www.nytimes.com
Open in
urlscan Pro
151.101.1.164
Public Scan
URL:
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/23/us/politics/alabama-ivf-court-republicans-democrats-election.html
Submission: On February 23 via manual from US — Scanned from CA
Submission: On February 23 via manual from US — Scanned from CA
Form analysis 2 forms found in the DOM
POST https://nytimes.app.goo.gl/?link=https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/23/us/politics/alabama-ivf-court-republicans-democrats-election.html&apn=com.nytimes.android&amv=9837&ibi=com.nytimes.NYTimes&isi=284862083
<form method="post" action="https://nytimes.app.goo.gl/?link=https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/23/us/politics/alabama-ivf-court-republicans-democrats-election.html&apn=com.nytimes.android&amv=9837&ibi=com.nytimes.NYTimes&isi=284862083"
data-testid="MagicLinkForm" style="visibility: hidden;"><input name="client_id" type="hidden" value="web.fwk.vi"><input name="redirect_uri" type="hidden"
value="https://nytimes.app.goo.gl/?link=https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/23/us/politics/alabama-ivf-court-republicans-democrats-election.html&apn=com.nytimes.android&amv=9837&ibi=com.nytimes.NYTimes&isi=284862083"><input
name="response_type" type="hidden" value="code"><input name="state" type="hidden" value="no-state"><input name="scope" type="hidden" value="default"></form>POST https://nytimes.app.goo.gl/?link=https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/23/us/politics/alabama-ivf-court-republicans-democrats-election.html&apn=com.nytimes.android&amv=9837&ibi=com.nytimes.NYTimes&isi=284862083
<form method="post" action="https://nytimes.app.goo.gl/?link=https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/23/us/politics/alabama-ivf-court-republicans-democrats-election.html&apn=com.nytimes.android&amv=9837&ibi=com.nytimes.NYTimes&isi=284862083"
data-testid="MagicLinkForm" style="visibility: hidden;"><input name="client_id" type="hidden" value="web.fwk.vi"><input name="redirect_uri" type="hidden"
value="https://nytimes.app.goo.gl/?link=https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/23/us/politics/alabama-ivf-court-republicans-democrats-election.html&apn=com.nytimes.android&amv=9837&ibi=com.nytimes.NYTimes&isi=284862083"><input
name="response_type" type="hidden" value="code"><input name="state" type="hidden" value="no-state"><input name="scope" type="hidden" value="default"></form>Text Content
Skip to contentSkip to site index Search & Section Navigation Section Navigation SEARCH Politics SUBSCRIBE FOR $0.50 (Cdn)/WEEKLog in Friday, February 23, 2024 Today’s Paper SUBSCRIBE FOR $0.50 (Cdn)/WEEK I.V.F. Ruling in Alabama * What to Know * The Court’s Ruling * Read the Decision * What Happens Next? * The Chief Justice Advertisement SKIP ADVERTISEMENT Supported by SKIP ADVERTISEMENT ALABAMA I.V.F. RULING OPENS NEW FRONT IN ELECTION-YEAR ABORTION BATTLES As some Republicans rushed to distance themselves from a decision that upended popular fertility treatments, Democrats vowed to tie them to it. * Share full article * * * Read in app Representative Nancy Mace of South Carolina has been among the Republicans trying to distance themselves from an Alabama Supreme Court ruling declaring frozen embryos should be considered children.Credit...Kenny Holston/The New York Times By Lisa Lerer, Elizabeth Dias and Annie Karni Feb. 23, 2024Updated 5:29 a.m. ET Sign up for the On Politics newsletter. Your guide to the 2024 elections. Get it sent to your inbox. An Alabama Supreme Court ruling, that frozen embryos should be considered children, has created a new political nightmare for Republicans nationally, who distanced themselves from a fringe view about reproductive health that threatened to drive away voters in November. Several Republican governors and lawmakers swiftly disavowed the decision, made by a Republican-majority court, expressing support for in vitro fertilization treatments. Some spoke out about their personal experiences with infertility. Others declared they would not support federal restrictions on I.V.F., drawing a distinction between their support for broadly popular fertility treatments and their opposition to abortion. “The concern for years has been that I.V.F. would be taken away from women everywhere,” Representative Nancy Mace, Republican of South Carolina, said in an interview on Thursday. “We need to do everything we can to protect women’s access in every state to I.V.F.” Yet, even as some Republicans backed away from the court decision, Republican legislators in conservative states planned efforts to push bills that would declare that life begins at conception — a policy that could have severe consequences for fertility treatments. Advertisement SKIP ADVERTISEMENT Others acted to protect I.V.F. treatments. Tim Melson, a Republican state senator in Alabama, said he planned to introduce legislation clarifying that embryos are not viable until they are implanted in a woman’s uterus. The division was a new twist on a familiar problem for the party. Since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, many Republicans, including former President Donald J. Trump, have tried to avoid the issue of abortion and reframe their proposals — like a 15-week federal ban — as common-sense policies that can appeal to moderate voters. Subscribe to The Times to read as many articles as you like. Lisa Lerer is a national political reporter for The Times, based in New York. She has covered American politics for nearly two decades. More about Lisa Lerer Elizabeth Dias is The Times’s national religion correspondent, covering faith, politics and culture. More about Elizabeth Dias Annie Karni is a congressional correspondent for The Times. She writes features and profiles, with a recent focus on House Republican leadership. More about Annie Karni * Share full article * * * Read in app Advertisement SKIP ADVERTISEMENT SITE INDEX SITE INFORMATION NAVIGATION * © 2024 The New York Times Company * NYTCo * Contact Us * Accessibility * Work with us * Advertise * T Brand Studio * Your Ad Choices * Privacy Policy * Terms of Service * Terms of Sale * Site Map * Canada * International * Help * Subscriptions Enjoy unlimited access to all of The Times. See subscription options