littlefield to discuss abortion access in the united states in the years since the dobbs decision. stick around for that discussion . we'll be right back. ♪ >> book tv, every sunday c-span two teachers leading authors discussing their latest nfiction books. live at noon eastern, e thor of "the end of history" report -- returns to talk and take calls aut politics, inrnional affairs, and liberalism. 7:00 p.m. eastern, bethany brookshire explores human animal relationships and what it means when we bill and eyes certain animals with her book, pests. watch every sunday and find a full schedule on your program guide or watch online anytime at book tv.org.

>> on american history tv saturdays on c-span2, explain the people and events that tell the american story. july marks the battle of gettysburg. saturday at 2 p.m. eastern the gettysburg college civil war institute hosts an annual topic on starvation parties. in the gettysburg battlefield guide with john mees gives insight on how the weather impacted the battle. 9:30 p.m. eastern on the presidency, lucas morale and richard brooke kaiser re-examine the second edition of his 1990 nine book, abraham lincoln redeemer president, the thinking on the debate at this time over politics, religion, and culture. explore the american story. watch american history tv sas on c-span2 with a full

schedule on your program guide, or watch anytime online at c-span.org/history. >> "washington journal" continues. host: amy littlefield joins us now, covering abortion and reproductive rights for the nation magazine, joining us from newton, massachusetts. good morning to you. guest: good morning, john. host: this is your latest story since the one-year anniversary of the dobbs decision. the headline is that the message they received is you don't deserve to care -- we cared for life on the abortion border land. what is the abortion border land? guest: my article focuses on one of the borderlands we have in this country. we are divided between states that they had abortion or heavily restricted or states that have gone further than ever to protect it. i focused on the texas and new mexico border. texas restricts abortion most

heavily. there are three bands in effect in the state including one that allows civil enforcement mechanisms allowing private lawsuits to be filed against anyone who aids or events abortion after six weeks and another that is a criminal abortion ban and then the pre-rose law from the 1800s. they are the epicenter of different strategies that are being used to try to punish anyone who tries to help someone to get an abortion. to the left of that you have new mexico, among the states who have gone the furthest to protect abortion access. the government there authorized public money to support abortion and create new avenues or care. so, so you have these legal battles being teed up in the abortion border land. but you also have patients who are moving across, from texas to new mexico every day. the other thing to remember is

that texas is at the western edge of a block across the deep south where abortion is banned. patients across the region are making their way to these states. in the story i focus on one of the women shepherding texas abortion patients across this abortion border land to new mexico for procedures at great personal risk to herself. host: do we know specifically in new mexico the number of clinics that have opened in the years since dobbs? guest: yeah it's interesting, new mexico handled a relatively small number of abortions compared to texas, where there are more than 55,000 in texas, a tiny a fraction of that in nevada and new mexico. providers there have really had to scale up. clinics in the south that were forced to close. the pink house, the plaintiffs in the supreme court decision that overturned roe v. wade, they moved to new mexico. we have seen dr. alan grave, the

only doctor who openly violated the six week ban, he has closed down his clinic and opened one in new mexico for women's health. whole wooden's health has opened a clinic in albuquerque, new mexico. we are seeing providers moving there. there are more clinics in the works, more operations in the works to bring more access to new mexico. so the providers there are scaling up and doing everything they can. leaders in the state are doing everything they can to protect abortion access at the legal level. meanwhile, texas antiabortion activist are making inroads with city level ordinances that revise the con stock act and use it to ban abortion nationwide, teeing up what could potentially be the next big supreme court case on abortion over whether to revive this 19th-century law that would in effect institute a

abortion ban if antiabortion activists get their way. host: i want to come back to the comstock act. but staying on your trip to new mexico, an interesting analogy that some of the folks you interviewed made was equating some of their efforts to bring people into new mexico for treatments as to something like the underground railroad, helping people to escape slavery. guest: i profiled a woman named reverend erica ferguson. she's been in the movement for abortion rights for many years. she had two abortions herself. one when she was 14, another when she was 18. she told me it was the warmth and compassion from the staff that took care of her when she had her abortion that motivates her to care for people in the abortion borderlands today. she openly does this work even though she lives in texas and understands the risks involved. she called her project the

