0:00

Jon Stewart is back in the host

0:02

chair at The Daily Show, which means

0:04

he's also back in our ears on

0:06

The Daily Show Ears Edition Podcast. The

0:08

Daily Show Podcast has everything you need

0:10

to stay on top of today's news

0:12

and pop culture. You get

0:14

hilarious satirical takes on entertainment, politics,

0:16

sports, and more from Jon and

0:19

the team of correspondents and contributors.

0:21

The podcast also has content you

0:23

can't get anywhere else, like extended

0:25

interviews and a roundup of the

0:27

weekly headlines. Welcome to The Daily

0:29

Show, Ears Edition, wherever you get

0:32

your podcasts. Hey

0:40

everybody, welcome once again to The

0:42

Weekly Show with Jon Stewart.

0:44

I'm Jon Stewart, and I apologize if

0:47

that was too enthusiastic. I have yet

0:49

to understand in terms

0:51

of a podcast how to open it

0:53

up, what level of enthusiasm is

0:56

appropriate for when people are

0:58

just listening to something as opposed to

1:02

on cable television when you're coming in

1:04

and very clearly somebody's making popcorn or

1:06

something else. That may have

1:08

been too forceful, and I'm sure that

1:10

our grand producers, Brittany Mamedovic and

1:12

Lauren Walker, who are here with me, would

1:16

be able to tell you. Last week, we

1:18

had our military industrial complex show.

1:22

We learned, shockingly, that

1:24

there is waste fraud and

1:26

abuse in a lot

1:28

of the budgets of our military industrial complex.

1:31

But even more interestingly, we

1:33

learned that our military industrial complex

1:35

may be strategically counterproductive.

1:39

We may actually be sowing more

1:42

chaos than

1:44

we are not. This week's episode is

1:47

fascinating. I don't know

1:49

if you know this. Maybe this is giving the tea on

1:53

production, on a glimpse

1:55

behind the curtain. We

1:58

have meetings where we don't have a meeting. discuss

2:01

what we would like to cover, what we would

2:03

like to talk about. So this week I voted

2:05

for. Celtics

2:07

Mavericks, Celtics, Mavericks, come on.

2:09

It's the championship. Tatum

2:11

Brown, they finally did it.

2:15

But we're going to we're actually going to do abortion. Are

2:18

you suggesting I vetoed you?

2:20

No, why, Lauren, how could

2:22

you come in a defensive

2:24

posture on that?

2:27

No, we have it's again.

2:29

We're listen, it's an issue

2:31

that this myth of Hearthstone judgment

2:34

that came down and was promoted

2:36

as this win for abortion rights,

2:38

but was really kind of a

2:40

just kick the can. There's

2:43

so much going on around it,

2:45

but I think more

2:47

trenchantly, it represents again,

2:49

there is broad support. And

2:52

we talked about this for. Abortion

2:55

rights for four women. There

2:57

is a broad, democratic, majoritarian

2:59

support. But because of the

3:01

way our system is set up, that

3:04

is under full on assault.

3:06

And it's just one more thing. That

3:09

I believe has people

3:12

feeling. That

3:14

our system is is not

3:16

responsive to the needs of the people that

3:18

it's supposed to represent. Would

3:20

you guys agree with with that? Totally.

3:23

And I think just to bridge

3:25

last week's episode and this week's

3:27

episode, last week,

3:29

the House voted on the defense

3:32

bill that included a provision blocking

3:34

abortion coverage from the Pentagon.

3:38

More specifically, they're trying to reverse

3:40

a Pentagon policy, which allows service

3:43

members to be compensated for time

3:45

off and travel if they need

3:47

reproductive care. So it just

3:50

shows you the attacks come from everywhere

3:53

can fit into any bill. Yes. And

3:56

the extent to which they will

3:58

not allow it. anywhere

4:00

that there is no opportunity small

4:03

enough for them to inject that

4:05

in there. And that's

4:07

for sure. Although to be fair, it's

4:09

the house and their knuckleheads.

4:11

And my guess is it probably doesn't get past

4:13

the Senate, but who the hell knows anymore with

4:16

the way things are functioning? Let's fucking hope not.

4:19

They'll try anyway. By the way,

4:21

that was Brittany Mamedovic with

4:23

just filthy language. Just

4:25

if I may, for those of you

4:27

at home who are watching in this

4:29

podcast, obviously is geared towards six

4:32

to eight year olds. I just want to let them know that

4:35

I did not in any way can go in the use

4:37

of the word fuck. No, of course not. I've learned from

4:39

the best. No, you've learned from

4:41

you. You've learned from the saltiest speaker of

4:43

all. So I apologize for

4:46

all of that. But our guests this week

4:48

are fabulous to discuss it. So let's let's get

4:50

to them right now. Hello.

4:56

OK, so we're going to welcome our

4:58

honored guest, Melissa Murray. Earl

5:00

favorite NYU law professor, co-host of

5:03

the Strict Scrutiny podcast, which I

5:05

say slowly so they don't fumble

5:07

it. And Jessica Valenti, she's

5:09

the founder of abortion everyday dot com,

5:12

an author of the forthcoming book,

5:14

Abortion, Our Bodies, Their Lies and

5:16

the Truths We Use to

5:19

Win. Welcome to

5:21

the conversation. We

5:24

are discussing ways

5:26

that our system is

5:29

somewhat dysfunctional and leads

5:31

to a certain dissatisfaction

5:34

with the kind of tenets and foundations of

5:36

the democracy. And I think the abortion issue

5:38

is one of those. It's an incredibly complex,

5:40

complicated issue. There's people of good faith on

5:42

all sides. Then there's also those that have

5:45

weaponized it. But

5:47

it felt like after Roe, the

5:49

country had found kind

5:52

of a status quo that felt

5:55

majoritarian to some

5:57

extent. But the

5:59

four. of the anti-abortion movement have

6:02

chipped away at that through legal

6:04

means, but we also want

6:06

to get to, you know, we

6:08

kind of have this idea that the things they

6:10

can't make illegal, they make

6:12

impossible. And so I wanted to

6:14

start there. Jessica, if I could, I'd start with you.

