‘Republicans have put the rights of a fertilized egg over the rights of the woman’

Last week, an attempt to pass a bill in the U.S. Senate protecting access to in vitro fertilization (IVF) was blocked by Republicans, an example of the ongoing struggle within the party to both appear open to the procedure while also declining to provide legal protections for it.

In the days since the Alabama Supreme Court ruling that gave fertilized embryos the same rights as children, GOP candidates have largely been scrambling to distance themselves from the implications of a policy they have been voting in favor of for decades in anti-abortion legislation.

But the failure last Wednesday to receive a vote on a request for unanimous consent by Democratic Illinois U.S. Sen. Tammy Duckworth — a disabled veteran who used IVF to become a mother — further signals that IVF and reproductive health care will be a significant issue in the 2024 election.

“My girls are my everything,” Duckworth said, referring to her two daughters. “They likely would have never been born if I had not had access to the basic reproductive rights that Americans, up until recently, had been depending on for nearly a half-century.”

The U.S. Senate debate crystallized how statements by GOP legislators about IVF and what they are willing to do to keep it available are often in conflict.

On Feb 23, former U.S. Rep. Mike Rogers (R-White Lake), who’s running for Michigan’s open U.S. Senate seat, posted to his X account a strong renunciation of the Alabama decision.

“IVF has been critical to helping Americans grow their families and realize the blessing of life and parenthood. I oppose any and all efforts to restrict access to IVF — period.”

Rogers’ statement came just hours after a memo was sent by National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) Executive Director Jason Thielman to GOP candidates instructing them to “clearly” state their support for IVF and other fertility-related services and “publicly oppose” any efforts to restrict access to those treatments.

“When responding to the Alabama Supreme Court ruling, it is imperative that our candidates align with the public’s overwhelming support for IVF and fertility treatments,” stated the memo. “By advocating for increased access to these services, opposing restrictions, and emphasizing the importance of supporting families in their journey to conceive, our candidates can demonstrate compassion, respect for family values, and a commitment to individual freedom. This approach aligns with the views of our electorate and positions Republicans as champions for accessible healthcare and family support.”

The NRSC is chaired by Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mon.) who was an original co-sponsor of an IVF ban in 2021.

Rogers is among a slew of GOP candidates seeking the nomination for the Senate race: former U.S. Rep. Peter Meijer (R-Grand Rapids), former U.S. Rep. Justin Amash (R-Grand Rapids), Board of Education member Nikki Snyder; Businessman Sandy Pensler, Alexandria Taylor, an attorney who has previously represented former Michigan GOP Chair Kristina Karamo; Sherry O’Donnell, a former 2022 congressional candidate and Michigan state chair for U.S. Term Limits; conservative businessman J.D. Wilson; Sharon Savage, an educator who worked for the Warren Consolidated School District for 42 years, Ottawa County Commissioner Rebekah Curran; and Michael Hoover, who previously worked for Dow Chemical Co.

But because Rogers is one of only three who has already served in Congress, he has a voting record that can be compared to his statement.

And that is exactly what many X users did, prompting a Community Note on the post.

“In his 14 years in Congress Mike Rogers sponsored 4 bills that would have the same effect as the Alabama Supreme Court’s IVF ruling,” stated the note, which then linked to each of those four bills from 2005, 2007, 2009, and 2013, each of which would provide legal personhood from the moment of conception.

U.S. Rep. Elissa Slotkin (D-Holly), one of the Democrats seeking the Senate seat, was also quick to connect Rogers to his voting record.

“Come on, Mike,” she posted. “In your 14 years in Congress, you co-sponsored FOUR bills — the last one with Jim Jordan in 2013 — that would have the same effect as the Alabama Supreme Court’s IVF ruling, making it impossible for millions of couples to have a family. You don’t get to run away from your own record because you’re just now understanding the consequences.”

Slotkin is also planning to hold a virtual IVF Town Hall at 7 p.m. Wednesday.

Actor Hill Harper of Detroit and businessman Nasser Beydoun also are seeking the Democratic nomination.

Meijer has not made any statement on the Alabama decision, but similarly cosponsored a 2021 bill that would essentially outlaw IVF, a fact the Michigan Democratic Party made sure to note.

“Mike Rogers and Peter Meijer support dangerous anti-IVF legislation that would rip away Michiganders’ freedom to make personal decisions. Rogers’ and Meijer’s extensive anti-choice records show that they are out-of-step with Michiganders,” said Sam Chan, Michigan Democratic Party spokesperson.

Also supporting the 2021 bill were Meijer’s fellow Republican U.S. Reps. Jack Bergman (R-Watersmeet), Bill Huizenga (R-Zeeland), Lisa McClain (R-Bruce Twp.) and John Moolenaar (R-Midland).