tubman travel project and says she calls it that because after harriet tubman, of course, because of the routes taken by people who need abortions out of states where it band and into states that are legal remind her of the states -- of the routes taken by people fleeing slavery. i want to be careful here, of course there is no, you can't draw a parallel to american chattel slavery, but these are her words. she is a black woman. she understands the risk of criminalization for her is ever present. as for many people of color in this country. and she's willing to take on the risk on these trips. what she does, one day a week she goes to an airport in north texas and meets a group of strangers. all of them need abortions. some of them are teenagers. some are moms who have teenagers at home. some of them are rape victims. some are people who just need the abortion care and have to leave their families, their jobs and lives for a day to make this

trip because abortion is no longer legal in their state. they board the plane with reverend ferguson and the first thing she does is tell her abortion story. she tells the women, you are going to be safe and you are going to be cared for. she told me that is the way that her ministry shows up. she doesn't preach about god, she says you will be safe and i will take care of you. she flies with them to albuquerque where they receive their abortion and they go back to the new mexico religious coalition office that i got to visit. it's in an office building in downtown albuquerque. it feels like a field hospital on the a border -- abortion border land. they have cots set up for patients to rest in. art supplies for kids. they had rom comms. they have massage therapists coming in. do luz and healing justice workers who support the people

who come from out-of-state. they have volunteers and go to great lengths to take care of the patients. cruz told me they want to counteract the message sent by the texans, which is that you don't deserve to be care for. they say no you do deserve to be cared for and you deserve that care. the most moving part for me is what happens at the end of the journey when they are getting ready to fly back to texas, reverend ferguson stands before this group of women and often times they have found commonality with each other and bonded over the course of the day and says to them that this is where we say goodbye because you have done what you are here to do. and in the event that when we touched down in texas there are authorities waiting there to arrest me, walk away as if we have never met. she understands the risks she is taking herself in this laboratory have testing over different strategies to try to punish people who are helping

others get abortion. she understands the risk she is taking that she doesn't want to extend to those women and she tells them to walk away from her. and then she gets on the plane. what i find so moving about her story is that these abortion bands, every time they stop someone from getting an abortion , that's a human tragedy but they are not working as well as the antiabortion movement intended them to work by a longshot. that is because it's a very hard to stop someone like reverend ferguson when there is a movement ready to have someone take her place. not when she says she is not afraid of a civil lawsuit, not afraid of whatever might phrase -- face me. i understand my place in history. the whole abortion access infrastructure is being held up by people like her.

host: life on the abortion borderlands came out last week. she's talking to us about abortion access in the years since dobbs. she will be with us until the top of the hour. republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. amy littlefield, as folks are calling in, come back to the comstock act, what it is and how antiabortion advocates are trying to use the act. guest: there are various strategies in place. the end goal is really personhood for the embryo at the moment of fertilization. the question has always been less about where they are headed and more about how to get there, right. the comstock act is an 1873 law

used to band, its name is named after comstock, who drove some to suicide with his aggressive crusades against anyone circulating pornography. pornographic drawings are mentioned in the law. emme goldman famously ran afoul of his laws. and of course, abortion was also covered in the acts. specifically the mailing of abortion drugs or devices. enforcement of these laws really hasn't happened in almost a century because of a series of decisions and modifications. the law has caused most people to forget that they exist. but antiabortion activists have been watching. they believe that the comstock act might be there key to ending abortion nationwide. because this court buys the

argument that the comstock act is still good law and it bands the mailing of abortion drugs and devices. that would force any abortion providers to shut down. if they can't use the mail to get their abortion devices or drugs, potentially information could be left in here and they won't be able to operate. we saw this strategy and for example the lawsuit used to take down method for stone, the pill winding its way through the court. we have also seen the strategy from texas antiabortion activists martha dixon and jonathan witchel. in cities or new mexico to tf the supreme court on whether the comstock act would ban abortion nationwide. one strategy where abortion activists are increasingly saying they want to ban all

abortions nationwide from the moment of fertilization and this is one avenue they are pushing together. host: how soon could that appear before the supreme court? guest: we have already seen the method for stone case where they were trying to overturn the two drug regimen for abortion that would have severely curtailed access nationwide potentially, even in blue states. what we see in the supreme court is that they have led the status quo. they have already considered a lawsuit that had the comstock argument in it, but they didn't say anything about the act when they left the status quote in place. they could have the opportunity very soon. the question of whether they entertain the argument is

