Trump campaign reiterates support for 'universal access' to IVF

Former US president Trump's campaign team for his run for re-election in November, have reiterated his commitment to providing 'universal access' to IVF in an interview with NBC News.

This follows Trump's recent announcement that, if elected, Republicans would ensure IVF was available for 'all Americans that need it' through public funding or insurance mandates earlier this month (see BioNews 1254). The proposal could expand funding options for gay couples, as currently only seven states require IVF benefits to include same-sex couples. However, according to NBC news, Trump's team did not respond to a follow-up email requesting confirmation of whether same-sex couples would be included.

Campaign press secretary Karoline Leavitt said, 'President Trump has long been consistent in supporting the rights of states to make decisions on abortion and has been very clear that he will NOT sign a federal ban when he is back in the White House. President Trump also supports universal access to contraception and IVF.'

Since Trump's earlier announcement, no further details have been provided about how the Republicans would enforce IVF access in practice. According to NBC, Kevin Munoz, a spokesperson for the Harris-Walz campaign, said: 'Donald Trump's own platform... could effectively ban IVF. As President, he appointed an anti-IVF extremist to the federal bench, proposed a rule to allow health care workers to deny IVF to LGBTQ couples, and hosted the Alabama judge who banned IVF at White House.'

This week, a federal judge appointed by Trump in 2020 ruled that over 8000 Catholic employers could refuse IVF funding for their employees. The case, brought by the Catholic Benefits Association and the Diocese of Bismarck, challenged the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) regulations. The regulations were introduced to enforce the federal Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, ensuring relevant accommodations for pregnant employees in April 2024. However, the EEOC faced controversy when they adopted an expansive view of the legislation, including accommodations related to abortion, fertility treatment and birth control.

US district judge Daniel Traynor of Bismarck, North Dakota, said the rule would cause 'irreparable harm' as it 'forces members to choose between expressing sincerely held beliefs and compliance'.

Since the Alabama Supreme Court's decision earlier this year to recognise frozen embryos as children (see BioNews 1228 and 1229), IVF treatment has become a contentious topic in the run-up to the US presidential election. Since then, multiple attempts to introduce federal legislation to protect IVF have been unsuccessful in the senate (see BioNews 1243 and 1245).

A recent ad from the Harris campaign cautioned that under Trump, IVF could be banned in some states. However, Trump disputed this in a post on Truth Social, saying 'I have been totally supportive of IVF, right from the beginning, and so has the Republican party!'