Abortion: NY Times, Washington Post, LA Times editorial boards solidly pro-choice but mum on limits
Reliably liberal editorial boards haven’t explained if they support abortions up to birth
{{#rendered}} {{/rendered}}Editorial boards from America’s major left-leaning newspapers have consistently pushed pro-choice views but remain vague on abortion limits following comments by Arizona gubernatorial candidate Katie Hobbs that suggested there shouldn’t be any.
Hobbs, a Democrat, appeared on CBS' "Face the Nation" on Sunday to discuss her race against GOP nominee Kari Lake, who supports abortions up to 15 weeks of pregnancy. When asked what she thinks about that restriction and whether she favors any specific limit on abortion, Hobbs indicated that she supports no limit.
"I support leaving the decision between a woman and her doctor and leaving politicians entirely out of it," Hobbs said.
{{#rendered}} {{/rendered}}Hobbs' comments follow similar remarks made by Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., at a press conference in September. However, editorial boards at reliably liberal newspapers have failed to mention where they stand the issue.
Washington Post editorial on overturning of Roe v. Wade. (Fox News)
SLANTED ABORTION MEDIA COVERAGE THROUGH THE YEARS HAS SOWN DISTRUST ON THE RIGHT
The New York Times, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times and Chicago Tribune have all published opinions from their respective editorial boards that indicate staunch pro-abortion stances but omit any sign that they feel it's too late to terminate a pregnancy at a certain point.
{{#rendered}} {{/rendered}}While Hobbs alarmed some on the right with her stance, the New York Times, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times and Chicago Tribune have all been less specific when it comes to the highly nuanced topic.
All four papers published pieces on June 24, the day the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, that strongly support the right for women to choose whether to terminate their pregnancies.
The Washington Post’s editorial board defended abortion with the headline, "The Supreme Court’s radical abortion ruling begins a dangerous new era," but the opinion was mum about abortion limits.
{{#rendered}} {{/rendered}}MSNBC HOST CLAIMS PRO-LIFE CHRISTIANS ARE ‘PERVERTING THE GOSPEL,’ CLAIMS JESUS IS NOT ANTI-ABORTION
"No, the board hasn’t specified this," a Post spokesperson told Fox News Digital when asked if the paper has detailed how many weeks into a pregnancy it's comfortable with abortion.
The Los Angeles Times urged readers to "fight" over the decision but didn’t mention limits either.
{{#rendered}} {{/rendered}}The L.A. Times’ editorial board published "Roe has been overturned. Feel outraged, feel betrayed — then fight to get it back," which warned of "dark times" but didn’t get specific about a cutoff at any particular point in the pregnancy.
"To my knowledge, no, they have not. They’ve only advocated for the right to abortion based on the law, with about 24 weeks being the standard for viability," an L.A. Times spokesperson told Fox News Digital when asked if the editorial board has clarified its views on limits.
Los Angeles Times editorial on overturning of Roe v. Wade. (Fox News)
{{#rendered}} {{/rendered}}The Chicago Tribune declared itself pro-abortion with an editorial headlined, "The impractical end of Roe v. Wade," which also failed to explain if it believed in a specific limit.
"We have not yet taken a position on that, at least during my tenure of about 15 months. The support for a woman's right to choose an abortion … is a long-standing position based on the board's philosophy of personal freedoms," Chicago Tribune editorial page editor Christopher Jones told Fox News Digital.
The editorial then declared, "Women seeking an abortion will continue to seek one even in the wake of an abandoned Roe v. Wade," and a "level of chaos will ensue" when women in states where abortion becomes illegal attempt to travel and anti-abortion activists attempt to restrict such travel.
{{#rendered}} {{/rendered}}"The burden will fall disproportionately on those who are young, vulnerable and without adequate financial resources," the board wrote.
New York Times editorial on overturning of Roe v. Wade. (Fox News)
The New York Times headlined its opinion piece, "The Ruling Overturning Roe Is an Insult to Women and the Judicial System," but said nothing about whether the editorial board is on the same page as Hobbs.
"The implications of this reversal will be devastating, throwing America into a new era of struggle over abortion laws — an era that will be marked by chaos, confusion and human suffering," the Times editorial board wrote.
{{#rendered}} {{/rendered}}The Times did not immediately respond when asked about the editorial board’s opinion on abortion limits.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
The Times editorial board has not weighed in on abortion limits since Roe v. Wade was overturned.