The Daily Show: Ears Edition - Abortion: Mission Impossible | The Weekly Show with Jon Stewart

Episode Date: June 20, 2024

On Mondays, Jon Stewart hosts The Daily Show, but now on Thursdays, he hosts The Weekly Show — a new podcast featuring in-depth conversations exploring some of the biggest threats to our democracy. In this episode, Jon addresses the backward slide of reproductive rights in America. Joining him are NYU Law professor Melissa Murray, who also co-hosts the Strict Scrutiny podcast, as well as Jessica Valenti, founder of AbortionEveryDay.com and author of the forthcoming book, “Abortion: Our Bodies, Their Lies, and the Truths We Use to Win.” Catch new episodes of The Weekly Show with Jon Stewart every Thursday, wherever you get your podcasts. Follow The Weekly Show with Jon Stewart on social media for more:  > YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@weeklyshowpodcast > Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/weeklyshowpodcast> TikTok: https://tiktok.com/@weeklyshowpodcast  > X: https://x.com/weeklyshowpod      See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Survivor 47 is here, which means we're bringing you a brand new season of the only official survivor podcast on fire. And this season we are joined by fan favorite and Survivor 46 runner-up, Charlie, Charlie, I'm excited to do this together. Thanks, Jeff. So excited to be here, and I can't wait to bring you inside the mind of a survivor player for season 47. Listen to On Fire, the official Survivor podcast starting September 18th, wherever you get your podcast. Hey, it's John Surrey. No Daily Show, ears edition this week. So we're gonna jam the weekly show back onto your ears edition channel.

I don't know how this works. We plugged into some kind of an outlet, USB. I don't know how this works. We plugged into some kind of an outlet, USB, I don't know what it is, but you're going to hear our show this week. It's the weekly show with John Stewart. It's a podcast. We're kind of, the theme of it is to discuss the kinds of soft threats to our democracy that make us vulnerable to these larger threats of authoritarianians and demagogues and on and on. It's. It's. It's. It's. It's the the the the the the the the the th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th thi thi thi threats thi thi thi thi thi thi the the. We're thr- thr- thr- thr-a. thr-a. thr-a. thr-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-c. th. th. th. th. the. the. the. thr-ea-ea-ea-ea-noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo. the. the. the larger threats of authoritarians and demagogues and on and on. It's sort of the things within our democracy that caused people to believe that the government no longer really represents the best interests and the needs of the people that they are supposed to be representing. And if they would, we would love it. So I hope you do enjoy this latest episode. And we'll see you next time.

Hey everybody! Welcome once again to the Weekly Show with John Stewart. I'm John Stewart. And I apologize if that was too enthusiastic. I have yet to understand, in terms of a podcast podcast how to open it up, what level of enthusiasm is appropriate for when people are just listening to something as opposed to on cable television when you're coming in and very clearly somebody's making popcorn or something else. So that may have been too forceful, and I'm sure that our grand producers, Brittany Mamedevick, and Lauren Walker who are here with me would be able to tell you. Last week we had our military industrial complex show we learned, shockingly, that there is

waste fraud in abuse in a lot of the budgets of our military industrial complex, but even more interestingly, we learned that our military industrial complex, but even more interestingly, we learned that our military industrial complex may be strategically counterproductive. We may actually be sewing more chaos than we are not. This week's episode is fascinating. So we obviously we have, I don't know if you know this. Maybe this is giving the tea on production, on a glimpse behind the curtain. We have meetings where we discuss what we would like to cover, what we would like to talk about.

This week I voted for Celtics Mavericks. Celtics Mavericks. Come on, it's the championship. Tatum, Brown. They finally did it. But we're going to, we're actually going to to to to to to to to do to do to do to do to do to do to do to do to do to do to do to do to do to do to do the the the the to the the the the the the the the the the the the the It's the championship. Tatum, Brown. They finally did it. But we're going to, we're actually going to do abortion. Are you suggesting I vetoed you? No, Lauren, how could you come in and a defensive posture on that? No, we have, it's again, we're, we're, listen. It's an issue that this MIFAapristone judgment that came down and was promoted as this win for abortion rights, but was really kind of a just kick the can.

There's so much going on around it, but I think more trencently, it represents, again, there is broad support. And we talked about this, for abortion rights, for women. There is a broad, democratic, majoritarian support. But because of the way our system is set up, that is under full-on assault. And it's just one more thing that I believe has people feeling that our system is, is not responsive to the needs of the needs of the ne. It represents. It'sthat it's supposed to represent. Would you guys agree with with that?

Totally, and I think just to bridge last week's episode and this week's episode, last week the House voted on the defense bill that included a provision blocking abortion coverage from the Pentagon. More specifically, they're trying to reverse a Pentagon policy, which allows service members to be compensated for time off and travel if they need reproductive care. So it just shows you the attacks come from everywhere can fit into any bill. Yes. And the extent to which they will not allow it anywhere that there is there is no opportunity small enough for them to inject that in there. And that's for sure.

Although, to be fair, it's the house and their knuckleheads. And my guess is it probably doesn't get past the Senate, but who the hell knows anymore with the way things things things things things things? things? things? things? th th th th th thi thi thi thi thi thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. they're they're they're they're thi. they're they're they they they they they they they they they'll they'll they'll they'll they'll they'll. they'll. to to to to to to to to to to to they they they they they they they they they they they they they it's the house and their knuckleheads. And my guess is it probably doesn't get past the Senate, but who the hell knows anymore with the way things are functioning? Let's fucking hope not. Let's hope not. By the way, that was Brittany Mamedovic with just filthy language, just, if I may, for those you, for those you at home who are watching, this podcast obviously is geared towards six to eight year olds. I just want to let them know that that I did not in any way condone the use of the word fuck. No of course not. I've learned from the saltiest speaker of all so I apologize for all of that but our guests this week are fabulous to discuss it so let's let's get to them right now. Hello. Okay, so we're going to welcome our honored guest. Melissa Murray, Earl of favorite, NYU Law Professor co-host of the strict scrutiny podcast, which I say slowly, so that don't bumble it.

