Politics
Trump’s Changing Messages on Abortion, in 660 Quotes
When he first ran for president, Donald J. Trump talked repeatedly about his opposition to abortion. “I’m pro-life, and I was originally pro-choice,” he said in 2016. Another time that year, he said, “I am pro-life, and I will be appointing pro-life judges.” In total in 2016, according to a New York Times analysis, he described himself as “pro-life” 36 times:
.
In this campaign, though, he hardly ever uses the term. This year, he has described himself as “pro-life” once:
.
During his re-election campaign in 2020, Mr. Trump often spoke of his support for a federal ban on abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy. In total, before the Supreme Court decision that ended the national right to abortion in 2022, he expressed his support for a federal ban 50 times:
.
Since the court’s decision, Dobbs v. Jackson, which allowed individual states to ban abortion, he has expressed support for a federal ban only once
, saying, “It could be a state ban, it could be a federal ban.”
More often, he has said the exact opposite, that he opposes a federal ban. Since the court’s decision, he has said that 11 times:
. “I’m not signing a ban, and there’s no reason to sign a ban”; “There will not be a federal ban”; “I’m not signing a national abortion bill.”
We looked at all the statements Mr. Trump has made about abortion since he first ran for president, in speeches, interviews and posts online, that were cataloged by Roll Call Factba.se. We categorized 660 of them based on the words he used. The analysis shows how his messaging over the last decade has changed with the political moment — and how this year he has tried to distance himself from the core beliefs of the anti-abortion movement.
The way Donald Trump has talked about abortion changed after the Dobbs decision. Below, a comparison of the themes Mr. Trump mentioned most in his public statements, based on a Times analysis.
Some statements appear in more than one theme.
Trump’s Statements on Abortion Before and After Dobbs
There is no evidence that Mr. Trump’s stance on abortion has changed. As president, he did more to restrict abortion rights in the United States than any other president, including by appointing three of the six Supreme Court justices who overturned Roe v. Wade. As recently as the September debate, he took credit, saying, “I did a great service in doing it.” Anti-abortion groups have laid out a pathway for him to effectively ban abortion nationwide if he is re-elected.
As it became clear that the Dobbs decision was hurting some Republican candidates, however, he changed his messaging, sometimes directly contradicting himself. He said as much in April, when he released a video on Truth Social emphasizing that Republicans needed to talk about abortion in a way that would appeal to voters: “You must follow your heart on this issue. But remember, you must also win elections.”
Mr. Trump’s ambiguous or even contradictory statements can allow voters to hear whichever message they want to hear, political analysts said.
Karoline Leavitt, the Trump campaign’s national press secretary, said that Mr. Trump had been consistent in his stance on abortion, and that he had always supported the rights of states to make decisions on abortion rights.
Jason Rapert, founder and president of the National Association of Christian Lawmakers, which supports a nationwide abortion ban, said, “I think we should remember the Donald Trump of 2016, and what he was saying from his heart, and he made good on those policy decisions.”
Mr. Rapert said he was “extremely disappointed” to hear Mr. Trump say he did not support a federal abortion ban. But he does not necessarily believe him, he said: “I realized that he really is delivering messaging that came from many of the consultants around him.”
Celinda Lake, a Democratic pollster, said Mr. Trump was giving mixed messages because he was trying to hold onto the support of evangelical voters while also trying to win back moderates who have turned against him because of his role in overturning Roe.
“It’s a winning strategy with evangelicals — you never hear born-again Christians are defecting; they’re not,” Ms. Lake said. “It’s been a loss with suburban women, with younger women, with the moderate Republican women who now call themselves independents, and he’s been trying to figure out a way to get them back.”
In her polling and focus groups, she said, many voters have never really believed that Mr. Trump opposes abortion. His recent rhetoric “just reinforces that his heart’s not really in it, he doesn’t really believe this,” she said. “But on the other hand, the MAGA party does believe in it, and his political calculations are such that he did Dobbs and he will continue to do more.”
Trump’s evolution
Before he became a national political figure, Mr. Trump had described himself as “very pro-choice,” so in his initial run for president as a Republican, he repeatedly emphasized that he had abandoned that position.
Times Trump described himself as “pro-life,” by quarter
“I am pro-life”
Mr. Trump was courting the evangelical wing of the Republican Party, whose votes he needed. He promised to appoint “pro-life judges” to the Supreme Court. He made abortion restrictions a staple of his 2016 campaign, speaking often about how important the issue was.
Times Trump said abortion is an important issue, by quarterAbortion is an important issue
After he was elected, Mr. Trump kept many of his promises to the anti-abortion movement. He enacted several regulatory policies that limited funding for abortion and organizations that supported it. He appointed three justices to the Supreme Court from a list of candidates pre-approved by the anti-abortion movement.