6:17

What are some of the things that have been done that

6:19

aren't necessarily legal challenges, but have

6:22

made it so that

6:24

it's unbelievably difficult? I

6:26

mean, part of the problem is there's

6:28

so much. And

6:31

they're not relying on any

6:34

one attack, which is really smart.

6:36

So if one fails, they have a million others waiting

6:38

in the wings. But I think, you

6:40

know, the things that

6:42

I'm most worried about are

6:45

travel bans, which I feel like are not

6:47

getting enough media coverage at

6:49

all. People sort of don't know that they

6:51

exist or they think that it's something we

6:53

don't have to worry about because right now

6:55

it's primarily targeted towards teenagers.

6:58

And all the little sort of

7:00

chipping away things that they're doing

7:03

around mifapristone and abortion medication specifically,

7:05

because they know that that's how people

7:07

in anti-choice states are ending their pregnancies,

7:10

right? There was some new numbers that

7:12

came out that showed 8,000 people a

7:14

month were getting pills from

7:20

pro-choice states. And so they know that women are

7:22

getting around their bans. They're really pissed off about

7:24

it. And so they're sort of doing everything that

7:26

they can to, as you said, make

7:28

it impossible to get. Melissa,

7:30

let me ask you, so that brings up how

7:34

they're doing it legally. So they're setting these

7:36

boundaries. I don't know much about how a

7:38

travel ban is

7:40

placed legislatively or is enforced. And

7:42

mifapristone, the big news was, oh,

7:45

that ban failed at

7:47

the Supreme Court, but it's not as simple

7:50

as that, is it? It was actually not

7:52

a particularly robust victory, no? No, I think

7:54

that's right. Thanks for having me. Let

7:57

me add on. Melissa, any time, any time,

7:59

Melissa. Are

12:00

you suggesting that the mainstream media has not

12:02

picked up the nuance of

12:04

this Supreme Court decision? I will say when I

12:07

go on MSNBC, I make sure that the nuance

12:09

is I know you do that everyone is telling

12:11

us But people are talking

12:13

about this as a victory. It's not a

12:15

victory It's or if it is it's a

12:18

very muted victory and it's not going to

12:20

last they are going to find new plaintiffs

12:22

that will challenge us and the only winner

12:24

the real it's relentless Well, but yeah, this

12:26

is the point the winner here is not

12:28

the pro-choice movement It's the court because the

12:30

court gets to appear moderate on the issue

12:33

of an abort of abortion At

12:35

a time when millions of people are galvanized

12:37

about abortion as an electoral issue We have

12:39

an election coming up in a few months

12:42

This court does not want to be a

12:44

part of that election and that narrative and

12:46

so this is a win for

12:48

the court They get to be moderate they get

12:50

to be consensus driven and rule of law oriented

12:52

But in fact, they've merely preserved a shitty status

12:54

quo that they brought into being kicked it down

12:56

the road, Jessica I want to ask you because

12:59

we bring up, you know, we sort of talk about these things

13:01

in the well in red states It's this and in blue states

13:03

is this but it's obviously never as simple and there are certainly

13:07

blue cities in red states and red

13:10

voters in blue states and and never the

13:12

twain shall meet but the

13:14

fact is You

13:16

know the hurdles that they put up For

13:20

people is the thing that is

13:23

really I think made it so difficult

13:25

for women To make

13:27

these choices, you know, Melissa talked earlier about

13:29

these these travel bans and and the like

13:31

But so if you're in a city a

13:34

blue city that broadly supports abortion, but you're

13:36

in a red state Let's go with you

13:39

know, Houston and Texas. Yeah,

13:41

what what is your? What

13:43

is your option? What is your recourse?

13:46

I Mean it's really

13:48

either travel right which you have to have

13:50

enough money to do you have to have

13:52

support to get out of the state Um,

13:55

or you can get abortion medication shipped

13:57

to you in the state, but you

13:59

have to Okay, if someone

14:01

finds out about this, if an ex-boyfriend, someone who

14:03

doesn't like me finds out that I had abortion

14:06

medication shipped to me, they can make my life

14:08

hell. They can bring a lawsuit because Texas has

14:10

the ability to bring civil

14:12

suits against anyone who aids and abets in

14:14

an abortion. And so there's a real chilling

14:16

effect. Wait, what? Go, go, go, go, go, go,

14:18

go, go, go, go, go, go, go, go, go. Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah. Don't

14:21

bury the lead there. What, say, say that again? Sure. So,

14:24

Texas has something that is sort of

14:26

informally called the bounty hunter mandate where

14:29

you can get 10,000. The bounty hunter

14:31

mandate for pregnant women. Well,

14:34

this is how they get around it

14:36

because they never want to seem as

14:38

if they're attacking the actual pregnant person.

