The NYT Editorial Board makes a strong case that judicial rulings, state-level actions, and federal laws could further erode abortion access, even as voters have tended to side with protecting reproductive rights when given a choice. However, it commits cherry-picking fallacies by selectively representing poll data on American attitudes toward abortion and framing Trump's proposed 15-week ban without providing crucial context about the exceptions it allows.

1. cherry picking •  The text seems to cast Donald Trump's proposed abortion policies in a way that selectively shares partial information about his position and its likely impact on actual abortions:

The justices seem prepared to throw out the lawsuit...

​But that should come as small comfort to anyone concerned for the future of reproductive freedom in America... The presumptive Republican nominee for president, Donald Trump, has indicated support for a 15-week national abortion ban...

If Mr. Trump's party wins solid control of the House and Senate, this could put Americans' reproductive rights at further risk, especially if Republicans first decide to do away with the filibuster. That would lower the threshold for passing legislation such as a 15-week abortion ban, which Mr. Trump seems likely to support.

The writers fail to mention that Trump's proposed 15-week ban has exceptions for when the mother's health is in jeopardy or cases of rape or incest. And they nowhere mention how many (or how few) abortions would be affected by a 15-week ban. For example, they do not mention that last year about 93% of abortions were at 13 weeks or earlier, and so would not be affected by the proposed ban.

By selecting only the information that casts Trump's position in the most extreme light, while leaving out mitigating details, the text commits the cherry-picking fallacy, with the result being an an overly simplistic and alarmist view of Trump's stance.

2. cherry picking • The argument cherry-picks data from Gallup polls to support the claim that a majority of Americans support legal abortion, while ignoring other results of the same polls that show a different picture.

Since 1975, a majority of Americans have supported legal abortion in some or all cases, according to polling by Gallup, and that support has increased slightly since Dobbs.

If one looks at the full range of responses in the most recent Gallup poll, one sees that the NYT writers are combining mixed responses to arrive at a "majority" of Americans believing abortion should be legal in "some or all" cases. What they leave out is that in the key survey question, respondents were able to choose four options: legal under any circumstances; legal in most circumstances; legal only in few circumstances; or illegal in all circumstances.

It is by combining the first three responses that one could say, as the Times writers did, that most Americans think abortion should be legal in "some or all" cases. But it is just as true that by combining the last three responses, one could say most Americans think abortion should be illegal in "some or all cases". Either of these statements is technically true, which is why either statement standing alone is cherry-picking.

This underscores how poll data can be weaponized through selective presentation to support divergent narratives. Providing the full context and breakdowns is crucial for a fair and accurate portrayal. We urge readers to go directly to the Gallup report and see the full picture there.

​ ​ ​