And Jessica Valenti, she's the founder of abortion every everyday.com, an author of the forthcoming book, abortion, our bodies, their lies, and the truths we use to win. Welcome to the conversation. We are discussing ways that our system is somewhat dysfunctional and leads to a certain dissatisfaction with the kind of tenets and foundations of the democracy. And I think the abortion issue is one of those, it's an incredibly complex, complicated issue. There's people of good faith on all sides, then there's also those that have weaponized it. But it felt like after Roe, the country had found kind of a status quo that felt majoritarian to some extent.

But the forces of the anti-abortion movement have chipped away at that through legal means, but we also want to get to, you know, we kind of have this idea that the things they can't make illegal, they make impossible. And so I wanted to start there. Jessica, if I could, I'd start with you. What are some of the things that have been done that aren't necessarily legal challenges, but have made it so that it's unbelievably difficult? I mean, part of the problem is there's so much. And if it's, and they're not, they're not relying on any one attack, which is really smart. So if one fails, they have a million others waiting in the wings. But I think, you know, the things that I'm most worrie about are travel bans, which I feel like are not getting enough

media coverage at all. People sort of don't know that they exist or they think that it's something we don't have to worry about because right now it's primarily targeted towards teenagers. And all the little sort of chipping away things that they're doing around mythopristone and abortion medication specifically because they know that that's how people in anti-choice states are ending their pregnancies, right? There was some new numbers that came out that showed 8,000 people a month were getting pills from pro-choice states. And so they know that women are getting around their bans. They're really pissed off about it. And so they're sort of doing everything that they can, to, as you said,

make it impossible to get. Melissa, let me ask, so that thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, tho, tho, tho, thi, thi, tho, tho, tho, tho, tho, tho, tho, tho, tho, tho, tho, tho, tho, tho, tho, tho, tho, tho, tho, tho, tho, tho, tho, tho, tho, tho, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thousa, thousand, thousand, thousand, thousand, thoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo, tho, let me ask, so that brings up how they're doing it legally. So they're setting these boundaries. I don't know much about how a travel ban is placed legislatively or is enforced. And Miff at Perstone, the big news was, oh, that ban failed at the Supreme Court, but it's not as simple as that is it. It was actually not a particularly robust victory, no? No, I think that's right. Thanks for having me. It's great to be back on. Let me add on. Any time. Any time, Melissa. Thank you. Again, the dogma has caught the car on this issue.

I want to tack back to something that Jessica said, you know, before Dobbs and the fall of Roe, we had become anesthesized to the fact that you had to wait two days if you wanted an abortion, that you had to travel and take time off of work if you wanted to do this and have an ultrasound and all of these things that were medically unnecessary but were designed to chill individuals from wanting to go through with this and to have abortions. We come to accept that is normal and now in this post-row landscape we are coming to accept the fact that a quote-unquote normal ban is one that prohibits abortion at 15 leagues. You were exactly right about this new Supreme Court opinion that was just released. It preserves the status quo and I just want to underscore that that's not great. The status quo is shitty and so it preserves that shitty status quo.

And I think the way to think about that challenge. What is this that when you say the status quo, what is what do you mean by that? Because I, so the court in this case, this was a challenge to Mifapristone, which is one of the drugs and the two drug medication abortion protocol, and it then also to the FDA's regulations that were released during the pandemic that made Mifapristone easier to access because it allowed for its distribution through the mail. Right, you could telehealth or all of that. I think the way for your listeners to think about this challenge to Mifapristone and those regulations are that this was the anti-choice movement's effort to the to.......... And, to, th. And, th. And, th. And, th. And, thi, thi, thi, the, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, to, to, to, to, to, to, to, the the, to, to, to, to, to, to, to to to to to to to to to to to to to, to, to, to, to, to, to, to, to, to, to, to, to, to, to, to to to, where it's accepted, where the constituents want access to reproductive freedom. So it is completely

anti-democratic because they are importing their red state values into these other places. So I want to make that clear. The status quo that we have now is we have a patchwork where red states ban it and blue states allow for it and you know there's some crossover because women who want this will go to blue states or will seek out help from blue state physicians and that's what they're trying to end and that's basically what the Supreme Court preserved. This was not a decision on the merits they never got into whether the FDA properly reg- It was on this jurisdictional question of standing were these anti-choice doctors, the alliance for

Hippocratic medicine, were they the right plaintiffs to rebring this case because they had never prescrib Mifapristone, nor had they ever had a patient who had been harmed by Mifapristone because wait for it. Nor are they Hippocratic. Well, they're hypocritical, but not hypocritical, but no one, like there are very few women who have thir by Mifapriston because the drug is incredibly safe and so it was a real challenge for them to actually find plaintiffs who could make out an actual injury to challenge the regulations of this law. And so instead you had these doctors making absolutely specious claims that their injury was in losing the aesthetic value of seeing a baby born of seeing their in utero losing the aesthetic value of seeing a baby born, of seeing their in utero patient brought to life. And the court-

That was the injury? It wasn't a physical, oh, they were hurt. It was, they would never have the glory? It was a generalized grievance, moral objections to abortion. And the court rightly said that, that's never been enough under Article 3 of the Constitution to sustain jurisdiction in federal court. But the fact that we had to go to the Supreme Court to say that is absolutely crazy because everybody knows that. So it's also for- It should have been struck down well before it was for God's sakes. They in the same session made it so that bump stocks are available. So this thing that actually does bring grievous harm to people through turning a regular gun into a machine gun, yeah, that's cool.

