In a controversial move during his second term, President Donald Trump issued pardons to 23 anti-abortion activists, including those convicted of blockading reproductive health clinics and intimidating staff and patients. The pardons came just a day before the annual March for Life rally in Washington, D.C., where Trump is set to address attendees via video.
These pardons are part of a flurry of executive actions taken by the Trump administration in its first week back in office, signaling its ongoing alignment with anti-abortion groups. Despite this, Trump has notably refrained from issuing new abortion-related policies, leaving activists and lawmakers questioning the administration’s strategy.
During his first term, Trump aggressively pushed anti-abortion measures, such as nominating judges opposed to reproductive rights, eliminating federal funding for organizations that refer patients for abortion, and pledging to overturn Roe v. Wade. He was also the first sitting president to attend the March for Life rally, cementing his reputation as a strong ally to the anti-abortion movement. However, his recent hesitation to prioritize sweeping abortion restrictions has sparked speculation about his current stance.
The pardoned activists were convicted of violating the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act, which prohibits the use or threat of physical force to block people from accessing reproductive health services. This move has emboldened anti-abortion groups but raised concerns about the administration’s potential disregard for reproductive rights.
Meanwhile, anti-abortion organizations are urging the Trump administration to revive the 1873 Comstock Act. This long-dormant law, if enforced, could ban the mailing of abortion medications, significantly limiting access to abortion pills, which are used in the majority of abortions in the U.S. Critics argue that reviving such outdated legislation would have devastating consequences, particularly in states where abortion remains legal.
Mary Ziegler, a historian of abortion law at the University of California, Davis, remarked, “He’s done so much in such a short amount of time that it’s still striking he isn’t doing anything about this. The longer it takes, the more people wonder how much he’s going to do at all.”
While Trump has taken symbolic steps to appease anti-abortion groups, his administration has yet to introduce substantial new policies. Notably, the White House removed a government website that informed readers of legal avenues to access abortion. Yet, more aggressive measures, such as instituting a national abortion ban or reviving the Comstock Act, remain on hold.
Kristi Hamrick, vice president of media and policy at Students for Life, expressed optimism but also impatience: “I don’t feel like it’s too late, but I certainly do hope Friday to see something.” She added that her organization would continue to press for a revival of the Comstock Act and other restrictive measures.
In Congress, 144 Republican lawmakers, including 35 senators, have signed a letter urging Trump to reinstate anti-abortion policies from his first term, such as barring federal Title X funding for organizations like Planned Parenthood. Title X supports family planning services for low-income individuals, and previous funding cuts led to significant reductions in healthcare access for 1.6 million patients.
Instead of pursuing sweeping national abortion bans, some Republicans are focusing on narrower goals, such as targeting “late-term” abortions—a term with no medical meaning—and advocating for “born-alive” bills. Senate Majority Leader John Thune recently backed legislation to penalize healthcare providers who fail to “exercise the proper degree of care” in cases where a child survives an abortion. However, such scenarios are extremely rare and often involve complex medical complications.
Hamrick and other anti-abortion advocates have acknowledged the shift in strategy, suggesting that the movement is adapting to the political climate. “In this current movement, the pro-life movement legislators will meet President Trump to address what he has identified,” Hamrick stated, indicating a willingness to follow Trump’s lead on incremental measures rather than pushing for immediate, sweeping bans.
Polls indicate that broad abortion bans are unpopular, even among some Republican voters. This political reality appears to be shaping Trump’s approach. Greer Donley, a law professor at the University of Pittsburgh, noted, “I’m not as convinced as some people seem to be that Trump’s going to do everything he can. It’s hard to feel confident about anything when it comes to what their strategy is.”
While Trump has yet to introduce new abortion-related policies, many activists believe he may enact significant restrictions later in his term to avoid immediate public backlash. Mary Ziegler pointed out, “There’s a fear that it’s a political loser,” emphasizing that Trump’s hesitation could be a calculated move to minimize controversy.
Despite the lack of immediate action, anti-abortion groups continue to push for their long-term goals. Reviving the Comstock Act, defunding Planned Parenthood, and limiting access to abortion medications remain top priorities. Whether Trump will fully embrace these measures in the coming months remains to be seen.
For now, the Trump administration’s ambiguous approach to abortion policies has left advocates and opponents alike speculating about its ultimate agenda.
