to some of the shades

33:39

of anti-abortion politics, right? That there

33:41

are people who would oppose Roe,

33:43

but also oppose some of what's

33:45

happening on the state level in Republican-led

33:47

states. I think on the left, in

33:50

terms of shades of pro-abortion policy

33:53

and pro-abortion rights, I'm

33:56

really struck by how many ads

33:58

continue to emphasize instance where

34:01

a mother's health is at

34:03

risk or where there's some

34:06

completely egregious situation of

34:08

a baby with lethal

34:10

conditions and nevertheless an abortion

34:13

is prohibited. That type

34:15

of messaging, those types of situations, continue

34:17

to be the anecdotes that are trotted

34:19

out as opposed to just women's basic

34:21

right to have an abortion even if

34:23

the fetus is healthy and the mother

34:25

is healthy. It's savvy, right, but it

34:28

is nevertheless noteworthy as we think about

34:30

our national comfort or discomfort with a

34:32

woman's right to terminate a

34:34

pregnancy. Okay, we

34:37

are going to get into the question of women's

34:39

access to an abortion and

34:41

how the election may impact it in

34:44

a moment. I'm

34:57

Sandra and I'm just the professional your small

34:59

business was looking for, but you didn't hire

35:01

me because you didn't use LinkedIn jobs. LinkedIn

35:04

has professionals you can't find anywhere else, including

35:06

those who aren't actively looking for a new

35:08

job but might be open to the perfect

35:10

role, like me. In a given month

35:12

over 70% of LinkedIn users

35:15

don't visit other leading job sites,

35:17

so if you're not looking on

35:19

LinkedIn you'll miss out on great

35:21

candidates like Sandra. Start hiring professionals

35:23

like a professional. Post your free

35:25

job on linkedin.com/spoken today. Mary

35:32

Ziegler is a legal historian at the

35:34

University of California Davis and has studied

35:36

access to abortion and how it has

35:38

been limited in the past. I

35:41

asked her what to make of President Biden's

35:43

claims that this election is indeed a choice

35:45

between restoring Roe and having

35:47

a federal ban on abortion. I

35:51

think it's quite unlikely that if President Biden

35:53

is reelected that Roe v. Wade will be

35:55

restored in the near term, right? So there's

35:57

largely two ways I think you could imagine.

36:00

Imagine that happening. One, Congress

36:02

passing some kind of bill

36:04

to restore Roe v. Wade.

36:07

The current congressional maps don't

36:09

appear to make that very

36:11

likely. The other way this could happen would be

36:13

if the Supreme Court reversed course and overturned

36:15

its decision from 2022 that

36:17

undid Roe v. Wade, but of

36:20

course the Supreme Court's composition would

36:22

need to change pretty dramatically. As

36:24

to a ban, it's equally unlikely

36:26

that Congress would pass a ban

36:28

on abortion. It's hard for me

36:30

to see Republicans from unsafe

36:33

districts voting for a federal ban.

36:35

The trickier question is

36:37

whether conservatives can transform a law

36:39

that's already on the books, known as

36:41

the Comstock Act, into a kind of

36:44

de facto backdoor ban on abortion. So

36:47

some former Trump administration officials have

36:49

been very public in saying that

36:51

they believe this 1873 obscenity law

36:53

makes it illegal to mail or

36:56

put through common carrier any abortion-related item,

36:58

and they believe that that in effect

37:00

is a ban on abortion. So

37:03

there's a possibility in a Trump administration that

37:05

you could have this law reinvented

37:07

as a backdoor ban on abortion. That

37:10

I think is somewhat more likely but not

37:12

inevitable because it would require the Trump administration

37:15

to interpret the law that way and

37:17

the Supreme Court to agree with that interpretation.

37:20

But both of those things seem entirely

37:22

realistic to me but not inevitable.

37:25

If Congress is split, how

37:27

much can the next

37:29

president do without Congress

37:31

to limit access to abortion? A

37:34

good amount. I think the Comstock Act is the most

37:36

important potential strategy. There

37:38

are strategies conservatives have suggested

37:41

that would involve limiting

37:43

access to mifepristone, a pill used in

37:46

more than half of abortions in the

37:48

United States, that wouldn't require agreement of

37:50

scientists at FDA, just the views of

37:52

the Secretary of Health and Human Services,

37:55

but those too would require the approval of

37:57

the U.S. Supreme Court. Another

38:00

way to think about this is that a potential President

38:02

Trump could have a lot of power to limit

38:04

access to abortion, but only if

38:06

the U.S. Supreme Court cooperates. The

38:09

genius of this Comstock Act strategy, if

38:11

you're the anti-abortion movement, is that it puts the

38:14

creation of a ban entirely

38:16

in the hands of people who can never

38:18

face re-election. Donald Trump can't run for

38:20

re-election. The Supreme Court justices

38:22

aren't elected in the first place.