14:40

They say anyone other than the pregnant

14:42

person. So someone who drove them out

14:44

of state, someone who helped them get

14:46

abortion medication. In one case, a

14:49

woman's abusive ex-husband brought a

14:51

lawsuit against three of her

14:53

friends. Yeah. Who helped

14:56

her to allegedly get abortion medication into

14:58

the state and enter pregnancy. And so

15:00

now you're set up with this system

15:02

where if you have an abusive ex-partner

15:04

who wants to make you miserable, they

15:06

can go ahead and they can sue

15:08

your friends for helping you to

15:10

get care. And what that means is

15:12

that all of these people who may have had, you

15:15

know, the ability to travel, the ability to get

15:17

abortion medication shipped to them are

15:20

terrified. They're terrified that they're going to ruin

15:22

their partner's life. They're going to

15:24

ruin their friend's life. And I'm sure

15:26

the doctors then must be terrified that they're going

15:28

to get prosecuted as well. All right. Quick

15:31

break. All

15:35

right, folks, we've got people that are

15:37

going to help pay for the podcast

15:39

through the art of advertising. And this

15:41

one is a necessity. Like

15:43

for instance, do you have a sandwich business and

15:46

you're like, this is a ciabatta business.

15:48

And then you hire people that are

15:50

like, I only make wraps, man. It's

15:54

just it's a it's a poor fit. But

15:56

thankfully, there's a place you can go

15:58

to help you for this zip recruiter.

16:00

make hiring fast and easy, you can

16:02

try it for free, which is a

16:04

rare treat. ziprecruiter.com/Zip

16:06

Weekly, their smart technology, identifies

16:08

the top talent, not the

16:10

people that only want to

16:12

make wraps. Four out of

16:14

five employers who post on

16:16

ZipRecruiter get a quality candidate

16:18

within the first day. Try

16:21

it for free at this

16:23

exclusive web address ziprecruiter.com/Zip Weekly.

16:25

I'll say it again because

16:27

I was a poor hire.

16:29

ziprecruiter.com/Zip Weekly. Do it

16:32

now! You

16:52

can't do that kind of care. Your facility has to be like

16:54

a hospital and you've got, and

17:01

then through sort of intimidation

17:04

of the doctors, they made it

17:06

so that there's very few clinics so that even

17:09

within the state people had

17:11

overwhelming travel hurdles, especially

17:14

if they didn't have the kind of resources

17:16

that, you know, people might have to have

17:18

to get that something done. Even

17:20

before these types of more draconian measures have

17:22

been put into place, haven't

17:25

they put into place effective bans

17:28

prior to this? Oh yeah, I have

17:30

a guest column at my newsletter today

17:32

from a woman who lost vision in

17:34

one of her eyes because

17:37

her abortion care was delayed in Maryland

17:39

before Roe was overturned. So they had

17:41

these laws in place for a really

17:43

long time, and I think you're talking

17:45

about TRAP laws, which is targeted regulation

17:47

of abortion providers. Okay. And so yeah,

17:49

they did everything that they could even

17:51

in pro-choice states. So for example, if

17:53

you're an abortion provider in a pro-choice

17:55

state, they say, well, you need to

17:57

have admitting privileges at a local hospital.

18:01

The problem is a local hospital is not gonna

18:03

give an abortion provider admitting privileges because

18:05

they never bring patients there because abortion

18:07

is so safe that they're not

18:10

bringing any patients into the hospital. And so

18:12

they've set up this system where it's essentially

18:15

impossible. Yeah, exactly. And

18:17

so they just made it increasingly difficult to

18:20

keep clinics open, even if

18:22

it was ostensibly legal. Let me

18:24

ask you a question Melissa. Is there recourse

18:26

in states where it's legal to

18:29

go after other states, let's

18:32

say because they're interfering

18:34

with interstate commerce? If

18:36

a red state is preventing you from

18:38

traveling into a blue state for a

18:40

procedure, couldn't that be construed as interference

18:43

at some level? Yeah, I

18:45

think that's right. And I think there

18:47

are a number of blue states and

18:49

blue state AGs that are contemplating the

18:51

prospect of dormant commerce clause challenges to

18:53

the fact that essentially these red states

18:55

are imposing their own public

18:57

policy preferences on the citizens of

18:59

blue states who don't share them.

19:01

And there was actually a very

19:03

interesting case in the Serene court

19:05

a couple of terms ago, not

19:07

about abortion, but ironically about pork

19:09

production. The state of

19:12

California had particular rules. Pork

19:14

production, the state of California, not

19:17

surprisingly, had particular rules about how

19:19

the pigs that were slaughtered and

19:21

then used for pork products were

19:23

kept. And the pork

19:26

industry challenged these regulations on the

19:28

view that because California was such

19:30

a large state with such a

19:33

demand for these products, that their

19:35

public policy preferences for humanely raised

19:37

and pastured pork products then basically

19:40

were exported out to other states that

19:42

didn't share them. And so I remember

19:44

the oral argument in this case really

19:47

keenly because everyone seemed really concerned about

19:49

the dormant commerce clause and about interstate

19:51

commerce and the prospect of very large

19:53

states exerting their will on smaller states.

19:55

And it didn't seem to be about pork products at all.

19:57

And I think it actually was a shadow.

20:00

debate for what would happen in the post-rho

20:02

world. And so what was

20:04

the decision in that

20:06

case? You know what, let me check on that.

20:09

I want to make sure that that's right. Are

20:11

you—wait, you can't Google during a podcast? That's

20:14

cheating, Melissa. No. I just want to make sure.

20:16

I want to make sure that I'm right. Okay,

20:19

the court affirmed the dismissal of the complaint.

20:21

So it's like a sight—it's cited with California,

20:23

but if it were presented in any other

20:25

context— Almost same with Mythic Cristo, right.

