Josh Hawley’s getting more extreme on reproductive rights. Missouri women, take note | Opinion
Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court shot down the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine’s attempt to restrict Americans’ access to the abortion pill mifepristone, which is used in about two-thirds of abortions nationwide. The plaintiffs’ case included an amicus brief signed by Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley, which makes sense for two reasons: First, his wife is one of the Alliance’s lawyers. And second, Josh Hawley has been getting steadily more extreme opposing reproductive freedoms.
Hawley is hardly a recent convert to the popular Republican cause of restricting women’s rights. Well before he was a senator, he worked on the Burwell v. Hobby Lobby case, successfully convincing the Supreme Court to allow employers to deny their employees birth control insurance coverage. After Roe v. Wade fell, Hawley bragged in the creepiest way possible about explaining it to his sons: “I sat my boys down, my 9-year-old, my 7-year-old later that evening and I tried to explain to them in a way they’d understand. I was like, you know, there’s been a big decision at the Supreme Court today. That’s our nation’s highest court and mommy was absolutely critical to this and it’s a great decision, that rights a terrible wrong. … Then we celebrated by going out as a family for Mexican food.” I’m not sure what would be the right way to celebrate the erosion of women’s bodily autonomy, but it’s probably not by going out to eat the food of a people you regularly dehumanize on Fox News. Anyway, at no point has he ever purported to be anywhere near pro-choice.
But the terms “pro-choice” and “pro-life” almost seem too simplistic now, relics of a time when the debate was restricted to abortion rights. Hawley seems to be seeking complete control over American women’s bodies. There’s no other explanation for why someone who claims to be “pro-life” could possibly vote against access to in vitro fertilization, as Hawley has done. He voted against the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, and just this month, he voted against the Right to Contraception Act. None of these is about “life.” They’re about relegating women to a second-class status. All women — you, your daughters, your granddaughters — are affected by legislation that takes control of their bodies, regardless of whether they want to start families or not.
Hawley is voting the Republican Party line, but his words tell a distinct story. His defenses for his extremist votes are so weak I wonder if he’s even trying. He claimed he couldn’t vote to protect birth control because there was “no way” the Supreme Court would overturn Griswold v. Connecticut, which currently makes contraception accessible — but Justice Clarence Thomas himself has said the court should reconsider it — something Hawley surely knows. (And also, that’s exactly what many conservatives claimed for years about Roe v. Wade.)
Hawley defended his anti-in vitro fertilization vote with the words: “This isn’t about IVF. This is about their continuing war on people of faith, their continuing war on anybody who won’t go along with their abortion agenda.” He’s saying the quiet part out loud with that last one: His vote isn’t about IVF, since of course, no one has to use IVF who doesn’t want to. It’s about owning the libs. It’s about winning. It’s about taking control of the people who disagree with him.
His porous arguments about specific pieces of legislation leave plenty of room for his honest opinions about women to slip through — more loudly now than ever. For example, he recently voiced his support for Harrison Butker as the Kansas City Chiefs kicker effectively asserted that women belong in the kitchen. Hawley said he’s “proud” to call Butker a friend when he could have just said nothing, especially if he wasn’t interested in highlighting his own regressive views.
With his words, Hawley stands in sharp contrast to others in the GOP who’ve been acting like the dog that caught the car when it comes to reproductive freedoms. This year’s Alabama Supreme Court decision threatening IVF left Republicans trembling, as they finally recognized that women like to have rights. Donald Trump has flip-flopped on his anti-contraception stances, and he’s allegedly looking for a running mate who’s less extreme than GOP hard-liners on abortion.
Hawley’s reportedly not on Trump’s short list for VP, but that doesn’t mean his anti-women views won’t harm him. The voters of Missouri have already taken notice. Following his endorsement of Butker, a group of tradeswomen in the state wrote an open letter saying: “When Harrison Butker told a group of young college graduates that working women like us have fallen for ‘diabolical lies’ by providing for our families, Senator Josh Hawley had a chance to stand up for us and for our freedom. Instead, Hawley showed us his true colors by defending that message.”
Missourians are worried about controlling their own bodies, and for good reason. Missouri was, after all, the first state to ban abortion after the end of Roe (and the Hawley’s celebratory Mexican dinner). Fears about losing access to IVF or contraception are far from unfounded.
Abortion will very likely be on Missouri’s ballot in November. But Josh Hawley’s increasingly extreme desire to control women’s bodies goes far beyond access to abortion. On the bright side, he’s on the ballot in November, too.
Ginny Hogan is a Baltimore-based stand-up comic and writer. You can find her in social media at @ginnyhogan_