In a Jan. 16 essay, Joshua Mercer, vice president of advocacy for CatholicVote, pushed back against calls for pro-life organizations to disengage from the Trump administration, arguing that sustained involvement and pressure, rather than public denunciation, has been responsible for consequential policy wins.
The column, titled “How should pro-lifers respond to Trump?”, was published at The Washington Examiner and responded directly to criticism from Examiner columnist Peter Laffin, who has described the Trump-Vance administration as “the most anti-life Republican administration in history” and questioned the credibility of pro-life organizations that continue to work with it rather than publicly break ranks.
Mercer framed the disagreement as a strategic one, asking at the outset: “When a Republican president goes off course on the pro-life cause, what should anti-abortioners do?” By Laffin’s logic, Mercer wrote, the answer would be “lecture and deride any pro-life organization that continues engaging the administration in hopes of improving outcomes—preferably from the safe distance of an opinion column, where no vote is counted, no policy negotiated, and no child’s life is directly at stake.”
“We take a different view,” Mercer continued.
Rejecting disengagement and public condemnation, Mercer argued instead for “pressure, persistence, negotiation, and yes, the unglamorous, frustrating work of engaging imperfect political actors in the real world.”
When President Donald Trump sends “mixed or frustrating signals” on life issues, Mercer insisted that pro-life organizations, including CatholicVote, “do not look the other way,” but address those concerns directly, “sometimes publicly, often privately,” while pressing for “concrete solutions” to protect the unborn.
That approach, Mercer argued, has produced some of the most consequential policy outcomes in the pro-life movement’s history.
He pointed to a series of landmark victories, including the expansion of the Mexico City Policy, the Protect Life Rule barring taxpayer funding of abortion providers, and Trump’s nomination of three Supreme Court justices whose votes ultimately led to the overturning of Roe v. Wade. “Trump’s record gives pro-lifers reason to believe such engagement matters,” Mercer wrote.
Addressing Laffin’s suggestion that pro-lifers are simply “cozying up” to power, Mercer countered that such criticism “may play well on social media but it contributes exactly nothing to saving lives.”
While acknowledging that “there is a legitimate debate within the pro-life movement about strategy,” Mercer warned against “mistaking performative purity for effectiveness.”
“Progress has never come from the peanut gallery,” Mercer wrote. “It has come from those willing to walk into the room, take heat from all sides, and keep pushing anyway.”
“That’s not ‘cozying up,’” he concluded. “That’s how victories are won.”Readers can find Mercer’s full essay here.
The post ‘How victories are won’: CatholicVote’s Mercer defends continued engagement with Trump on abortion appeared first on CatholicVote org.