• Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy has long been a pusher of junk science, especially when it comes to research around vaccines and autism. So it should come as no surprise that he appears open to revisiting the decades-old FDA approval of the abortion drug mifepristone, at least in part based on a report from a conservative think tank that was neither peer-reviewed, nor published in a medical journal. What the report in question conveniently contradicts more than 100 peer-reviewed studies that show mifepristone is safe to use and effective. Jessica Valenti, author of book ‘Abortion: Our Bodies, Their Lives, And The Truths We Use To Win,’ joins us to talk about the state of reproductive rights in the U.S. with President Donald Trump is back in power.
• And in headlines: Trump again walked back his threats for steep tariffs on the European Union, Russia unleashed another massive drone and missile attack on Ukraine, and Republican Senators throw cold water on the House version of Trump’s spending and tax plan — a.k.a. the Big Beautiful Bill.

• Check out Jessica’s book –https://tinyurl.com/2zs7jfsz
• Subscribe to the What A Day Newsletter – https://tinyurl.com/3kk4nyz8
• What A Day – YouTube – https://www.youtube.com/@whatadaypodcast

Follow us on Instagram – https://www.instagram.com/crookedmedia/

 

TRANSCRIPT

 

Jane Coaston: It’s Tuesday, May 27th, I’m Jane Coaston, and this is What a Day, the show that hopes you enjoyed your holiday weekend and didn’t spend any time online so you don’t know about anything involving the wife of the president of France because life is just better that way. [music break] On today’s show, President Donald Trump threatens more tariffs than backtracks—again! And Russia unleashes another massive drone and missile strike on Ukraine. But let’s start with reproductive rights in America and the creative ways the Republican Party has sought to undermine them. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. asked the Food and Drug Administration earlier this month to review its decades-old approval of Mifepristone, a drug that can end early stage pregnancies. He did so in light of a report from the Ethics and Public Policy Center, or EPPC, a conservative think tank that creatively entitled its report, The Abortion Pill Harms Women. The report argues that adverse events caused by mifepristone are 22 times more likely than the FDA currently recognizes. Missouri Senator Josh Hawley asked R.F.K. about the report in a Senate health hearing earlier this month. 

 

[clip of Senator Josh Hawley] Don’t you think that this new data shows that the need to do a review is in fact very pressing? 

 

[clip of Robert F. Kennedy Jr.] And it’s alarming and clearly it indicates that at very least the label should be changed. I’ve asked Marty Makary, who’s the director of FDA, to do a complete review and to report back. 

 

[clip of Senator Josh Hawley] Good. 

 

Jane Coaston: It’s important to mention that the report was neither peer-reviewed nor published in an academic or scientific journal. It also contradicts over 100 peer-reviewed studies that have shown the abortion pill to be safe. In fact, some research shows that the pill is safer than Tylenol and Viagra. And let’s be real here. Even if Mifepristone made women’s hair grow faster and also, I don’t know, eliminated carbon from the atmosphere, I’m guessing that the EPPC, whose stated goal is to quote, “apply the riches of the Christian and Jewish traditions to contemporary problems” might still have a problem with it. But late last year, three red states, Idaho, Kansas, and Missouri, brought a lawsuit against the FDA, arguing that it should prohibit telehealth access to Mifepristone. The pill has accounted for more than 60% of all abortions in the US since the Supreme Court overturned Roe versus Wade in 2022. The states brought their case to a United States District Court in Texas, a venue the Trump administration says is inappropriate for their complaint. Earlier this month, the Department of Justice asked U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk to drop the case. By taking issue with the suit’s venue, the Trump administration was able to weigh in on the case without making a judgment on abortion itself. President Trump has consistently sidestepped the issue of reproductive rights, repeatedly saying on the campaign trail that he would leave abortion to the states. But R.F.K. Jr. says he thinks that any policy changes on Mifepristone would ultimately come from the White House. To help us make sense of Mifepristone and more and the fight over abortion in the United States, I spoke to Jessica Valenti, the author of abortion, our bodies, their lives, and the truths we use to win. Jessica, welcome to What a Day! 