But, but it's imaginary. But this is the thing, John. So the court issues this decision says no, this is a completely specious standing claim. We're going to kick this out of court. We're not even going to decide this on the merits. And then you have the mainstream media to to to to to to to to to the m m. to to to the m. to the mainstream media. to the mainstream media. to to to the mainstream media. to the mainstream media. the mainstream media. the mainstream media. the m. the m. the m. the m. the mrs. the. the mrs. the the the. the. the. their their their their this. this. this. this. this. this. this. this. this. this. this. this. this. this. this. this. this. this. this. the the the the the the the the the the the the the the. the. the. the. the. the. the. the. the. the. the. thean. the. tre. tre. tre. tre. true. tre. true. the the tre. the the. the ththis on the merits. And then you have the mainstream media heralding this as a victory for reproductive freedom. It's not a victory. Melissa Murray, at long last, have you no decency, are you suggesting that the mainstream media has not picked up the nuance of this Supreme Court decision? I will say when I go on to MSNBC I make sure that the nuance is picked up. I don't know that everyone is doing this. But people are talking about this as a victory. It's not a victory. Or if it is, it's a very muted victory and it's not going to last. They are going to find new plaintiffs that will challenge us. And the only winner here. It's relentless. But yeah, this is the point. The winner here is's the court because the court gets to appear moderate on the issue of an abortion at a time when millions of people are galvanized about abortion as an electoral issue.

We have an election coming up in a few months. This court does not want to be a part of that election and that narrative. And so this is a win for the court. They get to be consensuous driven and rule of law oriented, in fact, they've merely preserved a shitty status quo that they brought into being. And kicked it down the road. Jessica, I want to ask you, because we bring up, we know, we sort of talk about these things in the, well, in red states, it's this, and in blue states, but it's obviously never as simple. And there. the blue, the blue, the blue, th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, to thi. thi's, thi's, thi. thi, thi, to to to to to to to to to to tooes, tooes, tooes, tooes, tooes, to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to be to too, to too, too, too, too, too, too, tooes. tooes. tooooooooooooooes. tooes. tooes. tooes. tooes. tooes. tooes. tooes. tooes never the twain shall meet. But the fact is, you know, the hurdles that they put up for people is the thing that is really, I think, made it so difficult for women to make these choices. You know, Melissa talked earlier about these travel bans and and the like. But so if you're in a city, a blue city that broadly supports abortion, but you're in a red

state, let's go with Houston and Texas. Yeah. What is your, what is your option? What is your recourse? I mean, it's really either travel, right? Which you have to have enough money to do, you have to have support to get out of the state, or you can get abortion medication shipped to you in the state, but you have to risk, okay, if someone finds out, throwns, if a, thrown, someone who doesn't like me finds out that I had abortion medication shipped, they

they can make my life hell, they can bring a lawsuit because Texas has the ability to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to, toe, to, the their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, or abortion, or abortion, or abortion, or abortion, or abortion, or abortion, or abortion, or abortion, or abortion, or abortion, or abortion, or abortion, or abortion, their, or abortion, their, or abortion, their, their, their, or abortion, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, abortion, or abortion, abortion, or abortion, their, their, because Texas has the ability to bring civil suits against anyone who aids and abets in an abortion and so there's a real chilling effect. Go go go baba bababab. Oh yeah yeah, yeah. Don't don't bury the lead there. What say say that say that again? Sure. So Texas has something that is sort of informally called the bounty hunter mandate where you can get 10,000 for pregnant women. Well, this is how they get around it, because they never want to seem as if they're attacking the actual pregnant person. They say anyone other than the pregnant person. So someone who drove them out of state, someone who helped them get abortion medication. In one case, a woman's abusive ex-husband brought a lawsuit against three of her friends, yeah,

who helped her to allegedly get abortion medication into the state and enter pregnancy. And so now you're set up with this system where if you have an abusive ex-partner who wants to make you miserable, they can go ahead and they can sue your friends for helping you to get care. And what that means is that all of these people who may have had, you know, the ability to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to the a the a the a the a the a the a the a the a the aboeaugh. the a the a the a the a the a the a the a, the a, the a, the a, the a, the a, their, their, their. their. their. their. their. their. their. their. their. their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, thoooooooooooooauuuoauoau. thoooooooooooauu. thoooooooooooooo. their, their,. And what that means is that all of these people who may have had, you know, the ability to travel, the ability to get abortion medicationship to them are terrified. They're terrified that they're gonna ruin their partner's life, ruin their friend's life.

And I'm sure the doctors then must be terrified that they they're they're they're they're they're they're they're they're they're they're they're they're they're they're they're they're they're they're they're they're they're they're they're they're they're they're they're thi, get prosecuted as well. All right, quick break. John Stewart here. Unbelievably exciting news. My new podcast, The Weekly Show. We're going to be talking about the election, economics, ingredient to bread ratio on sandwiches. Listen to the weekly show with John Stewart wherever you get your podcast. We're back. All right. Let me let me back this up to just for a moment because these are the things that sort of shocked the conscience.

But I want to talk about a little bit before this happened, isn't the pressure that they brought to bear on abortion providers. Isn't the pressure they brought to bear of, oh, if you're going to do that kind of care, your facility has to be like a hospital and you've got, and then through sort of intimidation of the doctors, they made it so that there's very few clinics, so that even within the state, people had overwhelming travel hurdles, especially if they didn't have the kind of resources that, you know, people might have to have the the the th th th the the the the the the the the. the. the. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. the. the. the. the. the. the. the. the. the. the. the. the. the. the. the. the. the. the. the. the. the. the. the. the. the they didn't have the kind of resources that, you know, people might have to have to get that something done.