38:25

So if they want to turn the Comstock Act into

38:27

a ban, they can do so

38:29

with no accountability to voters whatsoever. Whereas

38:32

a Republican who voted on a 15-week

38:34

ban or a six-week ban or a

38:36

ban at fertilization could easily lose

38:39

re-election. So I think a

38:41

lot of the savvy players in the

38:43

anti-abortion movement are looking for strategies that

38:45

are insulated from that kind of popular

38:47

backlash. The savvy players

38:49

in the anti-abortion movement, historically

38:52

their interests have been very closely

38:54

aligned with representatives

38:56

and senators on the right. Do

38:59

you find that those interests are starting

39:01

to diverge as the political risks

39:03

to those politicians becomes more clear?

39:05

I think they've always been

39:07

distinct in the sense that people

39:09

in the anti-abortion movement see

39:12

their cause as the sort of human rights issue

39:14

of the era. And

39:16

when Republicans are not in lockstep,

39:18

they've been willing to primary those

39:21

Republicans or essentially sometimes

39:23

destroy their careers. Generally,

39:25

I think the reason they were more

39:27

aligned was because the movement's prior

39:30

goal, to some extent current goal,

39:32

is control of the Supreme Court. Increasingly,

39:34

I think the movement has tried

39:36

to find ways of working around

39:38

popular politics rather than through popular

39:40

politics. So for example, by focusing

39:43

more on uncompetitive

39:45

legislatures, on

39:48

federal litigation, essentially on

39:50

working to change the

39:52

law and society without the approval

39:54

of voters. And that's, I

39:57

think, increased frustration within the movement

39:59

of Republican who aren't willing to go

40:01

along with it. In other words, Republicans who are still

40:03

kind of bound by ordinary

40:06

political rules who

40:08

still have to worry about losing races and

40:10

are therefore not willing to support the

40:12

movement's positions. So I think part of

40:14

what we're seeing now is a fracture

40:16

between the GOP and the movement

40:18

at some points that reflects

40:21

fundamental changes to the anti-abortion movement

40:23

itself. And then

40:25

what about on the other side for the Biden administration?

40:28

What more could they do to

40:30

try to protect access to abortion?

40:33

Well, I think to some degree, the Biden

40:35

administration in reality operates more like a

40:37

firewall to prevent further restrictions on abortion

40:40

than to expand protections in significant

40:42

ways. We've seen the

40:44

Biden administration in court essentially

40:46

fighting with states about their

40:48

limits on abortion, as well

40:50

as the Biden administration defending

40:53

access to Mipha-Pristan. Part

40:55

of the reason for that is when the

40:57

Biden administration takes more aggressive executive

40:59

action, it too has

41:01

to get the approval of the U.S. Supreme Court.