20:27

Well, yeah, I mean, same idea, sort of

20:29

a jurisdictional question, but

20:32

I imagine the debate and the disposition of

20:34

the case might have been really different if

20:36

it had been something like abortion or guns

20:39

and not necessarily pork patties. That's right. I want

20:41

to get into that because that's

20:43

interesting to me because I do think there

20:45

will be unforeseen consequences in cases

20:48

that come out of this when

20:50

you follow the logic. So I'm

20:53

going to present some other logical

20:56

maneuvers on this. I'm sure most of them are

20:58

fallational and make no sense, but I'd be

21:00

happy to have you address them

21:02

anyway. So now you have

21:05

in Texas if somebody abets someone

21:07

in the driving to Illinois

21:09

or whatever it is. And

21:12

then they always want to say things like, Well,

21:15

but we do make an exception for the

21:17

health of the woman if

21:21

she is in danger, correct? Is that

21:23

for the most part? I know there

21:25

are some that don't, but

21:27

isn't there an emergency care for the

21:29

health of the woman?

21:32

Well, they exist. Yeah,

21:34

but good luck qualifying. Here's

21:37

the thing. I think you see it all the

21:39

time and you see it in the context of

21:41

the bounty hunter law. These laws aren't necessarily meant

21:44

to survive legal challenges. Their

21:47

greatest efficacy can be in the

21:49

short term where they chill what

21:51

would be otherwise lawful conduct. So

21:54

you're right. There is an exception.

21:56

So take Texas's law, for example,

21:59

Texas. provides that if you

22:01

are getting an abortion, it has to

22:03

be for these sort of exigent circumstances.

22:05

And those exigent circumstances include when a

22:07

patient has a, quote, life-threatening

22:09

condition and is at risk of

22:11

death, or substantial impairment of a

22:13

major bodily function. But it doesn't

22:16

define what the substantial impairment of

22:18

a major bodily function is. And

22:20

isn't pregnancy in itself, it's not

22:22

a benign process. Couldn't that be

22:24

considered a substantial impairment? All

22:26

of that. And so without actual

22:28

definitions, it's left to the physicians

22:31

to make these judgments, knowing that

22:33

an enterprising attorney general, like say

22:35

Ken Paxton, might come down really

22:37

hard on them if he doesn't

22:39

agree with their medical judgment. So

22:42

in these circumstances, I think doctors feel like

22:44

their hands are tied. They know what they would

22:47

do in their medical judgment. They just don't know

22:49

where medical judgment begins and the law ends.

22:52

And if they take the chance, if they

22:54

take the risk, there can be real consequences.

22:57

For them, legal consequences for them.

22:59

I mean, legal consequences and collateral

23:01

consequences. If you are

23:03

a party to some kind of

23:05

legal proceeding, even if you ultimately

23:07

prevail, you have to document that

23:09

for purposes of licensure and you

23:11

could have your licensing held up.

23:14

You might not be able to get insurance. I

23:16

mean, it's a real conundrum for them. Jessica, has

23:18

that impacted people in a human way, in

23:21

a real way? Yeah, I mean, this is what

23:23

I was gonna say. There's what the law

23:25

says, and then there's what actually happens in

23:27

real life. And from the ex- Yes,

23:29

to human beings, which would be nice to think about

23:31

every once in a while. Human beings,

23:33

not vessels. Not vessels. It's

23:36

hard. So the

23:38

example that you gave, right? Let's

23:40

say someone wanted to travel, the

23:43

person, depending on the county they

23:46

are in Texas, several counties in

23:48

Texas have passed what they're calling

23:50

anti-trafficking laws, abortion trafficking laws,

23:53

that again, allow a civil suit

23:56

to be brought against someone who

23:58

uses the roads of that- particular

24:00

county to bring someone out

24:02

of state for an abortion. And so it's

24:04

this slow chipping away at our ability to

24:07

travel. And that's like a really terrifying

24:10

thing to even given the

24:13

mother's health being in question. Well,

24:16

this is part of the issue. As as

24:19

Melissa said, there's no real standard on what

24:21

that was in her case of a woman. There

24:23

was a woman who she

24:25

her it was an 18

24:27

week miscarriage, I think, but the fetus

24:30

was her water had broken and wasn't

24:32

going to survive. But she

24:34

herself was not in that moment.

24:38

They have to wait until the exact she

24:40

had to go home and get sepsis. I think she

24:42

had to go home and get sepsis. Okay, that's Amanda

24:44

Zorowski. So here we go. So now we're going to

24:47

get to now we're going to flip

24:49

the thing. And this is all informed

24:51

by I think sort of my experience with

24:53

this. And this has to do with

24:55

my family my. So

24:58

we won't even get into IVF, which is what we

25:00

had to do to have children. So it's incredible to

25:02

me to live in this world now where the

25:05

children that we desperately wanted would not

25:07

be able to be had because if

25:09

these people get their way, there'd

25:12

be no IVF. My wife after

25:14

our second child, this is after she

25:16

was born hemorrhaged.

25:19

This was probably three days post

25:22

birth, right? We

25:25

were home. She

25:27

was in danger. She

25:30

needed blood transfusions. We were

25:32

incredibly fortunate to have good

25:35

health care. We were able to get

25:37

her in. She was operated on under an emergency

25:39

basis on that night, right?

25:42

But my point is this. pregnancy

25:46

can always be a risk

25:49

to a woman's health. This idea that

25:51

it has to be based on a fetal

25:55

abnormality or something going wrong.