another question. i think that what we are seeing, new mexico state officials have filed legal challenges trying to protect their state laws saying abortion is legal, you cannot be passing ordinances with the comstock act in our state. teeing up the battles that these strategists hope will force the supreme court to take up the issue. if you have enough balls in the air, eventually the courts might say well we need to resolve this. host: let's chat with a few callers set up for you already. judith, line for republicans, you are up first with amy littlefield. caller: thank you for taking my call. i'm 73 years old. and is it -- [no audio] host: what's the question? caller: good morning, thanks for taking my call. question, i'm 73 years old and i was wondering, is abortion a

form of contraception? because don't people use contraception to not get pregnant? i guess it's because of catholic. i was raised that you know, you have a choice. abortion was never on the table when i grew up. it was just not. you got married. so my question is, is this used for contraception. thank you for taking my call. god. host: amy littlefield? guest: thank you for the question, judith. contraception is used to prevent a pregnancy before it happens. the birth control pal -- pill, iud, these are methods of contraception. there are emergency contraception that people can take to try to prevent pregnancy from happening. abortion is of course what

happens after pregnancy implants in the uterus if a person doesn't want to continue the pregnancy. the talking point over abortion shouldn't be a point of control is an antiabortion point i have heard a lot. indicating that it's the easiest thing to do, people taking it likely, easier to do than taking the birth control pill, which isn't the case actually. plenty of people have firm personal beliefs, religious beliefs about abortion because of the way that they were raised. the issue becomes whether beliefs are foisted on other people for whom abortion may be the correct decision based on their life circumstances. i hope that answers the question. host: going back to contraception, on twitter they are asking is birth control now in danger? guest: absolutely. absolutely.

i would say that the antiabortion unit -- won't say that the antiabortion movement is completely united on this front but plenty believe that abortion is long -- wrong. some of them only care about methods like iud's that prevent implantation of fertilized eggs. some of them think that all forms of birth control are wrong. again, that has always been a part of the vision and the plan. because antiabortion activists have used an incremental strategy, implement and 20 week bands, six week bands, total bands, taking away exceptions, leaving rape and incest exceptions and then taking them away. this has been their strategy. since it's been incremental we haven't necessarily seen the whole plan all that once the birth control was always a part of their vision of taking away access. in the comstock act it's related to contraception and reformed

and it won't necessarily be a direct threat to contraception but there are other concerns brewing. for example, over the weekend i went to a rally that antiabortion groups were holding in washington, d.c. and their big push was to renew the fight to have the fertilized egg declared an equal person under the 14th amendment of the constitution. if that happens, which that would be a long game. that is not a strategy we are likely to see in the next few months at the supreme court. but if it happens it would pose huge questions about in vitro fertilization, questions about contraception because if that fertilized egg is prevented from implanting, is that an abortion? is that something where a human person is being destroyed and it becomes murder? we need to understand that the end goal has always been a

project where contraception is under threat as well as abortion as well as access to fertility treatments and a whole range of gender affirming care. we are seeing now a record number of attacks on gender affirming care and trans people and their ability to exist in public life. it's all been a part of the project of the christian right from day one and we need to understand that. host: alexandria, brian, line for democrats. good morning. caller: how are host: you this morning? host:doing well, you are on with amy littlefield. caller: yes. how much, how much is made off of the fetus after the abortion? a lot of times we talk about abortion, abortion, abortion, which you have to have said 100 and 50 times. how much is made off of the fetus?

amy littlefield -- host: amy littlefield, i let you answer. guest: i don't understand the question. i don't think anyone is profiting off the fetuses. these organizations are often nonprofits and i have spent a lot of time talking to doctors and clinics staff who do this work. i can tell you that nobody i have met out there is doing this work for profit. especially in this environment where they are receiving threats where states are trying to run them out of business. people are doing this because they care about offering people a range of options. so i don't really understand the premise of how much is being made off of fetuses each year. there's not a profit motive here and frankly, if there was, i think access to legal abortion would have ended a long time ago because the entire system is being held up by people who consider this their life's work.