41:03

And the U.S. Supreme Court is much more conservative

41:05

than the Biden administration is on abortion. How

41:08

important are judicial appointments at this stage? What

41:10

issues could still be litigated? What are the

41:12

main questions that the courts still

41:14

face? I think they're very important. I think

41:16

the importance of judicial confirmations

41:19

has been pretty understated in this election. I

41:21

think we all became accustomed

41:23

to thinking about Supreme Court nominations as essentially

41:25

will they or won't they overrule Roe? And

41:28

now that Roe is gone, it sort of

41:30

feels as if judicial confirmations are a lot

41:32

less important than they used to be. One

41:35

reason they're important, of course, is that nothing is

41:37

forever on the Supreme Court, as we learned with

41:39

the reversal of Roe. So two

41:41

of the justices who are the oldest, Justices Alito

41:44

and Thomas, were both on the

41:46

majority that overrule Roe. So

41:48

any prospect of reversing course

41:50

on abortion rights will depend

41:52

on potentially new Supreme Court

41:55

confirmations. Conversely, we've seen

41:57

that censure was overturned. The Supreme Court's

41:59

been hurriedly out. of the business of resolving

42:01

abortion cases. There are two abortion cases that

42:03

will be resolved in the next month. There

42:05

have been challenges to the authority of the

42:08

FDA to approve Mr. Pristone. There have been

42:10

efforts to treat the Comstock Act as a

42:12

de facto ban. Another major

42:14

issue waiting in the wings is whether

42:16

the Constitution, the 14th Amendment of

42:19

the Constitution particularly, treats fetuses and

42:21

embryos as rights holding people, and

42:23

therefore whether liberal policies on things

42:26

like abortion or in vitro fertilization are in

42:29

fact unconstitutional. I don't think

42:31

any experts at the moment

42:33

think that would be a winning argument before

42:35

the Supreme Court, at least as the court

42:37

is currently constituted. But if the

42:39

court would have become more conservative, outcomes like the

42:41

recognition of fetal personhood which now seemed to be

42:43

a long shot could be on the table. Sasha,

42:53

Mary referred to two cases that are before

42:56

the Supreme Court that have to do with

42:58

abortion. What are they? So the court

43:00

is expected to rule on both of

43:02

these cases over the next few weeks

43:04

indeed. One is about

43:07

Mr. Pristone, which is one

43:09

of the two drugs used in

43:11

most abortions now. And

43:15

if the court ruled

43:17

to essentially ban Mr. Pristone, this would be

43:19

a very, very big deal. I

43:22

think it's unlikely that they will go that way

43:24

if I'm very honest. I think they will probably

43:26

throw it out, but not because they disagree

43:28

with the argument, but just on a

43:30

sort of technicality saying that the plaintiffs

43:33

don't have standing. So that kind of kicks

43:35

the issue long. The second

43:37

one is on something

43:40

called M.Tala. It looks at

43:42

whether states

43:44

with abortion bans can

43:47

and should still treat women

43:50

who are having pregnancy emergencies.

43:52

So who are having very

43:54

bad miscarriages or very problematic

43:56

pregnancies in which they could

43:58

essentially hemorrhage to death. There's

44:00

a pretty grim case and

44:02

there we think, well,

44:04

we don't know what the court's going to do,

44:06

so I think what it does there will be

44:08

really quite telling in terms of, again, how much

44:10

salience the issue gets again and I think that's

44:12

one of the questions in the coming months, right?

44:14

Does the post-dobs momentum

44:17

come back? I think if the Supreme

44:19

Court ruled, certainly if it ruled against

44:22

Mifepristo that would be a massive deal,

44:24

but even M.Tala, although it sounds a

44:26

bit more technical, I think could

44:28

return some real momentum and would obviously

44:30

be horrific for women who live in

44:32

those states. Yeah, I

44:35

was really interested in the oral arguments on

44:37

M.Tala because in that instance you had a

44:39

federal statute passed in the 80s that the

44:41

Biden administration is arguing takes

44:44

precedence over the Idaho

44:46

state law and it's an

44:49

example of the Biden administration trying to find

44:51

a way to insert itself here to protect

44:53

women's right to an abortion. It really scoured

44:55

the landscape to look for any

44:57

statute that it might use

45:00

to fight back against some of these

45:02

more restrictive state laws. The

45:04

Comstock Act is a law that

45:06

comes up often in this discussion.

45:09

Sasha, can you give a primer

45:11

on it? The Comstock Act is

45:13

this late 19th

45:16

century obscenity law

45:18

that's been dusted off by

45:21

conservative lawyers in the hope, as

45:23

Mary said earlier, to sort of

45:25

be a backdoor way of in

45:28

practice banning abortion. One of its main

45:30

aims was to stop people from mailing

45:33

around porn and other

45:36

obscenities, but one of the things that

45:38

it includes is, depending

45:40

on how you interpret it, that you couldn't

45:43

post anything related

45:46

to abortion. So what

45:49

people who hope there'll be some

45:51

form of a federal ban eventually

45:54

are sort of hitching their wagon on is

45:56

that if an enthusiastic president

46:00

and Supreme Court would interpret this

46:02

law as in fact being

46:04

a ban. And so, you

46:06

know, probably the lowest hanging fruit

46:08

for Joe Biden, if he wanted

46:10

to do something very significant for

46:13

securing abortion rights,

46:16

or at least defending against the national ban

46:18

would be to repeal this really old law.