25:59

You don't know. and

26:01

aren't these laws, so

26:04

who then is liable? Let's

26:07

say in the case of our thing, let's

26:09

say she didn't want to carry

26:11

that baby to term, she was forced to

26:13

by the state, and

26:16

post birth hemorrhaged and died. Well

26:18

who's responsible for that? If you

26:21

can arrest people for abetting

26:23

somebody driving into Illinois, who

26:26

is responsible for the death of women,

26:30

who are going to have

26:32

emergency complications arise? And

26:34

how come that's not part of the conversation? And

26:37

what do you think we can do about that?

26:39

Jessica, I'll ask you first and then Melissa. Sure.

26:41

I mean this is part of what the

26:43

case in Texas where 20 women sued Texas

26:46

for the extreme health

26:49

issues that they had because of the

26:51

abortion ban, and essentially what happened is

26:53

they blamed the doctors, right? They said

26:55

the law is not the issue, any

26:58

reasonable doctor would have given care at that point,

27:00

and this is something that they've sort of set

27:03

themselves up to do for a long time, to

27:05

blame the doctors, to say you just don't understand

27:07

the law, the law is fine as it is,

27:09

you should have given the care, and so

27:12

once again the liability goes to

27:14

the doctors given the right

27:17

judge and the right court. If a woman

27:19

dies in childbirth for a baby that she did

27:21

not want to have, it is

27:23

only the doctor that is liable,

27:25

not the state, for forcing her into

27:28

that pregnancy. Melissa, is that correct? That's

27:32

basically what they're saying. I'm Texas,

27:34

the Texas Supreme Court, SCOTEX, if you

27:37

will, issued a decision at the end

27:39

of May on the Tzorowski case and

27:41

basically said, yeah these seem good to

27:43

us and doctors know what they're to do

27:45

and they should do it and they should

27:47

provide this care. There's not a problem here

27:50

and this is a court

27:52

that's entirely Republican and this

27:54

was a unanimous decision from

27:56

the court and again completely

27:59

stripped of. any humanity for

28:01

either the pregnant patient or

28:03

the doctor who genuinely

28:05

is worried about whether or not they're

28:07

going to lose their livelihood if they

28:10

make a decision. And they're patients who

28:12

are not just at risk of death, but

28:14

I mean, there's a lot between a

28:16

valid and viable pregnancy

28:18

and death. I mean, you can

28:21

lose your fertility if you

28:23

go septic, like lots of things can happen. It's not

28:25

just even beyond that. It can

28:27

create hypertension. It can. That

28:30

is not a benign process. But

28:32

John, this goes to your point

28:34

about democracy. We have right now

28:36

highly gerrymandered state legislatures who are

28:38

making these laws. These legislatures

28:40

are not comprised of physicians. They're

28:42

not even comprised of women of

28:44

reproductive age. It's a lot of

28:47

men, many men who

28:50

are not in the same age bandwidth

28:52

as most women who are in their

28:54

prime reproductive years. And the

28:56

idea that your views are being

28:58

reflected, your interests are being accounted

29:00

for in the legislative process, that's

29:04

just a fallacy. These

29:06

are geriatric legislators made up of

29:08

men who are not doctors making

29:11

laws that will legislate

29:14

for doctors and their patients. The

29:17

legislatures aren't affected by this, but their patients are.

29:20

And again, I just want to emphasize the

29:22

way in which the anti-choice

29:25

movement has ginned up all of

29:27

this. Like James Bop, who is

29:29

the spokesperson, the head of the National

29:31

Right to Life Committee, argues that the

29:34

physicians are the problem. The laws are

29:36

clear. And if they're not clear enough

29:38

for the physicians, the onus is on

29:41

the physicians to suggest fixes. That's literally

29:43

what he says. They should suggest the

29:45

fixes. Doctors aren't legislators. Whose

29:47

job is it? But it's also. Melissa

29:50

and Jessica, I want you to address this.

29:52

There is no fix for

29:54

a process where some women

29:57

die. How do you fix pregnancy? to

30:00

make it so that there is no

30:02

chance that a woman dies if you

30:04

force someone to carry a prayer. And

30:06

I understand there's at a certain point

30:08

in the development of the fetus in

30:10

the embryo or the embryo of the

30:12

fetus and that the rights of both

30:15

tend to converge, right? I get

30:17

that. But starting

30:19

on that journey, you cannot guarantee

30:22

a woman that you'll be okay.

30:24

You just can't. No, especially

30:26

in the US, right? Where maternal

30:28

mortality is so awful. But

30:30

anyway. Right. And I have

30:32

to say, just getting back to the

30:35

scenario we were talking about before, even

30:37

if someone is able to get

30:39

that health indicated life saving abortion

30:41

in a lot of these

30:44

states, because the way they've written the

30:46

law in such a way that instead

30:48

of giving standard abortion procedures, they're giving

30:50

women C-sections or forcing them

30:52

into vaginal labor, even

30:54

before viability, even when they

30:56

know that there's no chance for the fetus

30:58

to survival. And this is one of the

31:00

ways that doctors are trying to protect themselves

31:02

from liability. But it's also written in the

31:05

laws. If a life saving care is needed

31:07

and they need to end the pregnancy, you

31:09

need to give a maternal fetal separation, which

31:11

means C-section or forced vaginal labor. And it's,

31:15

you know, just getting back to the

31:17

actual real life suffering that is happening.

31:20

That's for some women, that's the

31:22

best case scenario that the life

31:24

saving care that they get is

31:26

unnecessary, you know, major abdominal surgery.

