WASHINGTON — This week marks the first time Republicans will hold a federal trifecta since the Supreme Court’s Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision, which overturned the federal right to an abortion.

For some conservatives, it also marks a new start.

While Democrats made abortion rights their top campaign issue in 2024, Republican messaging largely sidestepped addressing federal action related to abortion. President Donald Trump has called to put the issue to bed on the federal level — an ask that advocates on either side of the abortion debate don’t take at face value.

Abortion rights advocates expect Trump to quickly begin issuing executive orders related to abortion, pointing to a similar timeline in 2017. Abortion opponents view Trump’s second term as an opportunity to revive federal enthusiasm on a longtime social issue and undo regulations implemented under the Biden administration.

“We’re hoping there will be executive orders handed down by the president and memorandums of various kinds. He is a pro-life president, and a very strong one,” said Rep. Christopher H. Smith, R-N.J., who co-chairs the House Pro-Life Caucus. “There’s a reappraisal going on in the country, and I do think the sanctity of life over time will win. This is the most important human rights issue of our time to say that a child before birth is persona non grata.”

On Tuesday, more than 140 Republican lawmakers wrote to Trump urging him to reinstate multiple anti-abortion policies.

“We are grateful that the Trump administration can bring an end to the weaponization of the United States government against pro-life Americans and unborn children,” they wrote. “We believe there is a better way forward for our Republic.”

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., and Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., are scheduled to address the March for Life, an annual event commemorating the Jan. 22 anniversary of Roe v. Wade, on Friday. Trump was the first sitting president to address the rally in 2020.

The anniversary of the 1973 Supreme Court decision has traditionally been marked with votes on abortion-related measures in Congress, and this year has been no different.

On Wednesday, the Senate did not reach the 60-vote threshold needed to advance a bill that would require medical professionals to care for an infant that survived a botched abortion. The vote on the measure was 52-47. The House could vote on that measure as soon as Thursday.

While the 60-vote Senate filibuster has long been an obstacle for passing that and many other abortion-related bills, this year, control of both chambers and the support of the president could make it easier for Republicans to message on the issue.

During the last Congress, before Republicans had a hold of the House, Senate and White House, federal lawmakers voted on more indirect abortion restrictions. Congressional Republican-led votes focused on ways to protect crisis pregnancy resources rather than voting to limit abortion after a certain gestational stage or permanently block federal funding for abortion.

While in the last Congress the adopted GOP-led House rules teed up consideration of Smith’s legislation to permanently ban federal funding of abortion, that bill never came up for a floor vote, although the House did vote on two pregnancy resource bills in the lead-up to the annual march.

“I’ve been in the pro-life movement for 50 years. I’ve never been more optimistic that people are finally recognizing that abortion is violence against children and that it’s violence against women too,” said Smith, who is also scheduled to address the rally.

Floor action

The bill that didn’t advance in the Senate on Wednesday has been part of abortion messaging since the beginning of this year.

The House Rules package agreed to on Jan. 3 fast-tracked consideration of the legislation that conservatives have used as a key messaging issue. Thune announced on Jan. 8 that his chamber would also vote on the bill “as thousands of pro-life Americans come to Washington for the 52nd annual March for Life.”

The latest versions of the bill were led by Rep. Ann Wagner, R-Mo., and Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla. The bill was introduced despite a 2002 bipartisan federal law that requires providing necessary medical care to protect any infant born, including through a failed abortion. Some Republicans say the status quo is insufficiently proactive, despite pushback from leading physicians’ groups who argue the proposed changes are unnecessary and often misleading.

Since its implementation, Republicans have angled for a follow-up policy that they say would protect an infant born during a failed abortion and require that the infant receive all medically appropriate care.

Lawmakers have introduced iterations of this legislation in both chambers since 2015. The House passed similar bills in January 2018 and again in January 2023 after reclaiming control of the chamber. As the minority in 2019, House Republicans unsuccessfully attempted to trigger a vote through other procedural tools.

Thune introduced the previous Senate version of the bill. The Senate fell short in procedural votes to advance the bill in 2019 and 2020.

On Wednesday, as senators edged toward yet another doomed procedural vote, the partisan lines over the issue still ran deep.

“When an abortion results in the live birth of a child, that child should be entitled to quality health care under the law,” said Sen. Charles E. Grassley, R-Iowa. “Tragically, that isn’t always the case. … These precious babies deserve justice.”

Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., countered, “This is not how abortion works. Republicans know it. All babies are already protected under the law regardless of the circumstance of their birth. Doctors already have a legal obligation to provide appropriate medical care.”

©2025 CQ-Roll Call, Inc., All Rights Reserved. Visit cqrollcall.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.