It does not appear Amash sponsored any personhood legislation during his time in Congress, but he is firmly anti-abortion.

“I believe that life begins at conception, and it is unconscionable that government would sanction the taking of the helpless and innocent. I will always vote against government funding of abortion and will fight to protect life at all stages,” stated his former campaign website for Congress.

IVF and how it relates to the Alabama case

In vitro fertilization is a process in which eggs are removed from a patient’s ovaries and then fertilized with sperm in a laboratory. The fertilized embryo is then reimplanted in the uterus so that a pregnancy can result. Approximately 2% of babies born in the United States are conceived through IVF.

However, several attempts may be required for success, so multiple embryos are created during the fertilization process. Those embryos that are assessed to be viable are then usually frozen for future use by the couple.

That was the situation in the Alabama case, in which embryos stored at a fertility clinic in Mobile were accidentally destroyed when they were dropped in 2020 by a patient who “managed to wander” into the clinic. The clinic was sued under Alabama’s Wrongful Death of A Child Act. The lawsuit was dismissed by a lower court which ruled that the embryos did not fit definitions of “person” or “child,” and as such were not applicable in a wrongful death claim.

On appeal, the Alabama Supreme Court, in an 8-1 ruling, determined that the law “applies to all children, born and unborn, without limitation.” Where the issue gets contentious for some is the invocation of overtly religious principles to make judicial decisions that have an effect on the public at large.

Concerns over national reproductive rights ban

Last week, the GOP-controlled GOP legislature quickly passed legislation sponsors said would protect IVF in the state.

Also scrambling to distance himself from the all-GOP Alabama court ruling was former President Donald Trump, who called on state lawmakers to “find an immediate solution” on IVF. The Alabama House and Senate obliged last week and passed separate bills extending criminal and civil immunity to IVF practitioners for IVF treatments. However, it’s unclear how that will ultimately square with the Supreme Court’s stance.

Trump has taken credit for placing three of the justices on the U.S. Supreme Court who voted with a 6-3 majority in the 2022 Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision that overturned 1973’s Roe v. Wade decision establishing a constitutional right to abortion. The Dobbs decision was cited in the Alabama Supreme Court’s IVF opinion and also uses the phrase “unborn human being” multiple times.

By removing the federal protections for abortion that had been provided for half a century, the Dobbs decision allowed each state to set its own laws, which several did, like Michigan, enshrining the right to an abortion in their state constitutions.

The result has been a new push to enact a national ban on abortion that would supersede any and all state laws on the topic.

“I’m not OK with abortion states and non-abortion states. I want an abortion-free America,” said Right to Life of East Texas director Mark Lee Dickson, standing outside the White House last month, at a sparsely attended protest organized by the Christian Defense Coalition where activists held signs of aborted fetuses.

If a national ban can be implemented on abortion, then abortion rights supporters argue that a similar ban can be placed on other issues connected to fertility, including IVF and contraception.

Democrats attempt IVF protections

Duckworth, who is a co-chair of President Joe Biden’s reelection campaign, told ABC News’s “This Week,” that she was not at all surprised by the Alabama ruling.

“Republicans have put the rights of a fertilized egg over the rights of the woman. And that is not something that I think the American people agree with,” she said.

Also making the Sunday talk show circuit was Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, who was emphatic on CNN’s “State of the Union” that Republicans’ pro-IVF rhetoric wouldn’t undercut the Democratic case that the GOP has extreme positions on issues surrounding women’s bodily autonomy.

“Hell no, it does not,” said Whitmer. “We’ve always known that with the appointments Trump made to SCOTUS that IVF, a woman’s ability to make her own decisions about her body and things that come from that were in jeopardy.”

This year, Democrats introduced H.R. 7056, the Access to Family Building Act, which would establish a federal right to access assisted reproductive technology, including IVF. U.S. Rep. Dan Kildee (D-Flint) is a cosponsor of the legislation, which he says would preempt state efforts to limit IVF access and ensure that no parents or doctors were punished for taking part in the process.

“What is happening in Alabama to restrict women’s health care is direct result of former President Trump’s promise to overturn Roe,” Kildee said. “Congress must act immediately to preserve women’s reproductive freedom, including access to IVF. If extreme Republicans support access to IVF, then they will bring this bill to the floor immediately. Every Michigan family deserves the freedom to decide if, when, and how to build a family.”

Joining Kildee in cosponsoring the bill were Slotkin and fellow Michigan Reps. Hillary Scholten (D-Grand Rapids) and Shri Thanedar (D-Detroit).