31:29

John, this goes back to the point I

31:31

think you made earlier. We're

31:33

fighting for the shards of reproductive

31:36

freedom, like the opportunity to have

31:39

physicians make exigent decisions on

31:41

behalf of their pregnant patients.

31:43

We're not fighting upstream for

31:46

what would reproductive freedom look like in an

31:48

ideal world? Because for now, that

31:51

is gone. I mean, the court preserved

31:53

the status quo on Mepha Pristone. There

31:55

are already three states who are teed

31:57

up and ready to bring that. case

32:00

on the ground that they have been

32:02

injured by the fact that, yeah, they

32:04

have a different claim of standing. Their

32:06

claim is going to be that as

32:09

anti-abortion states, the availability of mifrapristone and

32:11

medication abortion flouts their ability to regulate

32:13

abortion. But can't that be flipped? Melissa, can't

32:15

that be flipped? So let's say there is

32:17

a family that lost a

32:20

daughter, a wife, because they

32:22

were forced to endure a pregnancy and

32:24

they died during that pregnancy. And can't

32:26

that then be flipped? Let me let me also.

32:29

And this could be flipped. I

32:31

mean, but here's the thing. Like, we're

32:33

literally contemplating scenarios where our victories are

32:35

built on. I know the backs of

32:37

dead women. No, no, no. Listen, Melissa,

32:40

it's this is an awful scenario. I

32:42

am I am literally just

32:44

trying to figure out how I

32:46

battle this relentless. I think you

32:48

bat like that's a pull. I mean, that's how

32:50

Roe came into

32:53

being like stories like Jerry

32:55

Centoro, who was a mother

32:57

of two who was literally

32:59

butchered in a hotel room

33:02

trying to end a pregnancy she did not

33:05

want. Let me let me ask you, is

33:07

there any other law that compels a person

33:09

ostensibly to save someone else's life? So the

33:11

idea being, well, the abortion is to

33:14

save a baby's life once

33:16

it reaches a certain gestational age and

33:18

do the thing. But let's say, for

33:20

instance, my kidney. Would

33:23

if I were to give it to somebody, it

33:25

would save their life. Could I

33:27

ever be compelled to do that? You're

33:29

never placed in a situation, human beings,

33:33

other than like the military draft,

33:35

where the government compels you to

33:38

do something where you might lose your

33:40

life or have otherwise

33:43

harm. But we're doing this

33:45

to women. Are we not? We're

33:48

compelling them. So

33:50

I don't know outside of Prince

33:52

Harry, who says in his autobiography spare that

33:54

he was born to allow for extra organs

33:57

for Prince William, if they ask the

33:59

story. leaving that to the side. Like,

34:01

you know, your example

34:03

is an extreme one, but I think the anti-choice

34:05

movement would put up a different example, and that

34:07

example would be vaccinations. Vaccinations,

34:09

like the idea that mandatory

34:12

vaccinations to secure collective public health

34:14

is an intrusion on your bodily

34:16

autonomy that you may not want.

34:20

But again, I think it's a- And there can be

34:22

harm. That's a pretty good one. There can be harm.

34:24

I think that's right. There can be harm. Yeah, yeah.

34:27

I think the differences

34:29

between a vaccination, even

34:31

one that is, you know, very

34:34

quickly rolled out in

34:36

pregnancy and the real harms of pregnancy, I

34:38

think you can make a pretty clear distinction

34:40

between those. But I think that's the example

34:43

that they use. And in fact, Amy Coney

34:45

Barrett in the Dobbs oral argument,

34:47

that was the example that she used. She

34:49

was like, you know, speaking of bodily autonomy,

34:51

what about vaccinations? And I was like, oh,

34:53

here we go again. So,

34:55

you know, this question of bodily autonomy can

34:57

go both ways. Like they have made a

35:00

lot about this in the context of masking

35:02

and vaccinations. Right. Well, masking, I

35:04

would say- Abortion is- It's not, but vaccinations

35:06

can cause harm. But I mean, they do make

35:08

the claim. Yeah, but I mean, they make that

35:10

claim in those two contacts and seem completely oblivious

35:12

that you could make the very same arguments in

35:14

the context of abortion. All right, we'll be right

35:16

back. I'm

35:22

gonna tell you guys something. I'm not exactly

35:24

a business genius, but here's a little maxim

35:26

that I learned just today by reading this

35:29

copy. The less your business spends, the more

35:31

margin you keep. The less your business spends, the more margin you keep. But today, everything costs

35:33

more. So smart businesses are graduating

35:35

to NetSuite by Oracle. NetSuite is

35:37

the number one cloud financial system

35:39

bringing accounting, financial management, inventory, HR

35:41

into one proven platform. you

35:44

don't wanna follow them. They're not graduating. The

35:46

dumb businesses are in like year

35:48

six of college. NetSuite is the

35:51

number one cloud financial system that

35:53

brings accounting, financial management inventory, HR

35:55

into one proven platform, helping you

35:58

reduce IT cost maintenance. finance costs

36:00

and manual errors. Different

36:06

platforms, always with the

36:08

platforms. This is one platform.

36:11

Over 37,000 companies have already made the move to

36:13

NetSuite. Back by popular demand, NetSuite

36:15

has extended its one-of-a-kind, flexible financing program

36:17

for a few more weeks. Head to

36:20

NetSuite. Head to netsuite.com/weekly. I'm going to say

36:22

it again for those who are

36:24

still not graduating their businesses. netsuite.com/weekly.