 

Jessica Valenti: Thank you for having me. 

 

Jane Coaston: So I wanna start by talking about the case in Georgia that you wrote about recently on your sub stack where a brain-dead pregnant woman is being kept alive at Emory University Hospital to save the life of her unborn child. Can you tell us more about what’s happening? 

 

Jessica Valenti: That’s pretty much the gist of it. Georgia has an abortion ban and Adriana Smith’s family was told that because she was pregnant when she was declared brain dead and she was just nine weeks that they wouldn’t be able to let her go. So essentially this is a woman who’s being forcibly kept alive against her family’s wishes because of the state’s abortion ban. And obviously it sparked all sort of national and international outrage because it’s such a horrific case. What’s been really telling though has been the response of anti-abortion groups. There are some groups that have remained just completely silent on the case. They don’t want to attach their name to this at all. There are other groups who are trying to shirk responsibility and say that the state’s ban is not responsible for what is happening to Adriana, but it really shows that they understand just how incredibly unpopular something like this is and how horrified voters are. And so they’re really doing a lot to try to distance themselves from what’s happening in Georgia. But this is what happens when you have fetal personhood laws, right? 

 

Jane Coaston: Right. I want to get into that because are there other states that are currently fighting for their ability to do this? 

 

Jessica Valenti: Pretty much every anti-abortion state has some sort of attempt to get fetal personhood on the books if they don’t already. There are a lot of states who have some sort of fetal-personhood law. We’ve seen in Alabama, for example, women who are pregnant, who have been arrested if they are suspected of using drugs, they’re putting them in jail to protect the life of the fetus preemptively. This sort of thing is happening all over the place, in Kansas they want child support to start at conception. And this is like a very common tactic with Republicans. They’ll say, this is something to help women and families. But in reality, it has nothing to do with child support. It has to do with codifying that fetal personhood. 

 

Jane Coaston: Earlier this month, the Department of Justice asked a Texas judge to toss a case brought by Missouri, Idaho, and Kansas that sought to cut off access to the abortion pill Mifepristone. The DOJ said there was no reason the case should be filed in Texas. I think I can guess, but why was it filed in Texas? 

 

Jessica Valenti: It was filed in Texas because there is a judge there, Matthew Kacsmaryk, who is extremely, extremely anti-abortion. All of these states, all of these anti-abbortion groups really love to get their cases in front of him because they know exactly what’s going to happen. And so they’ve been putting a lot of Mifepristone cases in front of this particular judge. But what is so interesting to me is the response to the DOJ’s request was sort of this idea that, oh, look, the Trump administration is defending mifepristone, isn’t this great? And the Trump Administration, again, knowing that abortion bans are incredibly unpopular, really did try to milk that as much as possible. But in reality, what they were really trying to do was get a legal precedent that says states can’t intervene in FDA regulations so that when Trump’s FDA starts to restrict mifepristone even further that pro-choice states can’t sue. So it’s all part of this sort of like broader anti-abortion plan. 

 

Jane Coaston: One of the restrictions on Mifepristone that these states are seeking is telehealth access to the drug. Why does telehealth access to Mifepristone matter so much? 

 

Jessica Valenti: Telehealth is sort of the finger in the dam of access right now. About 20%, one in five American abortions are happening via telehealth. And that’s largely because of abortion bans. So if you’re in Texas, you’re in Tennessee and you want to get an abortion, you can contact a provider who is in a shield state, a place like New York or California, and get abortion pills shipped to you. Essentially, it’s been a way for abortion patients or abortion seekers to get around state bans. And so Republicans, anti-abortion groups have been really, really pissed off about this and that’s why they’re putting out all of these junk studies saying that Mifepristone is unsafe, that people are being harmed from Mifepristone when that is not true. They want to paint this picture of a dangerous abortion drug that doctors are surreptitiously like drug trafficking. They’re using a lot of like really scary language for a medication that’s been safely used for years. 

 

Jane Coaston: I have to add on to that very quickly that it’s funny to me because I joked somewhere that like, if mifepristone were the perfect medication and made your hair long and shiny and you know, made you smarter, but also ensured the end of a pregnancy, I don’t think that these groups would be like, oh, okay, well. 