As he approached his re-election campaign, he supported a bill in Congress that would have banned abortions nationwide after 20 weeks of pregnancy. The bill was a major theme of campaign rallies, and was featured in his 2020 State of the Union address and a speech that year at the March for Life, the anti-abortion movement’s biggest annual event. He was the first sitting president to speak there.
He called on Congress to “defend the dignity of life and to pass legislation prohibiting late-term abortion of children who can feel pain in their mother’s womb.”
Times Trump said he supports federal abortion restrictions, by quarterSupports federal restrictions
After the Dobbs decision overturning the right to abortion in 2022, Mr. Trump often celebrated his role in it: “If you look at what we’ve done with Roe v. Wade, we did something that everyone said couldn’t be done, and we got it done.”
At the presidential debate with Vice President Kamala Harris in September, he again praised Dobbs, and “the genius and heart and strength” of the Supreme Court justices who supported it.
Later that month, he extolled his record on the issue: “I’ve done an unbelievable job on the abortion question.”
He often said that all Americans or “all legal scholars” supported the court’s decision to overturn Roe, despite polling majorities and numerous legal briefs that opposed it.
During this campaign, though, he has sent mixed messages. At first, he said he would support a Florida measure expanding abortion access, then said he wouldn’t. He said he wouldn’t restrict access to abortion pills, then said he was open to it.
He has not always directly answered questions about his personal views on abortion. Often, he avoids it by embracing the fact that Dobbs allowed states to restrict and ban abortion: “It doesn’t matter because this issue has now been taken over by the states.”
Before Dobbs, he did not say much about believing abortion should be decided by the states. Now, he says it instead of answering questions about new federal policies he might pursue as president.
His party platform also emphasizes that abortion rights are a decision for the states, saying only that the party opposes “late-term abortion.” Then it shifts to other topics, like support for prenatal care, and access to birth control and in vitro fertilization.
He also deflects by saying the Democrats have taken extreme positions: “The radicals are really the Democrats because they’ll kill babies in their eighth and ninth month and they’ll kill babies after birth.” In fact, infanticide is illegal in every state. Arguments about Democratic extremism were also a staple of his 2020 re-election campaign speeches, but he is talking about that even more now.
He has also recently repeated his support for exceptions to abortion bans for women who are victims of rape or incest, or whose lives are threatened by their pregnancies. These statements somewhat conflict with his embrace of state-based approaches to abortion policy, since many states with abortion bans do not have these exceptions.
Melania Trump, the former first lady, published a book this month in which she said she supported abortion rights, a surprise that some political analysts said was a calculated move to appeal to more moderate voters.
For much of this campaign, Mr. Trump declined to say whether he would veto a federal abortion ban.
Then, in recent weeks, he changed course again, saying that he would veto a federal ban, in direct opposition to the goals of the anti-abortion movement. He said in an online message earlier this month: “Everyone knows I would not support a federal abortion ban, under any circumstances, and would, in fact, veto it, because it is up to the states to decide based on the will of their voters.”
Otherwise, Mr. Trump is not talking much about how he would handle abortion policy from the executive branch. Regardless of who wins the election, major federal legislation on the topic is unlikely to pass Congress in the next few years.
Instead, he has begun saying abortion is not an important issue: “The country’s falling apart,” he said recently. “We’re going to end up in World War III, and all they can talk about is abortion. That’s all they talk about. And it really no longer pertains because we’ve done something on abortion that nobody thought was possible.”
But the president still has major influence on abortion access nationwide, through regulations and executive actions. In Mr. Trump’s last administration, he cut federal funding to Planned Parenthood for contraceptive services. He appointed numerous federal judges who oppose abortion rights. If elected again, he could also use the Food and Drug Administration or the Justice Department to ban or restrict the mailing of abortion pills, which have contributed to increased abortion access since Dobbs.
“I know he’s steering clear with only days left until the election,” said Mr. Rapert of the National Association of Christian Lawmakers, “but clearly the federal government can do more.”
The complete list of Trump’s statements on abortion
Here is a list of Mr. Trump’s statements on abortion since 2015, organized by topic.
Oct. 2016 Breitbart News interview
May 2018
Susan B. Anthony Campaign for Life Gala speech Jan. 2019
March for Life speech
June 2020
Christian Broadcasting Network interview
Oct. 2020
Rally, Pensacola, Fla.
Oct. 2020 Rally, Lititz, Pa.
Sept. 2023
Rally, Dubuque, Iowa Sept. 2024
Rally in Indiana, Pa.
Methodology Transcriptions and related metadata were provided by Roll Call FactBa.se.
The analysis included transcripts from every public appearance by Mr. Trump, including every speech, interview, rally and debate, during his campaigns in 2016, 2020 and 2024 (through Oct. 23) and during his presidency. It includes appearances after he left office and before he started his campaign in late 2023, but some small appearances in this period may have been missed.
