Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, who has served as the Senate's Democratic Whip for more than 20 years, went down to the Senate floor on Jan. 21, 2025, to speak about a bill aimed at protecting the lives of certain newborn babies.

He was against it.

The Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, as described in its official summary, would have established "requirements for the degree of care a health care practitioner must provide in the case of a child born alive following an abortion or attempted abortion."

What exactly would this proposed law have required a health care practitioner to do when dealing with a born baby who survived an attempted abortion?

"Specifically," said the bill's summary, "a health care practitioner who is present must (1) exercise the same degree of care as would reasonably be provided to any other child born alive at the same gestational age, and (2) ensure the child is immediately admitted to a hospital."

"An individual who intentionally kills or attempts to kill a child born alive is subject to prosecution for murder," it said.

But the mother would not be prosecuted. "The bill," said the summary, "bars the criminal prosecution of a mother of a child born alive under this bill and allows her to bring a civil action against a health care practitioner or other employee for violations."

Durbin considered this bill an outrage.

"Tomorrow marks the 52nd year since our Nation's highest Court issued a rule recognizing a woman's constitutionally protected right to choose," he said on the Senate floor on Jan. 21, 2025, according to the Congressional Record. "Roe v. Wade enshrined into law something that should have been a given in America: In America, women have the right to make decisions about their own bodies. And, as a result of Roe, America's women took a giant leap forward in gender equity. The decision in Roe afforded women the right to choose whether, when, and how to start a family.

"But," Durbin said, "after nearly 50 years of progress, in June 2022, the Supreme Court overruled Roe with Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, dragging women's rights half a century backward."

"Instead of addressing the healthcare crisis that Dobbs unleashed, Republicans are now instead looking to make it even harder for women to access comprehensive and compassionate healthcare," he said.

"Tomorrow, they will attempt to bring to the floor the so-called Born Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act," said Durbin. "The goal of the bill that we will consider, introduced by the Republicans, is to target and intimidate reproductive healthcare providers and make it harder for women to access comprehensive and compassionate healthcare."

Is it "compassionate" to deny health care to a newborn baby?

The day after Durbin gave this speech, his Senate office put out a press release. It was headlined: "Ahead of the Roe v. Wade Anniversary, Durbin Condemns Republicans' Sham 'Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act.'"

That day the Senate held a cloture vote to end debate on the bill and bring it up for a final substantive vote. The cloture measure required 60 votes to succeed. It only got 52.

Every Democrat in the Senate voted against it.

The Dick Durbin who has now served in Congress for more than four decades has championed a dramatically different position on abortion than the Dick Durbin who first ran for the House of Representatives in 1982. That year, as this column has noted before, Durbin ran as a pro-life Democrat.

In January 1982, he served as master of ceremonies at the Springfield Right to Life Committee's annual "Respect for Life Observance." This event, as explained by the committee, was designed "to speak for the unborn and bear witness to the right to life of all human beings."

On March 14, 1982, Durbin wrote a campaign letter emphasizing his pro-life position. "My record of opposition to abortion on demand has been public record for eight years," he wrote. "As recently as January I was honored to serve again as Master of Ceremonies at the Annual Observance in the State Capitol for the fifth time."

"I oppose abortion on demand," he wrote. "I support the Hatch Federalism Amendment which has been endorsed by the National Conference of Catholic Bishops."

The Washington Post explained in a March 11, 1982, article what this amendment would do: "The Senate Judiciary Committee has approved something called the 'human life federalism amendment.' This newest vehicle of abortion foes, sponsored by Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) and also known as the Hatch amendment, would amend the Constitution in order to erase the constitutional right to have an abortion established by the Supreme Court nine years ago. The amendment would return the abortion question to the states and Congress. But it is not a states' rights or 'new federalism' initiative, for it stipulates that whichever law — state or federal-were 'more restrictive' would prevail."

On July 12, 2022, when Durbin was chairing the Senate Judiciary Committee, he presided over a hearing on "A Post-Roe America: The Legal Consequences of the Dobbs Decision." At that hearing Republican Sen. Mike Lee of Utah and Republican Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas quoted from a letter Durbin had written about abortion in 1989. Lee requested that this letter be included in the committee's record, and it was.

"I believe we should end abortion on demand and at every opportunity I have translated this belief into votes in the House of Representatives," then-Rep. Durbin wrote in that 1989 letter. "I continue to believe the Supreme Court's decision in Roe v. Wade should be overturned."

Durbin announced last year that he will not seek reelection in 2026. History will remember him as someone who abandoned the right position and adopted the wrong position on the most profound issue of our time.

To find out more about Terence P. Jeffrey and read features by other Creators writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators webpage at www.creators.com.

Photo credit: Gayatri Malhotra at Unsplash