Abortion rights is, once again, shaping up to be a defining issue in the race for California’s 45th congressional district — and could shed light on how the matter could play an outsized role in 2024.
The kerfuffle over how Rep. Michelle Steel has reaffirmed her support for anti-abortion legislation — and just who is qualified to speak about it — began when she added her name as a co-sponsor last week to legislation that’s nearly a year old.
Supporters say the resolution, introduced in January 2023, simply defines life as beginning at conception and ensures the unborn is protected under the 14th Amendment; others say it equates to a nationwide abortion ban.
“Rep. Steel’s position remains clear: She is pro-life with the exceptions of rape, incest and the health and life of the mother and does not support a national ban on abortion,” said Claire Nance, a spokesperson for Steel.
Nance disputed a report from the New York Times that said Steel only added her name on Jan. 12 to the 2023 legislation after an opponent criticized her. Steel’s office said she did not sign onto the resolution because of the New York Times and said the bill was already on her radar.
Dubbed the “Life at Conception Act,” the bill “declares that the right to life guaranteed by the Constitution is vested in each human being” and defines that as “including the moment of fertilization, cloning or other moment at which an individual member of the human species comes into being.” Steel, a Seal Beach Republican, co-sponsored similar legislation in 2021.
Rep. Alex Mooney, the West Virginia Republican who introduced the bill, says it would ensure “the preborn” are protected under the 14th Amendment, which guarantees the right to due process and equal protection. “As a result,” Mooney said in a statement when he introduced the bill last year, “preborn babies would be entitled to legal protection under the Constitution as enforced by the states.”
While…
Read the full article here