Even before these types of more draconian measures have been put into place, haven't they put into place effective bans prior to this? Yeah, I have a guest column at my newsletter today from a woman who lost vision in one of her eyes because her abortion care was delayed in Maryland before row is overturned. So they had these laws in place for a really long time and I think you're talking about trap laws which is targeted regulation of abortion providers. Okay. And so yeah, they did everything that they could even in pro-choice states. So for example, if you're an abortion provider in a pro-choice state, they say, well, you need to have admitting privileges at a local hospital, right? The problem is a local hospital is not going to give an abortion provider admitting privileges because they never bring patients there, because abortion is so that they're not bringing any patients into the hospital. And so they've set up the system where it's essentially impossible. Yeah, exactly. And so they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they. They they. They they. They they. They they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they're to to to to to have to have to have to have to have to have to have to have to have to have to have to have to have to have to have to have to have to have to have to have to have to have to have to have to have to have to have to have to have to to to to to to to to have to to to to to to to to have to to have to have their their their to have their their to have to have their their to have to have to have to have to. to have to have to have to have to have to have to have to have to have to have to set up the system where it's essentially impossible. Yeah, exactly. And so they just made it increasingly difficult to keep clinics open, even if it was ostensibly legal.

Let me ask you a question, Melissa. Is there recourse in states where it's legal to go after other states, let's say, because they're interfering with interstate commerce? If a red state is preventing you from traveling into a blue state for a procedure, couldn't that be construed as interference at some level? No, I think that's right. And I think there are a number of blue states and blue state AGs that are contemplating the prospect of dormant commerce clause challenges to the fact that essentially these red states are imposing their own public policy preferences on the citizens of blue states who don't share them. And there was actually a very interesting case in the Sereen Court a couple of terms ago,

not about abortion but ironically about pork production. The state of California had particular rules um, the state of California had particular rules. What? What The state of California, not surprisingly, had particular rules about how the pigs that were slaughtered and then used for pork products were kept. And, you know, and the pork industry challenged these regulations on the view that because California was such a large state with, you know, such a demand for these products, that their public policy preferences for humanely raised and pastured pork products then basically were exported out to other states that didn't share them. And so I remember the oral argument in this case really keenly because everyone seemed really concerned about the

dormant commerce clause and about interstate commerce on the prospect of very large states exerting their will on smaller states and it didn't seem to be about pork products at all. And I think it actually was a shadow debate for what would happen in the post-row world. And so what was the decision in that case? You know what, let me, let me check on that. I want to make sure that that's right. Are you, wait, you can't Google during a podcast? I just, I want to make sure that I'm right. Okay, the court affirmed the dismissal of the complaint. So it's like a site, it's cited with California, but if it were presented in any other context.

Right. Well, yeah, I mean, if, same idea, it's sort of a jurisdictional question, but I imagine the debate and the disposition of the case might have been really different if it had been something like abortion or guns and not necessarily pork products. That's right. I want to get into that because that's interesting to me because I do think there will be unforeseen consequences and cases that come out of this when you follow the logic. So I'm going to present some other logical maneuvers on this. I'm sure most of them are fallacial and make no sense, but I'd be happy to have you address them anyway. So now you have in Texas if somebody abets someone in the driving to Illinois

or whatever it is. And then they always want to say things like, well, but we do make an exception for the health of the woman. If she is in danger, correct? Is that for the most part? I know there are some that don't. But isn't there an emergency care for the health of the woman? Well, they exist. Yeah, but good luck, good luck qualifying. Here's the thing. I think you see it all the time and you see it in the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the health the health the health the health the health the health the health the health the health the health the health the health the health the health the health the health the health the health the health the health the health the health the health the health the health the health the health the health the health the health the health the health the health the health the health the health the health the health the health the health the health the health the health the health the health the health the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the health the health the health the health of. the health the health the health the health the health the health the health the health the health the health the health the health the health good luck qualifying. I mean, here's the thing. I think you see it all the time and you see it in the context of the bounty hunter loss. These laws aren't necessarily meant to survive legal challenges. Their greatest efficacy can be in the short term where they chill what would be otherwise lawful conduct. So you're right. There is an exception, so take Texas's law, for example.

Texas provides that if you are getting an abortion, it has to be for these sort of exigent circumstances. And those exigent circumstances include when a patient has a, quote, life-threatening condition and is at risk of death, or substantial impairment of a major bodily function. But it doesn't define what the substantial impairment of a major bodily function is. Isn't pregnancy in itself, it's not a benign process?

Isn't that, couldn't that be considered a substantial impairment? All of that. And so, you know, without actual definitions, it's left to the physicians to make these judgments, knowing that an enterprising attorney general, like say Ken Paxton, might come down really hard on them if he doesn't agree with their medical judgment. So in these circumstances, I think doctors feel like their hands are tied. They know what they would do in their medical judgment. They just don't know where medical judgment begins and the law ends and if they take the chance, if they take the chance,

their consequences. For them. For the legal, legal, legal, legal, legal, legal, legal, legal, legal, legal, legal, legal, legal, legal, legal, legal consequences, legal, legal, legal, legal the legal, legal consequences, the legal consequences, the legal, their their their their, their, their, their, their, their, their th. their, thi, thi, thi, their, their their, their, their, their their their their their their their their their, their, their, their, their, their, their, th. th. th. th. thi. thi. their thi. thi. thi. their their their thi. their their their their, to their their, their, te, te. te. te. tea. toea. toe. toe. the. their the. the. the. the. they take the chance, if they take the risk, there can be real consequences. For them, legal consequences for them. I mean, legal consequences and collateral consequences. Like, you know, if you are a party to some kind of legal proceeding, even if you ultimately prevail, you have to document that for purposes of licensure and you could have your licensing held up. You might not be able to get insurance. I mean, it's a real conundrum for them. Jessica, has that impacted people in a human way, in a real one? Yeah, I mean, this is what I was gonna say. There's right, there's what the law says