 

Jessica Valenti: Right. 

 

Jane Coaston: Carry on. 

 

Jessica Valenti: Exactly. 

 

Jane Coaston: We’re– 

 

Jessica Valenti: They just want it safe. 

 

Jane Coaston: Oh yeah. 

 

Jessica Valenti: They. 

 

Jane Coaston: Sure. 

 

Jessica Valenti: No. I mean it’s–

 

Jane Coaston: Amazing. 

 

Jessica Valenti: It’s just completely ridiculous. I mean, it is really, they have been so afraid of this drug for so long, because when it first came around, all of a sudden, people didn’t have to go to clinics. They didn’t have to through this gauntlet of anti-abortion protesters. So yeah, it has nothing to do with safety. It has to do one, it’s allowing people to get abortions. And two, it’s allowing people to get abortions without that like rite of humiliation that they like so much. 

 

Jane Coaston: Now, it’s almost been three years since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, declaring that Americans no longer have a constitutional right to an abortion. We’ve seen a lot of court filings and bans take place. What surprises you most about this post-Roe era? 

 

Jessica Valenti: I mean, I manage to be surprised every day. I always knew that we would be inundated and overwhelmed by the anti-abortion movement with anti-abortion legislation. I don’t think I was fully prepared for just how big that onslaught would be. I mean they’ve had 50 years to prepare for this moment and they really did prepare. They are throwing everything they can at the wall, whether it is potential travel bans or these bills that claim abortion medication and birth control are poisoning the groundwater. And therefore we need to you know restrict these medications to protect the environment. They are doing every single possible thing that they can on every single level, not just to make sure that their bans stay in place, but to further restrict any sort of reproductive health care like birth control, like IVF. They really have their eye sort of 30 years down the line for their next goal. 

 

Jane Coaston: It’s interesting you say that because I’m not sure if we disagree exactly, but something I’ve been struck by is the anti-abortion movement and the degree to which they were like the dog that caught the car on this issue. That was something that surprised me because I think–. 

 

Jessica Valenti: Yeah. 

 

Jane Coaston: Republicans dramatically to me overestimated how much support they actually had because most Americans approve of legal abortion. According to a Pew study published last year, 63% said it should be legal in all or most cases. And I’m pretty sure those numbers have gone up since Dobbs. And on the campaign trail, Trump kept being like, abortion is an issue for the states. Now that’s what he said, not what he’s done. And yet, Republican legislators who have supported Trump are pushing hard on this issue. Where do you think this leaves Trump? And how do we see those conflicting interests manifesting right now in the fight over reproductive rights? 

 

Jessica Valenti: Yeah, that’s a really interesting question. And this is the one thing that they were surprised by was the backlash against bans and they really underestimated support for abortion rights and opposition to bans. And I think Trump really understands that. And so I think what we’re seeing right now is very much the White House trying to sort of distance themselves, but at the same time, he’s sort of letting the anti-abortion folks in his administration in all of these agencies do what they want, they’re just framing it in a way that they can sell to the press. Like what they’re trying to do right now with this junk science report that says Mifepristone is unsafe. They can say, this isn’t about abortion, this is about reproductive health care, this is just about women’s safety. 

 

Jane Coaston: You wrote on your sub stack that the anti-abortion movement is more organized than ever, and that Democrats need to quote, “wake the fuck up.” I think we’ve seen in many states, Democrats have recognized that this is an issue you can put on the ballot and it gets people to vote. But how else do you think Democrats should talk about this issue, be about this issue moving forward? 

 

Jessica Valenti: Honestly, I think that they need to let go of the restore Roe language and this idea that we just need to go back to the way things are. People were still being denied care under Roe. We have an opportunity, as I said, there’s just tremendous, tremendous support for no government involvement in pregnancy. And every single day we’re seeing stories like Adriana Smith’s, like people who are being arrested for miscarriages. We’re seeing stories that prove how important it is that there is zero government involvement in pregnancy and abortion at any point. And I think Democrats have a real opportunity to talk about this proactively, to get off the defense so that when they start saying things about post-birth abortion and everything else, we can just say, no, we support families, we support medicine, we supports doctors, and we think that people, pregnant people and their families are the best folks to decide what happens to them and their bodies. 

