Did Brett Kavanaugh report that he supported "continued birth control"?

"Kavanaugh chooses his words very carefully, and this is a dog whistle after a birth control. He was appointed to remove a woman's constitutionally protected right to make her own decisions about health care. Do not get me wrong, it's about punishing women.

– Senator Kamala Harris (D-Calif.), In a tweetSeptember 7, 2018

Harris spoke to Brett M. Kavanaugh, a Supreme Court candidate, for what he said about "abortion-inducing drugs" when he discussed a case of an anti-religious group. is not the only Democratic senator to say that Kavanaugh could compromise access to birth control if he wins a seat in the court – Elizabeth Warren, Jeff Merkley, and Dianne Feinstein – but we're going to focus on Harris because she tweeted a video that cut a big part of her statement.

A day later, it should be noted that Harris responded to his tweet with another video that provided the full context of Kavanaugh's statements. But she then doubled on her main point: "There is no doubt that he has used indiscriminately the term" abortion-inducing drugs ", a term used by anti-choice groups to describe birth control.

Facts

In 2013, Priests for Life and other Catholic hospitals, universities and others brought an action against the Ministry of Health and Human Services regarding the requirement to provide contraception as part of the coverage health insurance for employees. The Affordable Care Act included a withdrawal provision, but the plaintiffs, citing the Restoration of Religious Freedom Act, stated that their exercise of religion was unfairly imposed because the ACA required the Freedom of Information Act. religion and restoration, a 1993 law signed by Bill Clinton, was presented to the House by the then representative. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) And in the Senate by then-Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.).

A panel of three judges of the US Court of Appeals for the DC circuit rejected this argument in 2014. The plaintiffs attempted to obtain a full court hearing the following year and have failed again. Kavanaugh, a member of the court, filed a dissent to explain why he would have allowed a broader hearing.

During the Judicial Committee hearings, Senator Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) Questioned Kavanaugh about the case by asking: "Can you talk to this committee about this case and your opinion there?

"It was a group that was obliged to provide some health coverage for its religious objections to its employees and, under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, the question was first, was it a substantial burden for the fiscal year religious? And it seemed clear to me that it was, "replied Kavanaugh. "It was a technical question to fill out a form, in which case – that – they said that completing the form would make them complicit in providing abortion-causing drugs that they were – as a religious question, objected to. "

The issue is Kavanaugh's reference to "abortion-inducing drugs". A simple reading of his sentence, which refers to "they said," suggests that it simply reflects the plaintiff's argument. Harris' decision to cut these crucial words from his first message on the video is certainly disturbing.

But, as we noted, Harris does not back down. "Originally, it had been published for the duration, like almost all videos, but we wanted to make sure that if there was confusion, we released the full video so that people could see her, "said Lily Adams. "Our argument in the original tweet remains unchanged, namely that it uses this term which is extremely political and medically inaccurate, with no criticism or effort to note any type of disagreement."

Adams pointed out a number of media reports, including in the Washington Post, pointed to its use of the term "abortion-inducing drugs". As readers know, the fact that it's in the mainstream media does not mean it's okay. (The brief mention in The Post, in which it was said that "birth control was considered an" abortion-causing drug ", was mainly about anti-Kavanaugh tweets about his comment.)

Adams also noted that the complainants in their submissions referred to "abortion-inducing products" and not to drugs. Since these were comments made at a public hearing, we do not think the distinction is particularly important.

Since this was a live event, where people may stumble in their remarks, we thought it would be useful to review Kavanaugh's dissent. How did he refer to the question then?

In his dissent, Kavanaugh does not refer to the products causing the abortion. (Another dissent in the case occurred.) Instead, he makes three references to abortion, four references to abortifacients and 53 references to contraceptives or contraceptives.

For example, referring to the plaintiffs' case, he writes, "They complain that submitting the required form violates their religious beliefs because it makes them complicit in contraceptive coverage, including. "(The question in particular is the next day's pill, or Plan B, which some believe it could refine the lining of the uterus and could therefore theoretically destroy a fertilized egg, although the evidence is there thin.)

This sounds pretty similar to his testimony: "It was a technical problem to fill out a form, in this case with – that – they said that filling out the form would make them complicit in the supply of drugs causing the drug." abortion that they were – as a religious affair, objected to. "

Regarding contraception – what Harris and his colleagues suggest against Kavanaugh – he wrote that the government seemed to have an "undeniable interest in facilitating women's access to contraception." has long sought to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies, including through the Affordable Care Act, by making contraceptives cheaper and widely available. A previous Supreme Court decision strongly suggests that the government has an interest in facilitating access to contraception for employees of these religious organizations. "

Again, it was like the second part of Kavanaugh's response to Cruz: "The second question was this: did the government have any interest in providing coverage to employees and applying the Supreme Court precedent? was yes, the government had an undeniable interest.

When we reported the dissent portion of contraception, Adams replied that Kavanagh seemed to have a hard time telling whether previous Supreme Court rulings had been properly taken when the court ruled that the government could not prohibit them. rather, referred to the previous statements of Chief Justice John G. Robert and Judge Samuel Alito: "That's what they said."

Adams challenged The Fact Checker for a statement from the White House that Kavanaugh thought the phrase "abortion-inducing drugs" was inaccurate.

"Judge Kavanaugh was specifically asked about his dissent and cited the complainant's position. The fact that the critics removed the phrase "they said" from his response shows that they knew he was quoting the party's opinion and was deliberately trying to mislead the public, "the spokesman said. the White House, Raj Shah. "As Judge Kavanaugh stated on the basis of the interpretation of the Supreme Court's Freedom of Religion and Restoration Act, it is the duty of the judge or judge to determine" only the sincerity of beliefs. applicants, and not their accuracy or reasonableness. & # 39; "

The Pinocchio test

Some might argue that this is a judicial decision, open to legal interpretation, as to whether Kavanaugh used "indiscriminately" a term that denigrates abortion rights advocates.

However, a simple reading of Kavanaugh's response during the hearings shows that it is broadly consistent with his written opinion. One may wonder why he used the term "abortion-inducing drugs" rather than "abortion-inducing drugs" or "abortion drugs". But it is clear from the context that he cited the complainants' views rather than offering a personal opinion.

Harris' original tweet, whose language "they say" was removed, was slightly toned down by the second tweet a day later, providing the full context. But Harris did not recognize that the original tweet was misleading. She wins four Pinocchios – and her fellow Democrats should abandon this topic.

Four Pinocchios

(About our rating scale)