46:21

Yes, I think that's right. I

46:23

think the Comstock Act is clearly

46:25

antiquated in many ways, including its

46:28

prohibition of letters that

46:30

are too sexual, among other things, but

46:32

it would be easiest for Democrats

46:35

to try to bring about the repeal. There's already

46:37

been a bill introduced to do that. But

46:40

if they wanted to do what Joe Biden is

46:42

pledging to do, which is reinstate Roe, they would

46:45

need to pass a law. That law would not

46:47

be budgetary, it would be regulatory in nature, so

46:49

it would be subject under the current rules to

46:51

a filibuster in the Senate. If

46:53

Democrats do get control of the Senate,

46:55

which is unlikely but possible, abortion

46:58

would be the issue on which they

47:00

decided to break the filibuster. It's the

47:02

most unifying issue for them, and it

47:04

is the clearest one for them to try

47:06

and get rid of the old supermajority requirements of

47:09

60 votes and instead move towards a simple majority.

47:11

And so I think that if there is a way that

47:13

Biden is being credible when he

47:16

pledges to restore Roe, it's through this mechanism

47:18

of the Senate breaking the filibuster, or it's

47:20

through, as Professor Ziegler said, a point justices

47:22

to the Supreme Court who would undo what

47:24

the Supreme Court just did. Another

47:27

really unifying issue for Democrats is contraception, and

47:29

that's what I wanted to get to next.

47:31

What are the other adjacent

47:34

issues that might come

47:36

up in coming months, either

47:38

in states or

47:41

in the Supreme Court? I was

47:43

struck again in the Intella

47:45

arguments, Alito seemed to

47:47

really want to insert this idea

47:50

of the unborn child, and it

47:53

both is relevant for the outcome of that

47:55

case, but in whatever decision ultimately comes from

47:57

the Supreme Court on this, if you have

48:00

Not to mention that the unborn child that. Bolsters.

48:02

The idea of personhood for a fetus.

48:05

So what are you looking at? The

48:08

line of the democrats is sort of. says.

48:10

They came for bullshit and. Then. They

48:12

came for i the ass I next

48:14

to come for contraception as well. and

48:16

actually that the sort of trying to

48:18

force republicans to take a position on

48:20

a right to contraception. Which. He see playing

48:22

out here in D C which I think

48:24

would be very interesting. I mean I think

48:27

the Uniting. Once. Very nice

48:29

legal concepts behind. All

48:31

these things is this idea of fetal

48:33

personhood and I think it's something we're

48:35

gonna. Hear. A lot more about. It

48:38

is essentially the idea that

48:40

a fetus or in some

48:43

interpretations, even and embryos has

48:45

the same rights basically as

48:47

a child. The consequence. Of

48:50

see to personhood lose ah.

48:53

Very clear for I be asked because

48:55

I vs. Almost always involves the destruction

48:58

of embryos which would count as

49:00

Mulder. Essentially book could even have

49:02

consequences for some forms of contraception

49:04

like are you d So again,

49:07

I think you live down the

49:09

road beyond Twenty Four Twenty Five.

49:11

Easy to see. The.

49:13

Relationship between. The Republicans in the

49:15

Pro Life movement guessing potentially more more

49:17

tense because all of these policies would

49:20

be much more unpopular. Also. With

49:22

their base then in a their boss

49:24

instance has been. I. Agree

49:26

with that and I'm struck

49:28

by the practical consequences for

49:30

health care providers and for

49:32

women. There have been women

49:34

in Idaho where a ban

49:37

has only been in place

49:39

for a few months, But

49:41

the practical consequences that states

49:43

abortion policy is that women

49:45

are then air listed by

49:47

helicopter to a different state

49:49

to get medically urgent. Care.

49:53

Address The court was supposed to be getting

49:55

itself out of the business of weighing in

49:57

on these issues and said as much explicitly

49:59

when. They decided dogs that seems

50:01

there to has been proved incorrect. What

50:04

do you make of the Supreme

50:06

court's continued machinations on this subject?