and then there's what actually happens in real life. And from the, yeah, to human beings, yeah, to human beings, to to to the to human beings, the human beings, the human beings, the, the, the, the, that's, that's, that's, that's, that, that, right, right, right, right, right, right, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, that, that, that, that, that, that, that, that, that, that, that, that, that, that, that, that, that, that, that, that, that, that, that, that, that, that, that, that, that, that, that, that, that, that, that, that, that, that, that, that, that, that, that, that, that's, that's, that's, that's, that's, that's, that's, that's, that's, that's, has, that's, has, has that, has that, that, that a while. Human beings not vessels, not vessels hard. So the example that you gave, right, let's say someone wanted to to travel, the person, depending on the county they are in Texas, several counties in Texas have passed what they're calling anti-trafficking laws, abortion trafficking laws that again allow a civil suit to be brought against someone who uses the roads of that particular county to bring someone out of state for an abortion. And so it's this slow chipping away at our ability to travel and that's like a really terrifying thing to even even given the mother's health being in question. Well, this is part of the issue. As Melissa said, there's no real standard on what that means?

Wasn't there a case of a woman, there was a woman who, she, her, it was an 18-week miscarriage, I think, but the fetus was, her water had broken and wasn't going to survive, but she herself was not in that moment. They have to wait until the exact immediate threat of death. I think she had to go home and get sepsis. Okay, so now, Amanda Zorowski. So here we go. So now we're going to get to, now we're going to flip the thing.

And this is all informed by, I think, sort of my experience with this. and th and th, and th, and th, th, th, th, th, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, threat, thi, though, though, though, though, the, their their their their their their their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, thi, their, threat, threat, threat, threat, threat, threat, threat, threat, threat, threat, threat, threat, threat, threat, threat, threat, threat, threat, this. And this has to do with my family, my wife. So we won't even get into IVF, which is what we had to do to have children. So it's incredible to me to live in this world now, where the children that we desperately wanted would not be able to be had, because if these people get their way, there'd be no IVF. My wife, after our second child, this is after she was born, hemorrhaged. This was probably three days post-birth, right?

We were home. She was in danger. She needed blood transfusions. We were incredibly fortunate to have good health care. We were able to get her in. She was operated on under an emergency basis on that night, right? But my point is this. Pregnancy can always be a risk to a woman's help. This idea that it has to be based on a fetal abnormality or something going wrong.

You don't know. And aren't these laws? So who then is liable? Let's say in the case of our thing, let's say she didn't want to carry that baby to term. She was forced to by the state. And post-birth, hemorrhaged and died. Well, who's responsible for that?

If you can arrest people for abetting somebody driving into Illinois, who is responsible for the death of women who are going to have emergency complications arise. And how come that's not part of the conversation? And what do you think we can do about that? Jessica, I'll ask you first and then, and then, the th th to to to their to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to be to to be to be to be to be to to be their their their their their their their their their their their their their their. their. their their their. their their. try. tea. tea. tea. tea. tea. their. toe. toe. toe. toe. toe. to. to. to. to. to. to. And how come that's not part of the conversation? And what do you think we can do about that? Jessica, I'll ask you first and then, and then, sure. I mean, this is part of what the case in Texas, where 20 women sued Texas for the extreme health issues that they had because of the abortion ban. And essentially what happened is they blamed the doctors, right? They said the law is not the issue, any, you know, reasonable doctor would have given care at that point.

And this is something that they've sort of set themselves up to do for a long time, to blame the doctors to say, you just don't understand the law, the law is fine as it is, you should have given the care. And so once again, the liability goes, the liability, and the liability, and the liability, and the liability, and the liability, and the liability, and the liability, and, and, th, th, th, th, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, their, the thi, the the thi, the the thi, thi, you thi, the, you, you, you, you, you, you, you, you, you, you, you the, you, you the, you the, you their, you their, you their, you thi, you thi, you thi, you, you, you, you, you, you, you, you, you, you, you, you, you, you, you, you, you, you, you, th. And, thi. And, thi. And, thi. And, thi. thi. thin, thr, the the thr, thr, to, the the to the throwne. And, the the the the to the the the the the the the throwne. throwne, the liability goes to the doctors, given the right judge and the right court. If a woman dies in childbirth for a baby that she did not want to have, it is only the doctor that is liable, not the state for forcing her into that pregnancy. Melissa, is that correct? That's basically what they're saying.

The Texas Supreme Court, Scotex, if you will, issued a decision at the end of May on the Zoroski case and basically said, yeah, these seem good to us and doctors know what they're to do and they should do it, and they should provide this care, like there's not a problem here. And this is a court that's a court, a court, a court, a court, a court, a court, a court, a court, a court, a court, a court, a court, a court, a court, a court, a court, a court, a court, a court, a court, a court, a court, a court, a court, a court, a court, a court, a court, a court, a court, a court, a court, a court, a court, a court, a court, a court, a court, a court, a court, a that's that's that's that's th., a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a c., a c., a c.e, a c.e, a c.e, a c.e, a c.e, a c.e, a c.e, a c.e.e.e.e.e.e.e.e.e. th.e. th.e.e. th. th. th.a. th.a. the, a c. the, a c. the, a th. that's entirely Republican. And this was a unanimous decision from the court. And again, completely stripped of any humanity for either the pregnant patient or the doctor

who genuinely is worried about whether or not they're going to lose their livelihood if they make a decision and their patients who are not just at risk of death. But I mean, there's a lot between a valid and viable pregnancy and death. I mean, you can lose your fertility if you go septic, like lots of things can happen. It's not just... But even beyond that, it can create hypertension.

