MAGA advocate calls for ban on pregnant women traveling to US and ‘sterilization of all foreign visitors’ 80%

By Rhian Lubin0%

7/1/2026, 12:44:23 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 26 faulty reasoning types, including Confirmation Bias, Biased Writer Voice, and Post Hoc (False Cause), with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 33% saturation with 168 hits. Analysis detected 1,246 faulty-reasoning hits from 509 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 72% and a BS Rank of 80% (4,234 of 21,182 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 80.00% of the article peer group.

A fierce MAGA advocate has called for a ban on all pregnant foreigners and the “sterilization” of all visitors to the United States in a meltdown after the Supreme Court struck down President Donald Trump’s executive order seeking to end birthright citizenship. 
Sean Davis, the CEO of The Federalist, one of the most hardcore pro-Trump outlets in the U.S., railed against the court’s 6-3 ruling Tuesday and called for the “dissolution of the Union” in a social media post critics described as “unhinged.” 
After the major defeat, Trump called on Congress to enact legislation to end the enshrined right, but Davis does not believe the president is going far enough on the matter. 
“Several ways forward here given the choice of Roberts/Barrett to nullify the 14th Amendment and extra-constitutionally replace it with their own language,” Davis began, referring to Chief Justice John Roberts and Trump-appointee Amy Coney Barrett, before laying out his seven-point plan. 
“1) Nullification. 
States issue birth certificates, and they can just stop issuing them to non-citizens. 
Roberts/Barrett can deal with the fallout and litigate each birth individually,” he suggested. 
“2) Pack the court. 
If Robert wants to be a politician who writes laws instead of a judge, then he can fight with 10 more unelected legislators in robes.” 
Points three through five were even more extreme. 
“3) Deny entry to all pregnant foreigners,” Davis said. 
“4) Deny entry to all female foreigners. 
5) Require sterilization of all foreign visitors prior to entry.” 
“6) Dissolution of the Union. 
A nation which can’t even restrict who gets to be a citizen isn’t a nation,” Davis added. 
His seventh suggestion was to amend the Constitution. 
“If you think all these options are not great, understand that that is what happens when unelected judges decide that they are in charge of the country and get to write its laws,” Davis concluded. 
Responses to his seven-point-plan varied from outrage to mockery. 
“This whole list is absolute BONKERS,” said former attorney and New York Times columnist David French. 
“It is absolutely bizarre that these people believe that the continued application of a rule that has existed for generation after generation -- as we've grown to the most powerful and prosperous free nation in world history -- is somehow the root of our national demise and so clearly wrong that we need to end the union,” he added. 
“The CEO of the Federalist is calling for forced sterlization of foreigners and dissolution of the union because the conservative-majority Court made one ruling he can't live with. 
You have the WH, House, SCOTUS and it's not enough,” said political journalist Isaac Saul. 
“Totally unhinged.” 
“Wonder how the Federalist is reacting to the rul—,” CNN’s Jake Tapper reacted with a screenshot of the X post. 
Davis testified about free speech and censorship to the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation in October last year, where he acknowledged his posts on social media are often “opinionated and provocative.” 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 21.4%Rhian Lubin: 1.7%The Independent: 2.9%Confirmation Bias21.4%This article: 0.0%Rhian Lubin: 1.4%The Independent: 0.7%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Rhian Lubin: 1.5%The Independent: 3.2%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Rhian Lubin: 0.6%The Independent: 0.9%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Rhian Lubin: 1.4%The Independent: 0.6%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 2.6%Rhian Lubin: 3.9%The Independent: 2.3%Overconfidence Bias2.6%This article: 0.0%Rhian Lubin: 8.9%The Independent: 8.2%Framing Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Rhian Lubin: 0.2%The Independent: 0.5%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 11.6%Rhian Lubin: 2.1%The Independent: 0.6%Status Quo Bias11.6%This article: 0.0%Rhian Lubin: 0.0%The Independent: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 11.6%Rhian Lubin: 4.9%The Independent: 2.4%Optimism Bias11.6%This article: 3.3%Rhian Lubin: 2.4%The Independent: 1.5%Pessimism Bias3.3%This article: 33.0%Rhian Lubin: 16.6%The Independent: 12.1%Negativity Bias33.0%This article: 