 

Jane Coaston: Jessica, thank you so much for joining me. 

 

Jessica Valenti: Thank you. 

 

Jane Coaston: That was my conversation with Jessica Valenti, author of the book, Abortion: Our Bodies, Their Lives, and the Truths We Use to Win. We’ll get to more of the news in a moment, but if you like the show, make sure to subscribe, leave a five-star review on Apple Podcasts, watch us on YouTube, and share with your friends. More to come after some ads. [music break]

 

[AD BREAK]

 

Jane Coaston: Here’s what else we’re following today. 

 

[sung] Headlines. 

 

[clip of Senator Rand Paul] I support spending cuts. I think the cuts currently in the bill are wimpy and anemic, but I still would support the bill, even with whimpy and anemic cuts, if they weren’t going to explode the debt. The problem is, the math doesn’t add up. 

 

Jane Coaston: Some Republican senators are already throwing cold water on the tax and spending plan that squeaked by in the House last week, a.k.a. President Trump’s big, beautiful bill. Kentucky Senator Rand Paul is one of them. Speaking on Fox News Sunday, he pointed out that the tax provisions in the bill are projected to increase the federal deficit by trillions of dollars over the next decade. That’s according to a recent government analysis of the bill. Paul isn’t a lone voice of opposition, either. Wisconsin Senator Ron Johnson also blasted the bill over spending worries in an interview with CNN Sunday. He said he is not afraid to buck President Trump on this. 

 

[clip of Senator Ron Johnson] My campaign promise in 2010 and every campaign after that was to stop mortgaging our children’s future. It’s immoral, it’s wrong, it has to stop. And so he may not be worried about that. I am extremely worried about that. 

 

Jane Coaston: Johnson promised major changes to the bill and said there are enough Senate Republicans willing to hold it up until, quote, “the president gets serious about spending reduction and reducing the deficit.” And I’m waiting on protein bars to rain down on me from the sky, which seems equally probable. In a party line vote, Senate Republicans can only lose three votes and still pass the measure. So all these complaints are probably not what House Speaker Mike Johnson wants to hear. He managed to thread a proverbial needle between the ultra-conservative Freedom Caucus and the more moderate Blue State Republicans, but just barely. The bill passed the House early Thursday by a single vote. The House Speaker warned senators not to mess with the bill too much during an interview with CNN Sunday, because they risk losing more votes in the House. 

 

[clip of House Speaker Mike Johnson] I have a very delicate balance here, a very delicate equilibrium that we’ve reached over a long period of time, and it’s best not to meddle with it too much. 

 

Jane Coaston: Counterpoint, meddle. The House will have to vote on the bill again to okay any changes made in the Senate version. Congressional Republicans say they want to get the final bill to Trump by July 4th. Look, I realize, Republicans will probably find some way to pass some version of this big bullshit bill that literally takes from the poor to give more to the rich. I hope it fails, but at the absolute very least, it’s fun to watch them fight. Over the weekend, Russia launched one of its biggest aerial attacks on Ukraine in the three years since the war began. On Sunday night, a bombardment featuring around 350 Russian drones hammered Ukrainian territory in the biggest such shelling of the war. That’s according to the Ukrainian Air Force’s Communications Department. Based on statements made by Ukrainian officials, from Friday to Sunday, Russia launched around 900 drones at Ukrainian targets. On Telegram, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky wrote, quote, “Only a sense of complete impunity can allow Russia to carry out such attacks and continually escalate their scale.” On the Russian side, the Russian defense ministry alleges that it intercepted more than 100 Ukrainian drones flying over Russian airspace on Sunday night. All of this made President Donald Trump, who repeatedly claimed during his campaign for the White House that he could end the war in Ukraine in quote, “24 hours,” before saying in March that he was being quote, “a little bit sarcastic when he said that” because he is not clear on what sarcasm is. A little miffed. On Sunday, the president seemed to be rather peeved at Russian President Vladimir Putin in response to a question from a journalist about the attacks on Ukraine. 