Everything. Yes. All of it. . But John, this goes to your point about democracy. We have right now highly gerrymandered state legislatures who are making these laws. These legislatures are not comprised of physicians. They're not even comprised of women of reproductive age. It's a lot of men.

Many men who are not in the same age bandwidth as most women who are in their prime reproductive years. And the idea that you are being, your views are being reflected, your interests are being accounted for in the legislative process, that's just a fallacy. I mean these are geriatric legislators made up of men who are not doctors making laws that will legislate for doctors and their patients and they're not, the legislatures aren't affected by this, but their patients are.

And again, I just want to emphasize the way in which the anti-choice movement has ginned up all of this. Like James Bopp, who is the spokesperson, the head of the National Right to Life Committee, argues that the physicians are the problem. The laws are clear and if they're not clear enough for the physicians, the onus is on the physicians to suggest fixes. That's literally what he says. They should suggest the fixes. Doctors aren't legislators. Whose job is it? It's the legislature's job. Melissa and Jessica, I want you to address this. There is no fix for a process where some women die. How do you fix pregnancy to make it????? to make it it it it it? to make it? the the the to make it? the the the the the the their their their their their their their their their their their their the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the on. The on. The on. The on. The on. The on. The on. The on the on the on the on. The on. The on. The on. The on. The on. The on. The on. The on. The on. The on. The on. The on. The for a process where some women die. How do you fix

pregnancy to make it so that there is no chance that a woman dies. If you force someone to carry a... and I understand there's at a certain point in the development of the fetus or the embryo or the fetus and that in that that the rights of both tend to converge, right? I get that. But starting on that journey, you cannot guarantee a woman that you'll be okay. You just can't. No, especially in the US, right? Where maternal mortality is so awful. But anyway. Right. And I have to say, just getting back to the scenario we were talking about before, even if someone is able to get that health-indicated, life-saving abortion, in a lot of these states,

because the way they've written the law in such a way that instead of giving standard abortion procedures, they're giving women C-sections or forcing them into vaginal labor even before viability, even when they know that there's no chance for the fetus' survival, and this is one of the ways that doctors are trying to protect themselves from liability, but it's also written in the laws. If a life-saving care is needed and they need to end the pregnancy, you need to give a maternal fetal separation, which means cesection or force vaginal labor. And it's, you know, you, you, th, th, th, th, th, th, th, th, th, th, th, th, th, th, th, th, thus, thus, thus, thus, thus, thus, thus, thus, thus, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, tho, tho, tho, tho, tho, and tho, and tho, and tho, and thus is thus is thus is thus is thus is thus, and th, and th, and th, and th, and th, and th, and th, th, th, th, th, th, th, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi. is thii. is thiiiiiiiiiiiii. is thiiii. is thi. thi. thi. thi, you know, just getting back to the actual real life suffering that is happening. That's, for some women, that's the best case scenario that the life-saving care that they get is an is unnecessary, you know, major abdominal surgery. But so John, this goes back to the point I think you made earlier. We're fighting for the

shards of reproductive freedom, like the opportunity to have physicians make exigent decisions on behalf of their pregnant patients. We're not fighting upstream for what would reproductive freedom look like in an ideal world, because for now, that is gone. I mean, the court preserved the status quo on Mifapristone. There are already three states who are teed up and ready to bring that case on the ground that they have been injured by the fact that. Yeah, they have a different claim of standing. Their claim is going to be that as anti-abortion states, the availability of Mifa Pristone

and medication abortion flouts. But can't that be flipped? Melissa, can't that be flipped? So let's say there is a family that lost a daughter, a wife, because they were forced to endure a pregnancy and they died during that pregnancy. And can't that, can't that then be flipped? But let me also, and this may be far afield. I mean, let me, let's th. th. thuu. thu. thu. thu. thu. thu. thu. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. tho. tho. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. A. th. th. th. tho. tho. that's, to. that's. to. to. to. toe. to. to. that. thoooooooooo. tho. tho. th. th. th. th Like, we're literally contemplating scenarios where our victories are built on the backs of dead women. No, no, no, listen, Melissa, it's, this is an awful scenario.

I am, I am literally just trying to figure out how I can battle this relentless. I think you bat, like, that's a political, I mean, that's how Roe came into being like stories like Jerry Centoro who was a mother of two who was literally Butchered in a hotel room trying to end a pregnancy. She did not want Let me ask you is there any other law that compels a person ostensibly to save someone else's life So the idea being well the abortion is to save a baby's life once it reaches a certain gestational age and do the thing. But let's say, for instance, my kidney would, if I were to give it to somebody, it would save their life.

Could I ever be compelled to do that? You're never placed in a situation, human beings, other than like the military draft, where the government compels you to do something where you might lose your life or have otherwise harm. But we're doing this to women. Are we not? We're compelling them. So I don't know, outside of Prince Harry, who says in his autobiography spare that he was born to allow for extra organs for Prince William if they were necessary, like leaving that to the side, like, you know,

yours, your example is an extreme one, but I think the anti-choice movement would put up a different example, and that example would be vaccinations, like the idea that mandatory vaccinations, to secure collective public health is an intrusion on your bodily autonomy that you may not want. But I think again, I think it's a- And there can be harm. There can be harm. I think that's right, there can be harm.