Advocacy organizations square off

In the wake of the Alabama decision, the National Right to Life organization has not made an official statement. However, the group’s website published an article on Feb. 20 that characterized IVF as “countless embryonic preborn children are created and then discarded when they are deemed unfit or unwanted.”

Similarly, Michigan Right to Life has made no statement on the decision, but has criticized IVF in past social media posts as creating ethical concerns over “designer children” and turning “children into mere commodities.”

Meanwhile, Planned Parenthood said the decision was the logical extension of efforts to date concerning women’s health care.

“We should all be able to build the families and the futures we want, without interference from courts or politicians,” the group posted on social media. “This ruling by the Alabama Supreme Court is the result of years of attacks on reproductive freedom, and efforts to restrict access to health care, including IVF.”

Mary Zieger, a law professor at the University of California Davis, has published six books since 2015 about the history of the national abortion debate.

She told the Associated Press that decisions like the one rendered by the Alabama Supreme Court, which provide fetal personhood, may provide the U.S. Supreme Court’s conservative majority a convenient path forward to grant Constitutional rights to fetuses and embryos.

“And then they’re going to say, ‘Well, look, there’s also all these states that hold this position,’” said Ziegler.

A desire to unite church and state

In a concurring opinion, Alabama Chief Justice Tom Parker repeatedly invoked scripture to make the argument that life begins at conception, thus the frozen embryos that were accidentally destroyed were protected under the law as having the same rights as all citizens.

“But the principle itself — that human life is fundamentally distinct from other forms of life and cannot be taken intentionally without justification — has deep roots that reach back to the creation of man ‘in the image of God.’ Genesis 1:27,” stated Parker.

Parker has also expressed support for the Seven Mountain Mandate, or 7M, a Christian Domionist precept that there are seven aspects of society that Christians need to influence: family, religion, education, media, entertainment, business, and, most tellingly, government.

During a recent interview with Tennessee evangelist Johnny Enlow, Parker detailed his belief in 7M and the concept that only Christians should have political power.

“God created government, and the fact that we have let it go into the possession of others, it’s heartbreaking,” said Parker.

Another adherent to the Seven Mountain Mandate is U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), who was among Republicans who expressed support for IVF after the Alabama ruling.

Johnson has numerous connections to a group called the New Apostolic Reformation (NAR), which has strongly promoted 7M, especially among elected officials. A visible symbol of this affiliation can be seen outside Johnson’s Washington, D.C., office where an “Appeal to Heaven” flag resides. The flag, featuring a pine tree on a white background with the phrase “Appeal to Heaven,” was originally a Revolutionary War symbol, but has been adopted by Christian Nationalists, and was among those prominently displayed during the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection.

Also infusing religious belief into legislative action is the document referred to as Project 2025. Created by The Heritage Foundation, a Washington D.C.-based arch-conservative think tank, the manifesto for a new Trump presidency has created a firestorm of condemnation for its authoritarian agenda that would, among other things, “defund the Department of Justice, dismantle the FBI, break up the Department of Homeland Security and eliminate the Departments of Education and Commerce.”

It also would promote a “Life Agenda” that would explicitly recognize the personhood of an embryo from the moment of conception.

“From the moment of conception, every human being possesses inherent dignity and worth, and our humanity does not depend on our age, stage of development, race, or abilities,” it states.

Even more explicit is the thinking about IVF by the Heritage Foundation itself. Emma Waters is a senior research associate in the Richard and Helen DeVos Center for Life, Religion, and Family at The Heritage Foundation. She recently called Alabama’s IVF ruling “an unqualified victory.” Waters has also written extensively on how biblical interpretation must be a necessary guide to approaching the procedure.

“[T]he use of many reproductive technologies may violate God’s vision for marriage, sex, and procreation,” said Waters, who added “When people try to produce children in their own power and control, Scripture calls such work vain.”

In a Feb. 26 memo, White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre notes Johnson was among more than 120 Republicans, including Bergman, Huizenga, McClain and Moolenaar, to co-sponsor the Life at Conception Act, which she called “an extreme, dangerous bill that would eliminate reproductive freedom for all women in every state.” The bill provides no exception for IVF.

Jean-Pierre concluded her memo saying officials are trying to “obfuscate their way out of their support for these extreme policies,” but their true intent is in their voting record.

“They have spent decades trying to eliminate the constitutional right to choose and undermine reproductive freedom everywhere,” she said. “Their agenda is clear, they’re just worried it’s not popular.”

Michigan Advance is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Michigan Advance maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Susan J. Demas for questions: info@michiganadvance.com. Follow Michigan Advance on Facebook and Twitter.