Also included in the data set is every public appearance that ran on C-SPAN or was posted on Rumble or YouTube, and every tweet and Truth Social post on Mr. Trump’s accounts, including over 300 deleted posts.
The authors searched this database for mentions of keywords related to abortion, then manually categorized individual quotations. Some statements were included in more than one category.
Abortion is an important issue
Politics
Noem vows criminal prosecution after catching alleged DHS ‘prolific leaker’
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem on Wednesday said another “prolific leaker” who disclosed information that put federal law enforcement officers at risk has been caught.
Noem announced the revelation in a post on X.
“I plan to refer this individual to @TheJusticeDept for criminal prosecution,” Noem wrote. “We are agnostic about your standing, tenure, political appointment, or status as a career civil servant—we will track down leakers and prosecute them to the fullest extent of the law.”
NOEM SAYS SHE GRIEVES FOR FAMILY AFTER CBP-RELATED SHOOTING IN MINNEAPOLIS, VOWS THOROUGH INVESTIGATION
Kristi Noem, secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, is seen during an assumption of command ceremony at the U.S. Coast Guard headquarters in Washington, D.C., on Thursday, Jan. 15, 2026. (Luke Johnson/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
Noem has made the prosecutions of leakers within her agency a top priority as the Trump administration continues its crackdown on illegal immigration.
Weeks after President Trump took office last year, she announced that two people in the Department of Homeland Security have been accused of disclosing DHS operations.
DHS SLAMS DEMS FOR COMPLAINING ABOUT IMMIGRATION LAW: ‘IT IS QUITE LITERALLY THEIR JOB TO CHANGE IT’
DHS Secretary Kristi Noem on Wednesday said another “prolific leaker” had been caught disclosing information that put federal law enforcement officers at risk. (Getty Images/Alex Brandon)
“We have identified two leakers of information here at the Department of Homeland Security who have been telling individuals about our operations and putting law enforcement lives in jeopardy,” Noem said in a video at the time. “We plan to prosecute these two individuals and hold them accountable for what they’ve done.”
“We’re going to continue to do all that we can to keep America safe,” she added.
Fox News Digital has reached out to DHS.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Noem has said the leaks endanger DHS law enforcement officers, who face an 8,000% increase in death threats against them.
Politics
California leaders decry Trump call to ‘nationalize’ election, say they’re ready to resist
WASHINGTON — President Trump’s repeated calls to “nationalize” elections drew swift resistance from California officials this week, who said they are ready to fight should the federal government attempt to assert control over the state’s voting system.
“We would win that on Day One,” California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta told The Times. “We would go into court and we would get a restraining order within hours, because the U.S. Constitution says that states predominantly determine the time, place and manner of elections, not the president.”
“We’re prepared to do whatever we have to do in California,” said California Secretary of State Shirley Weber, whose office recently fought off a Justice Department lawsuit demanding California’s voter rolls and other sensitive voter information.
Both Bonta and Weber said their offices are closely watching for any federal action that could affect voting in California, including efforts to seize election records, as the FBI recently did in Georgia, or target the counting of mailed ballots, which Trump has baselessly alleged are a major source of fraud.
Weber said California plays an outsized role in the nation and is “the place that people want to beat,” including through illegitimate court challenges to undermine the state’s vote after elections, but California has fought off such challenges in the past and is ready to do it again.
“There’s a cadre of attorneys that are already, that are always prepared during our elections to hit the courts to defend anything that we’re doing,” she said. “Our election teams, they do cross the T’s, dot the I’s. They are on it.”
“We have attorneys ready to be deployed wherever there’s an issue,” Bonta said, noting that his office is in touch with local election officials to ensure a rapid response if necessary.
The standoff reflects an extraordinary deterioration of trust and cooperation in elections that has existed between state and federal officials for generations — and follows a remarkable doubling down by Trump after his initial remarks about taking over the elections raised alarm.
Trump has long alleged, without evidence and despite multiple independent reviews concluding the opposite, that the 2020 election was stolen from him. He has alleged, again without evidence, that millions of fraudulent votes were cast, including by non-citizen voters, and that blue states looked the other way to gain political advantage.
Last week, the Justice Department acted on those claims by raiding the Fulton County, Ga., elections hub and seizing 2020 ballots. The department also has sued states, including California, for their voter rolls, and is defending a Trump executive order seeking to end mail voting and add new proof of citizenship requirements for registering to vote, which California and other states have sued to block.
On Monday, Trump further escalated his pressure campaign by saying on former FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino’s podcast that Republicans should “take over the voting in at least 15 places,” alleging that voting irregularities in what he called “crooked states” are hurting his party. “The Republicans ought to nationalize the voting.”