50:09

Is a D C Alito in

50:11

and other judges asserting a new

50:13

fundamental right which is that fetuses

50:15

have some degree of personhood and

50:17

I think it does demonstrate that

50:20

were it. The court is

50:22

gone off the rails. Of the past

50:24

few decades has been the invention and

50:26

and really discovery of new fundamental rights

50:28

embedded in the constitution. I think he

50:30

can apply that argument a row itself

50:32

which found the right in abortion in

50:35

a constitutional right to privacy. I think

50:37

you've seen you know the use of

50:39

the First Amendment. To me, unlimited campaign

50:41

contributions and a Fundamental Rights fluctuate and

50:43

zigzag based on who is in charge

50:45

of the court at. That. Given

50:47

time, I think that it undermines the

50:49

entire project of of legitimacy. I'm for

50:51

the judiciary, so I think that. My.

50:54

Hope both in a practical consequences for

50:56

women and also just the via legitimacy

50:58

as of the court itself would be

51:00

that they don't pursue to seal person

51:02

had arguments much faster, but they might

51:04

have to if courts at the same

51:07

level do actually end up taking it

51:09

up and implementing it in there and

51:11

states. Yeah, I think that's why I

51:13

think you may see. Quite a bit more activity

51:15

there. I

51:25

am going to ask you both

51:28

Sinclair questions today's episode describes and

51:30

very important ballot measures, but the

51:32

quiz today. Highlights. And

51:34

more ridiculous once. These. Existent

51:37

these are not made up and I

51:39

want you to guess is dismissed as

51:41

passed or failed. In a quick fi

51:43

around as a. Question Number

51:46

once: the Arizona Voter Reward Act

51:48

was a two thousand and six

51:50

measure to give one randomly selected

51:52

voter a million dollars simply for

51:54

voting. Did this Pass. The

51:57

sounds like amount of pass. as you say

51:59

i had my first visit to Arizona

52:01

for this case, and I wouldn't be surprised

52:03

if it did. It

52:06

failed 67 to 33. Okay,

52:08

next one. This

52:11

was in 2010. The

52:13

question was whether Denver should set up

52:15

a commission for tracking UFOs. Pass

52:18

or fail? Fail.

52:23

Failed 82 to 18. Patrice,

52:26

you also, so far, failing,

52:28

but I'm sure you'll recover

52:30

soon. Question number three. A

52:33

vote banning the killing of horses

52:36

for human consumption and the sale of horse meat.

52:38

This was California in 1998. Did

52:40

it pass or fail? Definitely

52:43

passed. Definitely, definitely passed. You

52:45

can't even have foie gras in California, I think.

52:48

Yeah. There were 10,000 horses who were

52:50

ending up as dinner in places like

52:52

France and Switzerland to Belgium. Okay,

52:56

that one did pass. You are both correct. Okay.

52:59

Confetti has dropped from the ceiling. Sasha has won. This

53:02

is, this is not a day I was expecting to have. I

53:05

shouldn't say this, but like, why is it so much horse

53:07

to eat a horse and to eat a cow? No,

53:09

I hear you. Horses are beautiful. I think.

53:11

The size of cows. Have you ever looked

53:13

a cow in the eyes? I have, I

53:15

have helped a cow give birth to a

53:18

calf. Oh wow. So yes. But

53:20

you still eat burgers. I

53:22

do. Very happily. I do. Thank

53:25

you, Sasha. Thanks, Charlotte. Thanks, Adrize. Thank

53:28

you. This

53:34

episode was produced by Stevie Hurst.

53:36

Carla Patella is our sound engineer

53:38

with thanks to Daniela Raz, Mary

53:40

Ziegler, Margaret Howell and Hannah Marino.

53:43

If you like the podcast, please let people know

53:45

and leave us a rating and a review. If you're

53:47

not a subscriber to Economist Podcast

53:50

Plus, I really recommend that you sign

53:52

up, it's only $5 a month. You

53:55

can get in touch with us by email. The address

53:57

is puttust at economist.com. The

54:00

meantime, thank you very much for the snow.

54:02

We will have more to unbalanced. Selling

54:22

a little? Or a

54:24

lot? Selling. A little. Shopify helps you do

54:27

your thing however you chitching. Shopify. Shopify

54:29

is the global commerce platform that helps you sell

54:31

at every stage of your business. From

54:34

the launch your online shop stage to the first

54:36

real-life store stage, all

54:38

the way to the did we just hit a

54:40

million orders stage, Shopify is there to help you

54:43

grow. Shopify helps you

54:45

turn browsers into buyers with the internet's

54:47

best converting checkout. 36% better on average. With

54:59

Shopify, get a one

55:01

dollar per month trial

55:03

period at shopify.com/work shopify.com.

55:05

Slash work.