Hillary Clinton provided her most specific answer to date for when she believes that abortions can be restricted.
“There can be restrictions in the very end of the third trimester, but they have to take into account the life and health of the mother,” Clinton told “MTP Daily” host Chuck Todd in a two-part interview, the first segment of which aired Sunday.
In a typical pregnancy, the third trimester stretches from the 27th week to the 40th week. Medical professionals generally agree that fetuses are viable outside of the womb in the weeks before the beginning of the third trimester.
While abortion has always been a politically divisive issue, it has entered the spotlight early in the presidential campaign because of a series of videos showing officials with Planned Parenthood discussing the sale of fetal organs and body parts for medical research.
Some Republicans have proposed ending federal funding for the organization. The debate has left many conservatives wondering just where — and if — Clinton and other Democrats would draw the line on abortion.
During her interview with Todd, Clinton said that she would support some constitutional restrictions on abortion that take into account the life and health of the mother. But she declined to give specifics and put the ball in Republicans’ court to make a workable proposal.
“If there is a way to structure some kind of constitutional restrictions that take into account the life of the mother and her health, then I am open to that, but I have yet to see the Republicans willing to actually do that, and that would be an area where if they included health, you could see constitutional action,” Clinton said.
Last week, Clinton was asked a similar question on whether she supports abortion restrictions during an interview with “Face the Nation” host John Dickerson.
Clinton did not provide a specific timeframe for when she would support such restrictions, saying that “I think that the kind of late-term abortions that take place are because of medical necessity, and therefore I would hate to see the government interfering with that decision.”
“This gets back to whether you respect a woman’s right to choose or not, and I think that’s what this whole argument is about,” she told Dickerson.