On Tuesday morning, Karoline Leavitt, the White House press secretary, appeared to try to walk back Trump’s comments, saying he had been referring to the Save Act, a measure being pushed by Republicans in Congress to codify Trump’s proof-of-citizenship requirements. However, Trump doubled down later that day, telling reporters that if states “can’t count the votes legally and honestly, then somebody else should take over.”
Bonta said Trump’s comments were a serious escalation, not just bluster: “We always knew they were going to come after us on something, so this is just an affirmation of that — and maybe they are getting a step closer.”
Bonta said he will especially be monitoring races in the state’s swing congressional districts, which could play a role in determining control of Congress and therefore be a target of legal challenges.
“The strategy of going after California isn’t rational unless you’re going after a couple of congressional seats that you think will make a difference in the balance of power in the House,” Bonta said.
California Democrats in Congress have stressed that the state’s elections are safe and reliable, but also started to express unease about upcoming election interference by the administration.
Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Fremont) said on “Meet the Press” last week that he believes the administration will try to use “every tool in their toolbox to try and interfere,” but that the American people will “overcome it by having a battalion of lawyers at the polls.”
California Sen. Adam Schiff this week said recent actions by the Trump administration — including the Fulton County raid, where Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard put Trump on the phone with agents — were “wrong” and set off “alarm bells about their willingness to interfere in the next election.”
Democrats have called on their Republican colleagues to help push back against such interference.
“When he says that we should nationalize the elections and Republicans should take over, and you don’t make a peep? What is going on here?” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said Tuesday. “This is the path that has ruined many a democracy, and our democracy is deep and strong, but it requires — and allows — resistance to these things. Verbal resistance, electoral resistance. Where are you?”
Some Republicans have voiced their disagreement with Trump. Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) said Tuesday that he is “supportive of only citizens voting and showing ID at polling places,” but is “not in favor of federalizing elections,” which he called “a constitutional issue.”
“I’m a big believer in decentralized and distributed power. And I think it’s harder to hack 50 election systems than it is to hack one,” he said.
However, other Republican leaders have commiserated with Trump over his qualms with state-run elections. House Majority Leader Mike Johnson (R-La.), for example, took aim at California’s system for counting mail-in ballots in the days following elections, questioning why such counting led to Republican leads in House races being “magically whittled away until their leads were lost.”
“It looks on its face to be fraudulent. Can I prove that? No, because it happened so far upstream,” Johnson said. “But we need more confidence in the American people in the election system.”
Elections experts expressed dismay over Johnson’s comments, calling them baseless and illogical. The fact that candidates who are leading in votes can fall behind as more votes are counted is not magic but math, they said — with Democrats agreeing.
“Speaker Johnson seems to be confused, so let me break it down. California’s elections are safe and secure. The point of an election is to make sure *every* eligible vote cast is counted, not to count fast,” Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) wrote on X. “We don’t just quit while we’re ahead. It’s called a democracy.”
Democrats have also expressed concern that the administration could use the U.S. Postal Service to interfere with counting mail-in ballots. They have specifically raised questions about a rule issued by the postal service last December that deems mail postmarked on the day it is processed by USPS, rather than the day it is received — which would impact mail-in ballots in places such as California, where ballots must be postmarked by election day to be counted.
“Election officials are already concerned and warning that this change could ultimately lead to higher mailed ballots being rejected,” Senate Democrats wrote to U.S. Postal Service Postmaster General David Steiner last month.
Some experts and state officials said voters should make a plan to vote early, and consider dropping their ballots in state ballot drop boxes or delivering them directly to voting centers.
Politics
Video: What Does the F.B.I. Raid in Georgia Mean for Elections?
new video loaded: What Does the F.B.I. Raid in Georgia Mean for Elections?

By Nick Corasaniti, Nikolay Nikolov, Alexandra Ostasiewicz, Joey Sendaydiego, Gilad Thaler and Thomas Vollkommer
February 4, 2026
-
Indiana3 days ago13-year-old rider dies following incident at northwest Indiana BMX park
-
Massachusetts4 days agoTV star fisherman, crew all presumed dead after boat sinks off Massachusetts coast
-
Tennessee5 days agoUPDATE: Ohio woman charged in shooting death of West TN deputy
-
Pennsylvania1 week agoRare ‘avalanche’ blocks Pennsylvania road during major snowstorm
-
Movie Reviews1 week agoVikram Prabhu’s Sirai Telugu Dubbed OTT Movie Review and Rating
-
Indiana2 days ago13-year-old boy dies in BMX accident, officials, Steel Wheels BMX says
-
Culture1 week agoTry This Quiz on Oscar-Winning Adaptations of Popular Books
-
Politics6 days agoVirginia Democrats seek dozens of new tax hikes, including on dog walking and dry cleaning