 

[clip of President Donald Trump] I’m not happy with what Putin’s doing, he’s killing a lot of people and I don’t know what the hell happened to Putin, I’ve known him a long time, always gotten along with him, but he’s sending rockets into cities and killing people and I don’t like it at all, okay? We’re in the middle of talking and he’s shooting rockets into Kyiv and other cities, I don’t like it all. 

 

Jane Coaston: Whoa, Vladimir Putin killing a lot of people for no reason? That doesn’t sound like Vladimir Putin. What happened to that guy? 

 

[clip of President Donald Trump] She just called me, as you know. And she asked for an extension on the June 1st date. And she said she wants to get down to serious negotiation. 

 

Jane Coaston: President Trump confirmed to reporters Sunday that he agreed to delay a 50% tariff on imports from the EU for 90 days. The truce came following a telephone call from EU chief Ursula von der Leyen, who requested the delay. Trade representatives from both parties were due to hold talks on Monday, according to a European Commission spokesperson. Trump threatened a tariff hike Friday, complaining on Truth Social that trade discussions with the EU are, quote, “going nowhere!” Exclamation point. President Trump discussed his strategy with reporters in the Oval Office on Friday. 

 

[clip of President Donald Trump] I just said it’s time that we play the game the way I know how to play the game. You know, nobody, they’ve taken advantage of other people representing this country and they’re not going to do that any longer. 

 

Jane Coaston: But it didn’t stop there. Trump took once again to his Truth Social account on Friday, this time to cyber bully Apple CEO Tim Cook and declare that iPhones not manufactured in the US will be subject to a 25% import tariff. On Saturday, Trump told reporters the tariffs would apply to Samsung too and would take effect at the end of June. 

 

[clip of President Donald Trump] But I had an understanding with Tim that he wouldn’t be doing this. He said he’s going to India to build plants. I said that’s okay to go to India, but you’re not going to sell into here without tariffs. 

 

Jane Coaston: Cook met with Trump at the White House last Tuesday according to reporting from Politico. That same day, one of Apple’s biggest suppliers announced plans to invest $1.5 billion in its India operations. President Trump has a new idea for what he wants to do with $3 billion of federal grant money previously awarded to Harvard. In a Truth Social post Monday, Trump said he’s considering taking the money away from quote, “a very anti-Semitic Harvard and giving it to trade schools all across our land,” but he didn’t elaborate on the idea. Harvard already sued the administration last month over its attempt to freeze billions in funding. Trump’s new threat comes amidst an ongoing battle between the White House and university. Last week, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem directed DHS to end Harvard’s Student and Exchange Visitor Program certification, meaning, quote, “Harvard can no longer enroll foreign students and existing foreign students must transfer or lose their legal status.” In another lawsuit filed by the university, Harvard called the action retaliatory and unconstitutional. It said the termination had a devastating effect on the university and more than 7,000 visa holders. A federal judge on Friday temporarily blocked the government’s bid to stop foreign students from enrolling at Harvard. And that’s the news. [music break]

 

[AD BREAK]

 

Jane Coaston: That’s all for today. If you like the show, make sure you subscribe, leave a review, go see a movie this week, and tell your friends to listen. And if you’re into reading, and not just about how sure, there are lots of things you could go do. But seeing a movie in a theater with other people is fun and enjoyable, even when you are convinced Tom Cruise is about to drown in a submarine, like me. What a Day is also a nightly newsletter. Check it out and subscribe at Crooked.com/subscribe. I’m Jane Coaston, and movies and theaters, what a concept! [music break] What a Day is a production of Crooked Media. It’s recorded and mixed by Desmond Taylor. Our associate producers are Raven Yamamoto and Emily Fohr. Our producer is Michell Eloy. We had production help today from Johanna Case, Joseph Dutra, Greg Walters, and Julia Claire. Our senior producer is Erica Morrison, and our executive producer is Adriene Hill. Our theme music is by Colin Gilliard and Kashaka. Our production staff is proudly unionized with the Writers Guild of America East. [music break]

 

[AD BREAK]