36:35

All right, let's get back

36:37

into it. Jessica, is that for

36:39

the women that you're trying to

36:41

uphold and represent, what is

36:43

in your

36:45

mind kind of the

36:48

mental health of a community

36:50

that feels trapped by

36:53

this idea and sort of placed

36:56

into a

36:58

secondary position in society? Right.

37:01

I mean, I do think in

37:05

anti-choice states, it's

37:07

just constant fear. I think that's

37:09

safe to say there's just constant fear. In

37:12

pro-choice states, and I have this conversation

37:14

a lot with my daughter outside of

37:16

the immediate physical impact that these bands

37:18

have on people, it does

37:21

something to you as a person to know

37:23

that your country doesn't see you as fully

37:25

human. There is an

37:27

emotional toll to know that you

37:30

don't matter. There was a

37:32

woman in Oklahoma who, another one of these

37:35

post-war horror stories where she was miscarrying, she

37:38

couldn't get care, she had to travel out

37:40

of state, spend thousands of dollars, and she said,

37:42

I'm not going to get pregnant again because

37:44

now I know my life doesn't matter. Now

37:46

I know I don't count. So why would

37:49

I ever put myself in that situation? Because

37:51

as soon as you're pregnant in this country,

37:53

you do not count. You do not matter.

37:56

And that's a really difficult,

37:58

bitter pill to swallow. swallow. Yeah,

38:02

that's tough. Melissa, is there are you

38:04

finding on the horizon? Are

38:06

there the types of legal

38:08

challenges to this? Where

38:11

do you see this with a little bit

38:13

of light at the end of the tunnel? Or do you think

38:15

it gets darker before things begin

38:17

to to shape up? I want

38:19

to emphasize, you know, the limits

38:21

of law here. Law

38:23

is not necessarily a place for imaginative

38:26

solutions to real problems. If you're in

38:28

the courts, you're necessarily in a defensive

38:30

posture. So I'm not thinking about legal

38:33

solutions for this. I mean, I think

38:35

there can be cases, but as I

38:37

said, those are the cases that are

38:40

going to be built on a foundation

38:42

of utter tragedy. Like literally will be

38:44

litigating from the posture of dead women.

38:47

You're right. I think the bigger opportunity

38:51

is in the political

38:53

or electoral space. Right.

38:55

And we live in

38:58

a distorted democracy. The

39:00

court has made it much

39:02

harder for individuals to register

39:04

their preferences through representative government

39:06

because of its rulings on

39:09

gerrymandering. It's made it

39:11

harder to register your preferences at

39:13

the ballot box because of laws

39:15

that allow for voter suppression. And

39:18

the Constitution is already gerrymandered

39:20

to favor rural white. 100

39:22

percent. That's how it began. So

39:24

I mean, so I just want to say that

39:26

like I understand the challenges like we truly live

39:29

in a distorted democracy. We have

39:31

to recognize the fact of that distortion,

39:33

but understand that that

39:35

distortion can be

39:38

counteracted by overwhelming participation,

39:40

collective action. Right. So

39:42

we have an

39:44

election coming up. The court is on

39:46

the ballot in that election. You know,

39:48

Justice is Thomas and Alito. In

39:51

addition to having emotional support billionaires,

39:54

our septuagenarians and if Donald Trump

39:56

is elected, they will step down.

39:58

They will retire the day. after

40:00

the inauguration and they will be

40:02

replaced by teenagers. And

40:05

this six to three conservative

40:07

supermajority not only may be

40:09

expanded to seven to two or eight to

40:11

one, it will endure even

40:14

longer because the judges will be

40:16

younger. So we are fighting

40:18

defensively right now in every, every

40:21

forum. But the electoral space

40:23

is where we have the opportunity to

40:25

really help counteract this. If you can

40:27

prevent Donald Trump from appointing new justices

40:29

to fill Thomas and Alito

40:31

seat from filling any other seat. That's a

40:33

win right now. And like we have to

40:36

take that win. We have to look at

40:38

state courts where, you know, all of these

40:40

challenges in our abortion are shifting, not in

40:43

fact, they're shifting from federal courts to state

40:45

courts. Those state courts have

40:47

to be in a position to make

40:49

rulings that are consistent with the will

40:52

of the people. We have

40:54

to have legislatures that are ready

40:56

to enact constitutional amendments to

40:58

their state court to their state constitutions that

41:01

would protect reproductive freedom. We can't just focus

41:03

on the president. We have to be down

41:05

ballot. We have to focus on keeping the

41:07

Senate. The Trump administration

41:10

was so successful at adding movement

41:12

conservatives to the federal court, completely transformed

41:14

the federal court. And the Biden administration

41:16

has done a great job counteracting some

41:19

of that. But there needs

41:21

to be eight more years of work

41:23

on this. And you've got to

41:25

have the Senate to do that. So this is

41:27

not the moment to be divided in our

41:30

big tent. It's the moment to come together

41:32

as a big tent to overwhelm the distortion.

41:34

That's right. Try to divide us and limit

41:37

our authority. Melissa, that's a phenomenal as

41:39

my daughter would say, I believe you may

41:41

have eaten eaten and left no crumbs. That

41:43

was a I believe that's it. I think

41:45

that's what she said to me. That's what

41:48

the young people say. Young people say you

41:50

ate and left no crumbs. It's that that

41:52

is an unbelievably trenchant and fabulous point. And

41:55

one that has to be at

41:57

the forefront because. Frank,

42:00

the other group is tenacious and

42:02

strategic, and they understand how to

42:05

overwhelm them, you

42:08

know, and take out the bottom of that. Jessica, is

42:10

there anything else that you wanted to add before

42:13

I let you guys go? Yeah, just building

42:15

on something Melissa said, it does give

42:18

me a lot of hope when I think about

42:20

just how popular abortion rights are. And

42:23

if we could get to that place where we're

42:25

focusing on the electoral bit, this

42:28

is an issue that people like to talk

42:30

about as if it's something the country is

42:32

evenly split on or like irrevocably

42:34

polarized over. It's not. We're not 50-50.

