Is Donald Trump still pro-life?

The Trump administration’s recent decision to defend Biden-era abortion policies is once again raising questions among pro-lifers about what the Trump administration really thinks about life. President Trump has been called the “most pro-life president in history” because his first administration protected the unborn and the conscience rights of those with pro-life convictions in truly historic ways. His defining accomplishment on the abortion issue was the appointment of three pro-life Supreme Court justices who eventually overturning of Roe v. Wade—a direct result of campaign promises.

But the candidate who campaigned for president in 2024 was different than the president who was the first to appear in person at the March for Life. A series of state ballot measures on the abortion issue were decided in favor of abortion, even in conservative states. Apparently in response to political winds blowing in a pro-abortion direction, President Trump said the question of abortion should be decided on a state-by-state basis and moved on.

Trump’s equivocation on abortion in response to political developments does not mean he has no convictions. He started a global trade war against the advice of most economic advisors and is defending the same despite strong public opposition because he believes he is right and will ultimately be vindicated. And everyone invested in the American economy hopes he is right. But those who value life even more than good economies may be disappointed to see evidence the president has more conviction about the value of tariffs than the value of the unborn.

But for some, disappointment that Trump had become a less reliable ally in the defense of the unborn turned to concern they had been duped entirely when they read headlines declaring that the Trump administration would defend Joe Biden’s abortion pill rules in a federal court case from Texas. Does the Trump administration’s decision to defend Biden’s chemical abortion policies mean he has become a pro-abortion advocate? Not necessarily.

The Trump administration did not defend chemical abortion on the merits but challenged the lawsuits on procedural grounds. This could be part of the Trump administration’s attempt to defend the executive branch more broadly after relentless efforts to interfere. Everyone knows President Trump does not appreciate judges telling him what to do—so fewer active lawsuits would mean there are fewer federal judges he must deal with. But if it’s true that the Trump administration is opposing this lawsuit because he doesn’t like to be told what to do and not because he likes chemical abortion, then he needs to act on the underlying issue soon.

After all, chemical abortions are now the majority of all abortions in America and the pills are increasingly delivered through the mail, often into states where abortion is illegal. When ordered remotely, there is no in-person medical examination. This lack of an examination increases the risk of harm because a medical professional could determine how far along a pregnancy is, find out whether the pregnancy is ectopic, or otherwise screen for potential complications. A recent study from the Ethics and Public Policy Center found that a shocking 10.93% of women who take mifepristone experience medical complications.

Sen. Josh Hawley has responded by introducing the Restoring Safeguards for Dangerous Abortion Drugs Act which would require the FDA to establish new safety protocols for mifepristone and prohibit foreign companies from mailing or importing the drugs into the United States. We can hope that President Trump will throw his significant political weight behind the effort. Not only would it make America safer for women, but it would also reassure a lot of pro-life voters that the president they voted for—“the most pro-life president in history”—is still pro-life.