people who are willing to risk incarceration in some cases. who are willing to risk facing the full brunt of abortion stigma in order to continue keeping abortion available in this very restrictive fraying landscape. host: brooklyn. lloyd, independent. good morning. caller: i think this is really ridiculous. the constitution was written for the living men and women. to take this out of context to consider the unborn? the bible clearly declares human life begins at birth. trust these religious people to take things out of context to say they are caring for the

unborn because they fail the living. they say they care so much for the unborn. they fail the living. the bible clearly says that god breathes in his nostrils the breath of life and the fetus became a human being. there's nothing about this thing in the bible that goes around with what these religious people are trying to claim, a fetus is a human being. host: got your point. amy littlefield, in your coverage of abortion and reproductive rights, how much do you find yourself covering religious arguments, religious disagreements? guest: oh, it's all the time. this is a religious argument and it is not as if it is a religious argument that everyone who is religious agrees on. as the caller points out, there are different interpretations of

the bible. judaism has a different interpretation of when life begins than many strains of christianity and with all the schism. it so happens that a narrow version of right-wing christianity is the one that is most dominant in our society and laws today and that is the one people tend to think of when they think of religion but in fact the person i was talking about who traveled from texas to new mexico, she's a person of faith, a minister. she does the work because of her faith. the clergy consultation service is this underground network in the years before roe that provided access to underground abortions. . so there is a diversity of religious opinion. the antiabortion movement is a religious movement. people who are atheist and secular, i think they feel isolated and alone at times. it's a religious project. i think it's a problem when somebody else's views are foisted upon some buddy else.

i have spent a lot of time on antiabortion spaces and you hear a lot of these arguments being used, even though there is a diversity of religious opinion. certainly not all people of faith are antiabortion and they do see the right to choose as part of their faith. including the members of the new mexico religious coalition for religious choice. there are people who do this work on the pro-choice side because of faith and we don't hear as much about them. host: the message they have received is that you don't deserve to be cared for, life on the abortion borderland. amy littlefield released it last week around the one-year anniversary of the dobbs decision. there is the cover of the issue. body politic is the headline

there. when you are talking about abortion borderlands, you went to new mexico, that is where you chose to report this article from. where else would you call the abortion borderlands in this country? where are the tough spots? guest: absolutely. idaho is one. restrictive state next to states in the pacific northwest that have gone far towards protecting abortion access and we are seeing an important battleground emerging in florida. this was one of the last safe havens for abortion access in that part of the deep south. and now of course that ron desantis is trying to bolster his presidential campaign, he has decided against what the polls show that restricting abortion is a way to do that to try to win over a conservative base. he signed a six week ban into law. the 15 week man is in place now in florida.

that's a really important battleground because again, 10 of the 14 states where abortion is now banned and unavailable, 10 of them are across the south all in a row. we are also seeing north carolina, which was a safe state until recently when one change of heart by a member of the legislature imperiled abortion access their. these are parts of the south that are really, really important. kansas is another one. i got to be there in person last august when kansas became the first state to vote directly on the issue of abortion after the dobbs decision overturned roe v. wade. it wasn't in norma's amount of momentum building around the campaign where before it was handed down, everyone thought the referendum would go towards the antiabortion side and and said the abortion side triumphed in ruby red kansas. that is an important part of the abortion borderland where

patients from across the country are going from texas to oklahoma and beyond, it has been preserved for now. host: you mentioned florida. this is emily in st. petersburg on the line for independents. good morning. caller: i have mostly a comment with an open question at the end . my sister is an og view in and i have heard awful stories about late term abortions. i really think it's disgusting that it is weaponized the way that it is. she has told me horrible stories about how they are forced to make mothers deliver completely unviable babies. even like babies that are just, they are just going to die a hugely painful death in the end with -- within three or four hours. i just, it would be nice to hear about more about what you think

about that and also let's throw ron desantis in a volcano. [laughter] good morning. host: that's emily. your thoughts on the weaponization as she said of late-term abortions? guest: thank you, emily. it is such an important point. i'm glad you brought it up. i would encourage everyone listening to go to the nation.com. read the post about abortions later in pregnancy. it's a powerful story featuring the case of a woman who got a devastating fetal diagnosis and the lengths she had to go to to get the care she needed. it is horrifying, the stories we are hearing about people who are being forced to carry doomed pregnancies to term because of abortion bands. people for whom an abortion later in pregnancy might feel like the most humane choice because of these devastating fetal diagnoses who are being

forced to watch their infant die from these conditions because of these restrictions. the other hard story, i feel like i read a new one almost every day, someone who has been forced to get very, very ill, to the point of death before doctors will intervene to save her life when she is suffering a miscarriage. we have seen many of these stories emerging, including in a lawsuit filed by eight plaintiffs in texas who are talking about how they had wanted pregnancies, they were carrying the pregnancies and learned devastating things about the condition of the fetus or became sick themselves are both. one of them ended up in the icu, with her family gathered around her. certain that she was going to die. people flying in from out of town to be there at her deathbed because the state of texas felt