0.0%Rhian Lubin: 3.4%The Independent: 2.5%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 13.0%Rhian Lubin: 1.6%The Independent: 1.2%Fundamental Attribution Error13.0%This article: 0.0%Rhian Lubin: 0.1%The Independent: 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Rhian Lubin: 1.2%The Independent: 1.6%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Rhian Lubin: 1.8%The Independent: 0.8%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Rhian Lubin: 1.8%The Independent: 2.2%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Rhian Lubin: 0.0%The Independent: 0.3%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Rhian Lubin: 0.0%The Independent: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 3.9%Rhian Lubin: 1.7%The Independent: 1.5%Recency Bias3.9%This article: 11.6%Rhian Lubin: 0.8%The Independent: 0.4%Primacy Effect11.6%This article: 0.0%Rhian Lubin: 0.0%The Independent: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 4.9%Rhian Lubin: 3.4%The Independent: 2.2%Ad Hominem4.9%This article: 0.0%Rhian Lubin: 3.3%The Independent: 0.4%Straw Man0.0%This article: 6.5%Rhian Lubin: 2.4%The Independent: 3.8%Appeal to Authority6.5%This article: 8.6%Rhian Lubin: 1.6%The Independent: 1.4%False Dilemma8.6%This article: 2.0%Rhian Lubin: 1.2%The Independent: 0.7%Slippery Slope2.0%This article: 0.0%Rhian Lubin: 0.3%The Independent: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 3.9%Rhian Lubin: 1.7%The Independent: 4.2%Hasty Generalization3.9%This article: 3.9%Rhian Lubin: 0.2%The Independent: 0.4%Red Herring3.9%This article: 0.0%Rhian Lubin: 0.1%The Independent: 0.6%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 4.5%Rhian Lubin: 8.6%The Independent: 6.4%Appeal to Emotion4.5%This article: 6.9%Rhian Lubin: 1.7%The Independent: 0.9%Begging the Question6.9%This article: 18.5%Rhian Lubin: 1.7%The Independent: 2.8%Post Hoc (False Cause)18.5%This article: 5.5%Rhian Lubin: 0.8%The Independent: 0.3%Tu Quoque5.5%This article: 2.6%Rhian Lubin: 0.1%The Independent: 0.7%Burden of Proof2.6%This article: 0.0%Rhian Lubin: 0.0%The Independent: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Rhian Lubin: 0.0%The Independent: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 8.6%Rhian Lubin: 2.1%The Independent: 2.2%Anecdotal8.6%This article: 0.0%Rhian Lubin: 0.0%The Independent: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 8.1%Rhian Lubin: 2.7%The Independent: 1.8%Ambiguity (Equivocation)8.1%This article: 0.0%Rhian Lubin: 0.0%The Independent: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Rhian Lubin: 0.3%The Independent: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Rhian Lubin: 0.0%The Independent: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Rhian Lubin: 0.0%The Independent: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Rhian Lubin: 0.0%The Independent: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 13.6%Rhian Lubin: 5.7%The Independent: 2.6%Unattributed Quote13.6%This article: 3.3%Rhian Lubin: 3.9%The Independent: 2.1%Quote-first Misdirection3.3%This article: 19.6%Rhian Lubin: 5.6%The Independent: 7.9%Biased Writer Voice19.6%This article: 11.8%Rhian Lubin: 2.6%The Independent: 1.3%Indoctrination11.8%This article: 0.0%Rhian Lubin: 2.7%The Independent: 2.0%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Rhian Lubin: 0.3%The Independent: 0.6%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Rhian Lubin: 0.7%The Independent: 0.4%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

509 words analyzed.

Speakers

4speakers63%attributed speech190writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 42 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 41 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 0.0% coverageSean Davis • 41 words • 100.0% coverageSean Davis • 2 words • 100.0% coverageSean Davis • 13 words • 0.0% coverageSean Davis • 13 words • 0.0% coverageSean Davis • 4 words • 0.0% coverageSean Davis • 25 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 100.0% coverageSean Davis • 9 words • 0.0% coverageSean Davis • 7 words • 0.0% coverageSean Davis • 10 words • 100.0% coverageSean Davis • 5 words • 100.0% coverageSean Davis • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageSean Davis • 35 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 100.0% coverageDavid French • 16 words • 0.0% coverageDavid French • 59 words • 0.0% coverageIsaac Saul • 28 words • 100.0% coverageIsaac Saul • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageJake Tapper • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 33 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

David French

100%flagged-word coverage
75 attributed words24% of attributed speech71% writer coverage
0%27.5%55.0%Biased Writer Voice-52.6 ptsWriter: 52.6%David French: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.