Yeah. I think the differences between a vaccination, even one that is, you know, very quickly rolled out in pregnancy and the real harms of pregnancy. I think you can make a pretty clear distinction between those, but I think that's the example that they use and in fact Amy Coney Barrett in the Dobbs oral argument that was the example that she used. She's like, you know, speaking of bodily autonomy, what about vaccinations? And it was like, oh, here we go again. So, you know, this question of bodily autonomy can go both ways. Like, they have made a lot about this in the context of masking and vaccinations. Right. Well, abortion is not.

But, but, but, I mean, they do make that claim in those two contacts and seem completely oblivious that you could make the very same arguments in the context of abortion. All, we th, I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I th, we th, we th, we th, we th, we th, we th, we th, we th, we th, we th th th th th th th th th th th th th tho tho tho tho tho tho tho tho tho tho tho tho tho tho tho tho tho tho tho tho tho tho tho tho tho tho, tho, tho, tho, tho th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. tho. tho. tho. tho tho tho tho tho to tho tho to tho tho tho tho tho tho tho tho tho tho tho tho th make the very same arguments in the context of abortion. All right, we'll be right back. Hey, everybody, John Stewart here. I am here to tell you about my new podcast, The Weekly Show coming out every Thursday. We're going to be talking about the election, earnings calls. What are they talking about on these earnings calls? We're going to be talking about ingredient to bread ratio on sandwiches. I know you have a lot of options as far as podcasts go, but how many of them come out on Thursday? Listen to the weekly show with

John Stewart wherever you get your podcast. All right, let's get back into it. Jessica, is that, you know, for the women that you're trying to uphold and represent, you know, what is in your mind kind of the mental health of a community that feels trapped by this idea and sort of placed into a, you know, a secondary position in society. Right. I mean, I do think, you know, in anti-choice states, it's just constant fear. I think that's safe to say there's just constant fear. And in pro-choice states, and I have this conversation a lot with my daughter, outside of the immediate physical impact that these bans have on people, it does something to you as a person

to know that your country doesn't see you as fully human. Right, like there is an emotional toll to know that you don't matter. There was a woman in Oklahoma who, you know, another one of these post-row horror horror horror horror was miscarrying, she couldn't get care, she had to travel out of state, spend thousands of dollars, and she said, I'm not going to get pregnant again because now I know my life doesn't matter. Now I know I don't count. So why would I ever put myself in that situation? Because as soon as you're pregnant in this country, you do not th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. tho, tho, tho, tho, tho, tho, tho, tho, thou, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thu, thu, thu, thu, thu, th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thou, thin, thee to to to to toe toe toe toe toeoooooooooooooooooo not count you do not matter and that's a really difficult bitter pill to swallow.

Yeah that's tough. Melissa is there are you finding on the horizon are there the types of legal challenges to this where do you see this with a little bit of light at the end of the tunnel or do you think it gets darker before things begin to shape out? I want to emphasize, you know, the limits of law here. Law is not necessarily a place for imaginative solutions to real problems. If you're in the courts, you're necessarily in a defensive posture. So I'm not thinking about legal solutions for this. I mean, I think there can be cases, but as I said, those are the cases that are going to be built on a foundation of utter tragedy, like literally we'll be litigating from the

posture of dead women. You're right. I think the bigger opportunity is in the political or electoral space, right? We live in a distorted democracy. The court has made it much harder for individuals to register their preferences through representative government because of its rulings on gerrymandering. It's made it harder to register your preferences at the ballot box because of laws that allow for voter suppression.

And look, the Constitution is already gerrymandered to favor rural white areas. 100%. 100%. Yeah. So, I mean, so I just want to say that. Like, I understand the challenge is like we truly live in a distorted democracy. We have to recognize the fact of that distortion. that distortion can be counteracted the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the th recognize the fact of that distortion, but understand that that distortion can be counteracted by overwhelming participation, collective action. Right, so we have an election coming up. The court is on the ballot in that election, you know, Justice's Thomas and Alito, in addition to having emotional support billionaires are septogenarians. And if Donald Trump is elected, they will step down. They will they will retire. They will retire the day after they will they will tho. They will they they they will they th, th, th, th, th, th, th, th, th, tho, tho, tho, tho, tho, thi, tho, the, the, the, the, tho, tho, tho, the, the, thi, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the the the the the to thi thi to thi to to thi to thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi the the the the the the to to having emotional support billionaires, are sectagenarians. And if Donald Trump is elected, they will step down.

They will retire the day after the inauguration, and they will be replaced by teenagers. And this six to three conservative supermajority, not only may be expanded to seven to two or eight to one, it will endure even longer because the judges will be younger. So, we are fighting defensively right now in. they, they, in, in, in, in, in, in, in, in, in, in, in, in, in, in, in, in, in, in, in, in, in, in, in, in, in, in, in, in, in, in, in, in, in, in th, in th, in the th, in th, th, thi, thi, th, th, th, th, thi, thi, thi, thi, th, th, th, th, th, th, th, th, th. th. th. th. th, th, th. th, th, the th. the their, their, their, their, their, their, their, in, in, in, in, in their, in their, in their, in their, their, their, their, their, their, their, thi. In, thiiii. thii. thiii. thi. thi. their their their their their their to two or eight to one, it will endure even longer because the judges will be younger. So we are fighting defensively right now in every forum, but the electoral space is where we have the opportunity really help counteract this.