the hospitals did not feel they could intervene to save her life because she was very ill. the problem is that once you become ill and septic like that, things can move unpredictably and quickly. devastatingly it's only a matter of time before we hear about someone dying in this situation. i'm so glad the caller brought it up. i also want to say there is a huge amount of stigma against abortions later in pregnancy. roe v. wade had a framework around viability, this idea that abortion was ok until the fetus could survive outside the womb on its own. after row we are seeing a lot of ballot initiatives from advocates on the line signing into law. it is a problem for those who get devastating diagnoses, like featured in my project at 26 weeks or beyond that, what is

considered viability in those places. this is a huge concern. we need to be aware, the providers providing abortions later in pregnancy are privy to these horrific stories of people who had to travel across the country who received these devastating diagnoses and in some cases are sick themselves. there are any number of reasons people might need abortion later in pregnancy and that needs to be a part of the conversation and consideration around care. host: again, the nation.com is where you can go to read the stories that amy littlefield has brought up. it's a special issue, body politic, one year after dobbs. this is elliot in waterloo, iowa. independent, good morning. caller: yeah, how you doing? i just want to quote margaret sanger.

breeding a race of human thoroughbreds without following a plan. we must make the country into a garden of children instead of a disorderly back lot overrun with human weeds. that's it. host: anything you want to pick up on question mark margaret sanger question mark guest: -- margaret sanger? guest: that's a despicable quote that you just read. but i want to say about that is part of the troubled and complicated history of the early pro-choice movement is this connection to these racist eugenic ideas, absolutely. if you talked to activists today, they rejected these ideas resoundingly. i think the most encouraging sign we are seeing on the side of abortion rights right now is that there is growing momentum behind the framework of reproductive justice started by black women in 1994, they coined

the term. it justice, unlike these eugenic ideas that are overtly racist, reproductive justice is about the right to access abortion. the right to have the children that you want to have. to be free from the forced sterilization that was forced on many people of color, women of color because of these racist policies until quite recently, unfortunately. and the right to parent the children that you have. i think that this is the vision that the abortion rights movement is following in the post-dobbs era moving forward and it is a far cry from the eugenic principles that were a part of that early movement. i think it says something that the new head of planned parenthood, alexis mcgill johnson, wrote an op-ed distancing the organization from that origin precisely for the

reason that she espoused racist views that are unacceptable. fighting against racial injustice and police brutality is very much a part of the reproductive justice movement now. unfortunately it wasn't back then and that's shameful. host: 10 minutes left in the program. amy littlefield is our guest. the abortion access correspondent for the nation magazine. how does one become the abortion access correspondent for the nation? what was your path to covering this beat? guest: like a lot of journalists, i started out in local news. shout out to brockton, massachusetts, where i got my start covering water commission meetings and nepotism in city government. from there i worked as a counselor in an abortion clinic. i actually used to work at the abortion clinic on saturdays before i finished, before i

started my saturday shift at the newspaper. from there i made my way to democracy now, the independent tv and radio news hour, where i worked as a producer during the era when the so-called war on women was really riffing up a decade ago and where we were starting to see a rise in state legislation because of the tea party victories that happened in the 2010 state legislative races we were seeing a record number of antiabortion bills and efforts to chip away, chip away, chip away at access for the most marginalized people in these states. so i started sounding the alarm about this issue back then. and then worked for the rewire news outlet. a nonprofit that covers reproductive health care specifically. from there became a freelancer and started working with the nation. it's interesting, having covered this topic for so long, to have

seen the incremental strategies, the long game of the antiabortion movement playing out in real time. having seen that 50 year project reach its culmination with the plan from the beginning. the fall of roe v. wade and now the push towards fetal personhood. host: where do you think your next trip will be to cover this beat? where are you going next? guest: you know, my focus right now, i have cover the abortion rights movement, activism, the grassroots abortion funds holding up the abortion sky, to quote a provider in kansas. i have cover that landscape for a long time and volunteered for those organizations myself. i'm really interested in the antiabortion project now and understanding how they triumphed over the past 50 years and i'm hoping to do a lot more writing on the past half-century and

working on that project of the past half-century of antiabortion victories and where they succeeded on the grassroots levels and where the abortion rights side went wrong each step of the way. starting with the hyde amendment. it irrevocably shaped the abortion access landscape from the beginning starting in 1976, putting abortion care off-limits for medicaid recipients in most cases. it really forced the abortion rights movement to become a mutual aid infrastructure from the very beginning and change the landscape since day one. i'm thinking a lot about history and the grassroots on the antiabortion side and also thinking about the path forward. host: talking about the antiabortion project going back 50 years, what specific people or?