42:37

We're not 50-50. No,

42:39

there's been several polls that have

42:41

come out this year that showed 80%, over

42:44

80% of Americans don't want any

42:46

government involvement at all in

42:48

pregnancy. They do not want abortion to be

42:50

regulated by the law at all. This

42:53

is something that is really, really important to

42:55

voters, and it goes across

42:57

parties. So that is something like as

42:59

horrible as all of this is, and it is

43:01

horrible to talk about this every day and to write about this

43:04

and to do this work. It gives

43:06

me so much hope knowing that

43:08

Americans really do understand what's at

43:10

stake and how important this issue

43:12

is. Well, I thank you

43:14

guys both so much. Melissa

43:16

Murray, NYU Law professor, co-host

43:19

of Strict Scrutiny podcast and

43:21

my go-to. Melissa, you

43:23

know you might go to.

43:25

Whenever I get into trouble, I always think, what would Melissa

43:27

Murray do? How would she put this down? That's what I want to say to

43:29

myself. I like how you said it. I don't call Melissa Murray

43:31

to be my lawyer, but I do refer to her as

43:34

my go-to. My go-to. Law,

43:36

whatever it is. And Jessica Valetti, founder

43:38

of abortioneveryday.com, an author of the forthcoming book, Abortion,

43:40

Our Bodies, Their Lies, and the Truths We Use

43:42

to Win. Guys, thank you so much for being

43:44

here. Thank you. Wow.

43:50

Look, I don't want to say Melissa Murray blows me away

43:52

every time I hear from her, but holy

43:55

God, the information being

43:57

held in a normal sized head.

43:59

That's just She's got a normal sized

44:01

head and yet all that

44:03

information and Jessica, you know, you

44:05

can tell, uh, you

44:09

know, Melissa is attacking it from a legal

44:11

sense. Jessica's really feeling, I think the human

44:13

burden of this. Yeah. And boy,

44:15

she articulated that so well. Yeah.

44:17

The personal story is, I mean, they,

44:21

they break my heart every time. Like I just,

44:23

like, I can't wrap

44:25

my head around the conversations and how

44:28

this is still happening. But yeah. Well,

44:31

she, and the way she said it, you know, look, even

44:33

with these legal victories, remember, it's on the backs of

44:35

dead women. And you just think, oh God, that's right.

44:37

You know, sometimes we forget in these

44:40

theoretical and now there's that Lauren,

44:42

what was that case in Idaho?

44:44

That's coming up. The Supreme Court,

44:46

this term is meant to decide

44:48

on Idaho v United States, where

44:51

Idaho is pushing back against a

44:53

federal law that allows emergency abortion

44:55

in the case of the life

44:57

of the mother. So

45:00

that's a literally saying, even if the

45:02

life of the mother is in jeopardy.

45:04

Nope. Sorry. Yeah. Holy

45:08

shit. So, uh, well,

45:11

wow. Just a lot to certainly

45:13

a lot to chew on there. But, and, and the

45:15

call to action from Alyssa, uh, at

45:17

the end, I thought was just, boy, what a

45:19

great reminder of what's really at stake

45:22

and fabulous. Uh, that is the

45:24

weekly show for this week. As always, you

45:27

can't do it without a lead producer, Lauren

45:29

Walker, producer, Brittany Mamedovic, the man

45:31

behind the glass, Rob,

45:33

the Tolo video editor and engineer,

45:35

audio editor and engineer, Nicole Boyce,

45:37

our fabulous researcher, Catherine Newan. And

45:40

as always executive producers, Katie gray

45:42

and Chris McShane, if come

45:45

on, fantastic. Best in the biz

45:48

best in the biz for God's sakes. Where

45:50

can they find us? We are

45:52

weekly show pod on Twitter, weekly

45:55

show podcast on Instagram threads, Tik

45:57

TOK and the weekly show with

45:59

John. on YouTube. We're

46:02

on Instagram. Yeah we are.

46:05

What would we do on Instagram? Just thirst

46:08

traps? Yeah,

46:11

I don't.

46:16

Unfortunately for me it's it's a desert

46:19

out there if you're gonna get pictures

46:21

of me. Fantastic guys thanks so much

46:23

and we'll see you all next week. The

46:32

weekly show with Jon Stewart is

46:34

a Comedy Central podcast. It's produced

46:36

by Paramount Audio and Busboy Productions.

46:47

Exclusively on Paramount Plus. When Napster came

46:49

out. I thought Yahoo was a person.

46:52

Step inside the untold true story of

46:54

how music got free. People just started

46:56

ripping music and sharing it. From executive

46:58

producers LeBron James and Eminem. Meet the

47:00

Pirates, the Innovators, and the artists behind

47:02

the crime we all committed. 17 FBI

47:04

agents rounded our apartment complex. All that

47:06

worked. Writing it, recording it. Now these

47:08

songs week and I'm like don't miss

47:10

how music got free. New Jockey series

47:13

now streaming exclusively on Paramount Plus. Go

47:15

to paramountplus.com to try it free. Terms

47:17

apply. Paramount

47:21

Podcasts.