Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic nominee for the 2024 presidential election, made headlines on Tuesday by advocating for the elimination of the Senate filibuster in order to restore federal protections for abortion rights, specifically by codifying Roe v. Wade. Roe, which had guaranteed abortion rights for nearly 50 years, was overturned by the Supreme Court in 2022, a decision that has since spurred numerous states to enact strict abortion bans.
In an interview with Wisconsin Public Radio, Harris underscored the importance of legislative action in securing reproductive rights. "It is well within our reach to hold onto the majority in the Senate and take back the House," she said. As a former senator herself, Harris noted the crucial role Congress plays in ensuring long-term protections. She expressed her commitment to not only the presidential election but also winning the legislative seats necessary for meaningful change. "I think we should eliminate the filibuster for Roe," Harris declared, explaining that reducing the voting threshold to a simple majority of 51 votes in the Senate would allow lawmakers to pass federal protections for reproductive freedom. This would give women the autonomy to make decisions about their own bodies without governmental interference.
Calls for Action from Advocates and Lawmakers
Harris’ stance has been met with support from numerous lawmakers and reproductive rights advocates. Representative Pramila Jayapal, a Democrat from Washington and chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, praised the vice president’s position, highlighting the increasing threat to abortion access posed by extreme Republican lawmakers. "This is so important," Jayapal emphasized. "Congress needs to step up and codify abortion rights—and we do that by ending the filibuster." Jayapal has been an outspoken advocate for abortion rights and has shared her own abortion story, bringing personal experience to the debate.
Other Senate Democrats echoed this sentiment. Senator Tina Smith from Minnesota reiterated that the filibuster obstructs policies supported by a majority of Americans, including reproductive rights. Smith pointed to a recent Senate vote on in vitro fertilization (IVF) as an example of how the filibuster can stymie legislation that addresses critical healthcare issues. “The filibuster is an undemocratic rule,” Smith asserted, agreeing with Harris that it prevents meaningful legislative progress on matters important to the American public.
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer also indicated that Democrats might consider adjusting the filibuster rule if they retain control of the Senate in the upcoming elections. Schumer suggested that a special exception or "carveout" could be created specifically for abortion rights legislation, allowing such bills to pass with a simple majority instead of the 60 votes traditionally required to break a filibuster.
Opposition to Harris' Position
While Harris’ remarks received applause from many in her party, they were not without opposition. Notably, Senator Joe Manchin, an Independent from West Virginia who was once a Democrat, voiced strong criticism. Manchin, a long-time supporter of the filibuster, framed Harris’ proposal as a threat to democracy. "Shame on her," he said in response to her comments. "She knows the filibuster is the Holy Grail of democracy. It's the only thing that keeps us talking and working together." Manchin has frequently positioned himself as a centrist, often opposing more progressive elements of the Democratic Party’s agenda.
Another significant critic of the filibuster’s elimination is Kyrsten Sinema, an Independent from Arizona who left the Democratic Party in 2022. Like Manchin, Sinema has long defended the filibuster as a safeguard for bipartisan cooperation and has expressed concern over removing it for any legislative purpose, including abortion rights.
Manchin’s remarks underscore a longstanding division within Congress about how best to approach the filibuster. While Democrats like Harris and Schumer see it as a roadblock to enacting policies supported by a majority of Americans, others argue that its removal could lead to further partisan gridlock and diminish the collaborative spirit the Senate was designed to foster.
The 2024 Election and Abortion Rights
As the 2024 presidential election approaches, abortion rights are expected to be a central issue for many voters. Harris, who has long championed reproductive rights, has frequently pointed to the damage done by the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade. She has placed the blame squarely on former President Donald Trump, who appointed three conservative justices to the Court during his term. Those justices played a pivotal role in the Court's ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which ended the federal right to abortion and returned the decision to individual states.
Since the Dobbs decision, Republican-led states have moved quickly to enact sweeping abortion bans, some of which include criminal penalties for doctors and patients. This legislative push has further polarized the nation, with reproductive freedom emerging as one of the defining issues of the upcoming election. Trump, who is running for re-election, has touted his role in reversing Roe, framing it as a victory for conservative values.
In contrast, Harris has used her platform to highlight the detrimental effects of these abortion bans, often framing the issue as one of personal freedom and bodily autonomy. "It’s about letting every person, every woman, decide what is right for them," she said during her Wisconsin interview, making a clear case for federal protections.
The Path Forward
While Harris’ endorsement of eliminating the filibuster represents a significant development in the fight for reproductive rights, the road ahead remains uncertain. Democrats will need to retain or expand their majority in the Senate while also regaining control of the House of Representatives to have any hope of passing abortion protections at the federal level. Even with these gains, overcoming opposition from centrist lawmakers like Manchin and Sinema may prove to be a significant hurdle.
Reproductive rights advocates, however, see Harris' comments as a much-needed signal of progress. For All founder Kai Newkirk praised Harris for taking a clear stand on the issue. "It’s great to finally hear Kamala Harris be clear as our candidate about ending the filibuster to restore abortion rights nationwide," Newkirk said. He added that abolishing the filibuster, which he referred to as a "Jim Crow relic," is essential for undoing the damage caused by recent abortion bans and advancing other critical reforms.
The debate over the filibuster’s future is emblematic of a broader struggle in Washington to address deep-seated divisions in the country’s politics. For Harris and her supporters, eliminating the filibuster is a necessary step toward ensuring that the will of the majority prevails on issues like reproductive freedom. For opponents like Manchin, however, it represents a dangerous unraveling of the Senate’s role as a deliberative body designed to foster consensus.
In the end, the question of whether the filibuster will be eliminated, and whether Roe v. Wade will be codified into federal law, may ultimately hinge on the outcome of the 2024 elections. As both sides prepare for the final stretch of campaigning, one thing is certain: the future of abortion rights in America is far from settled.