guest: well it's interesting, i got to see one of them over the weekend. he holds a general counsel at right to life, one of the largest and oldest pro-life organizations in the country. he has been working on the project of overturning roe v. wade for over 40 years. and along the way decided campaign finance regulations were standing in his way of trying to curry favor for his cause within the republican party so he decided to fight campaign finance and became the architect of citizens united, the decision that took down rules on campaign-finance, opening the floodgates to unlimited campaign spending by corporations in elections. so he is a very influential man. what's interesting about him, yeah, i saw him presenting at the national right to life convention on friday.

what is interesting about his speech at that convention is that he was at once trying to claim victory and say that hey this was a huge victory, we worked for 50 years, my strategy prevailed, we did a great job congratulations, but he was also really concerned because according to his numbers at least he expected to see a drop in abortions of 300,000 after the dobbs decision went into effect in the most recent survey we have from the society family planning shows that in the nine months after dobbs the number of abortions dropped to buy closer to 25,000. -- dropped by closer to 25,000. when he said the number at the convention, you could hear a pin drop in the room. people were shocked. he's really focused now on the fact that these abortion bands in these states where he has worked he's entire career to bring about don't actually seem to be working. in large part i think because of

the efforts of passwords activists and by the way they are also deeply unpopular, you know. by their own count, only about 10% of the public agrees with the absolute vision of national right to life, abortion and no exception -- no abortion with any exception except to save the life of the pregnant person. we have seen that in texas where people have been forced practically onto their deathbeds. they've got a series of problems . any of the enforcement mechanisms they want to implement the be deeply unpopular. i would not even say that people like jim fox are declaring victory on this one-year anniversary. not by a longshot. host: one more call from connie. independent line. caller: good morning. i don't know why so many people seem to be fixated on abortion when there are so many other

issues that should be dealt with. but the reason i'm calling is there is one thing that mystifies me. it has for a long time. in illinois, abortion is legal up until the time of birth. but we do not have the death penalty for heinous criminals. how can you be in favor of killing a baby and opposed to the death penalty? you either think it's ok to kill human or it's not? i want to know, what is your stance on the death penalty and please explain the logic. guest: so if i understand the question correctly, you are in favor of the death penalty but against abortion? or am i misunderstanding? host: i think we lost the caller. guest: anyway, yeah. what is my stance on the best -- death penalty and how do i justify that with supporting

abortion access i think is the question? you know, look. i'm against the death penalty. i'm in favor of abortion rights. i actually think that's incredibly consistent with understanding what one of the callers said earlier, which is that none of the major religions, none of the major medical groups have been able to pinpoint for us precisely the moment when life begins. it is not my job to figure out that question for any person carrying a pregnancy nor to tell that person what she or he should do or they should do. i would like to live in a society where the state does not have the power to put living and breathing human beings to death with the death penalty. however i want to turn back to my reporting. i'm a journalist and i will say one thing, the national right to

life convention, there was an organization called re-humanize that had a table at the convention. their vision was the consistent life ethics. they are against the death penalty and against abortion. they are also against what's happening in guantanamo. they are against police brutality i had an interesting conversation with the actors that group, many of whom do not support the project of the republican party has sort of fused with the antiabortion movement in many ways. but i just don't think they have very much influence within the antiabortion movement writ large. i think at this point their work is kind of a thought experiment. and you know, they are not talking to presidential candidates. they don't have the influence that other major antiabortion leaders have. going back to the diversity of

personal beliefs and opinions on this issue, i don't think that criminal law is the place to work it out. host: we will have to end there. amy littlefield is the abortion correspondent for the nation magazine. you can see her work there included in the special issue body politic, the july 10 issue of the nation. appreciate your time this morning, thank you so much for joining us from boston. guest: thank you. host: that is going to do it for "washington journal," this morning. we will be back tomorrow morning. in the meantime, have a great tuesday. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2023] ♪