If you can prevent Donald Trump from appointing new justices to fill Thomas and Alito's seat from filling any other seat, that's a win right now. And we have to take that win. We have to look at state courts where, you know, all of these challenges in our abortion are shifting. Not in fact, they're shifting from federal courts to state courts. Those state courts have to be in a position to make rulings that are

consistent with the will of the people. We have to have legislatures that are ready to enact constitutional amendments to their state court, to their state constitutions that would protect reproductive freedom. We can't just focus on the president. We have to be down ballot. We have to focus on keeping the Senate. The Trump administration was so successful at adding movement conservatives to the federal court. And the Biden administration has done a great to the federal court, completely transformed the federal court. And the Biden administration has done a great job counteracting some of that.

But there needs to be eight more years of work on this. And you've got to have the Senate to do that. So this is not the moment to be divided in our big tent. It's the moment to come together as a big tent to overwhelm the distortion that's tried to divide us and limit our authority. Melissa, that's a phenomenal as my daughter would say, I believe you may have eaten, eaten and left no crumbs. That was a, I believe, that's it, I think that's what she said to me. That's what the young people say. The young people say, correct. That is an unbelievable. thrain, thin, thin, thin, thin, thin, that is th trencant and fabulous point and one that has to be at the forefront because to be frank, the other group is tenacious and strategic and they understand how to overwhelm them you know and take out the bottom of that. Jessica is there anything else that that you wanted to add before I let you guys go?

Yeah, just building on something Melissa said it does give me a lot of hope when I think about just how popular abortion rights are. And if we get to that place where we're focusing on the electoral bit, this is an issue that people like to talk about as if it's something the country is evenly split on or a revocably polarized over. It's not. We're not 50-50. No. There's been several polls that have come out this year that showed 80 percent, over 80 percent

of Americans don't want any government involvement at all in pregnancy. They do not want abortion to be regulated by the law at all. This is something that is really, really important to voters, and it goes across parties. So that is something as horrible as all of this is, and it is horrible to talk about this every day and to write about this and to do this work. It gives me so much hope, knowing that Americans really do understand what's at

state and how important this issue is. Well, I thank you guys both so much. Melissa Murray, NYU Law Professor, co-host of strict scrutiny podcast, and my go-to. Melissa, you know you're my go-to. Whatever, whenever I get into trouble, I always say, what would Melissa Murray do? How would she put this time? I think I like how you said, I don't call Melissa Murray to be my lawyer, but I do refer to her as my go-to. Law, whatever it is. And Jessica Valenti, founder of Abortion Every Day.com and author of the forthcoming book,

Abortion, our bodies, their lies and the truths we use to win. Guys, thank you so much for being here. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Wow. I don't want to say Melissa Murray blows me away to to to to to to the information being held in a normal-sized head, that's just, just got a normal-sized head. And yet, all that information. And Jessica, you know, you can tell, you know, Melissa's attacking it from a legal sense. Jessica's really feeling, I think, the human burden of this. Yeah. And boy, she articulated that so well. Yeah, the personal story is, I mean, they, they break my heart every time. Like I just,

like, I can't wrought my head around the, the conversations and how this is still happening, but yeah. Well, she, and the way she said it, you know, look, even with these legal victories, remember, it's on the backs of dead women and you just think, oh God, that's right, you know, sometimes we forget in these theoretical. And now there's that, Lauren, what was that case in Idaho that's now coming up? The Supreme Court, this term is meant to decide on Idaho the United States where Idaho is pushing back against a federal law that allows emergency abortion in the case of the life of the mother. So that's a fun. Wait, literally saying even if the life of the mother is in jeopardy, nope. Sorry. Yeah.

Holy shit. So. Well, wow. Just a lot to, certainly a lot to chew on there. But, and the call to action from Melissa at the end I thought was just, boy, what a great reminder of what's really at stake and fabulous. That is the weekly show for this week, as always. You can't do it without lead producer, Lauren Walker, producer Brittany Mamedov. The man behind the glass.

Rob the t, video editor and engineer, audio editor and engineer Nicole Boyce, our fabulous researcher Catherine Newen. And as always, executive producers, Katie Gray and Chris McShade, come on, fantastic. Best in the biz. Best in the biz. Where can they find us? We are weekly show pod on Twitter, weekly show podcast on Instagram, threads, Tick-Tock,

and the weekly show with John Stewart on YouTube. We're on Instagram. Yeah, we are. What would we do on Instagram? Just. Thirstratz? Get pictures. Yeah, don't look.

Yeah, I don't. Unfortunately for me, it's a desert out there if you're going to get pictures of me. Fantastic. Guys, thanks so much and we'll see all next week. Thanks for listening to this episode of the weekly show. If you liked it, follow the show on your favorite podcast app. And tune in every Thursday for new episodes. And send us your ideas. Why not? Save us the work. The weekly show with John Stewart is a comedy central podcast.

It's produced by Paramount Audio and Bus Boy Productions. Survivor 47 is here which means we're bringing you a brand new season of the only official survivor podcast on fire and this season we are joined by fan favorite and surviver 46 runner-up. Charlie Davis to bring you a brand new season of the only official survivor podcast on fire and this season we are joined by fan favorite and survivor 46 runner up. Charlie Davis to bring you even further inside the action Charlie. I'm excited to do this together.. tog tog. tog. to to to to to th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. the the the th. the podcast. th. the podcast. the podcast. to to the podcast. the podcast. to to to the podcast. th. the podcast. the podcast. to to to the podcast. to to to the podcast. to the podcast. to the podcast. the podcast. the podcast. the podcast. the podcast. to to the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the th. th. the. the. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. the. the tho. tho. the tho. tho. tho. tho. tho. tho. tho. tho. the tho Charlie Davis to bring you even further inside the action Charlie I'm excited to do this together. Thanks Jeff so excited to be here and I can't wait to bring you inside the mind of a survivor player for season 47. Listen to on fire the official survivor podcast starting September 18th wherever you get your podcasts