Er … what? CNN caught up briefly with Nikki Haley to get her reaction to a Texas supreme court ruling enforcing the abortion ban for a woman at the 20th week of a pregnancy.

Haley fronts this by claiming not to understand the context of the controversy, but then blasts the Texas courts for involvement in it. It should be left to “the people,” says Haley:

PHIL MATTINGLY: … We’ve seen it in state referendums. We’ve seen it in midterms. We’ve seen it in off-year elections just a couple of weeks ago. It’s striking to watch Republicans try and grapple with this, including Nikki Haley, who’s kind of been on a surge inside the Republican primary. She was asked before this decision came down about this specific issue. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

NIKKI HALEY (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I don’t know the details of the case that you’re referring to. What I can tell you is I don’t think that this issue needed to be in the hands of unelected justices. It needs to be in the hands of the people, because it’s a personal issue for every woman and man.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ERROL LOUIS, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Wow. That’s the very dilemma that many, many Republicans are going to find themselves in. You know, Texas is a step away from needing to, if it goes from 20 cases to 200 cases, setting up, in effect, fertility courts where all of these questions will be adjudicated. You know, case after case after case.

Where to start, where to start, where to start … In the first place, a candidate for office who feels compelled to say, “I don’t know the details of the case that you’re referring to,” should only add to that declaration, “so I can’t give you an answer at this time.” This demonstrates the wisdom of the proverb that advises that it is better to keep one’s mouth shut and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt.

Because in this case, abortion was finally in the hands of the people of Texas after Dobbs, and their elected representatives acted on their wishes. The 2021 law passed by the state legislature and signed by Greg Abbott three months after Dobbs prohibits abortions after a heartbeat is detected, unless the pregnancy acutely threatens the mother’s life. The courts followed the 2021 ‘heartbeat’ abortion restriction in their rulings, and the courts only got involved because the woman demanded that the state make an exception to it at 20 weeks without a demonstrably acute threat to her life.

What exactly would Haley have the courts do — not enforce the law, which is the will of “the people” expressed through their legislature and governor? That is the antithesis of Haley’s populist framing, no?

It also counters her own expressed position during the debates that pro-life legislation should only proceed to the extent that it can pass and be enacted into law. A month ago, Haley declared that she would “welcome that”:

After years of hearing Republican candidates recite virtually the same talking points about abortion on the campaign trail and at debates, something strange happened Wednesday night: Nikki Haley said something different.

“And what I’ll tell you is, as much as I’m pro-life, I don’t judge anyone for being pro-choice, and I don’t want them to judge me for being pro-life,” she said, following up a more standard abortion-is-evil answer from Ron DeSantis. “So, when we’re looking at this, there are some states that are going more on the pro-life side. I welcome that. There’s some states that are going more on the pro-choice side. I wish that wasn’t the case, but the people decided.”

That’s exactly what happened in Texas, as well as in a few other states. The people decided! Haley welcomed that! So does Haley think these laws should be passed, but that courts shouldn’t enforce them when women want abortions because the issue will come before “unelected judges” at some point in the enforcement of these laws?

Oh, and by the way — Texas Supreme Court judges are elected and deal with civil matters. So are the jurists on the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, which handles the highest level of criminal appeals, obviously. Haley missed that too, in her haste to be all things to all people on abortion.

In this particular case, the elected judges upheld the will of the people of Texas and denied a 20-week abortion to the plaintiff. The woman then went to a state that would perform the abortion and had one done, an option she had from the start. The judges followed the law set by the people, the woman had the abortion in a state where the people allow them.

That’s how federalism is supposed to work, which Haley keeps insisting she supports, except apparently when pressed on the specifics by mainstream media reporters. At that point, Haley apparently prefers to just assume the worst of the pro-life effort and scold everyone on the outcomes. In that, Haley sounds very much like Democrats on the issue, or just too foolish to keep herself from being manipulated into that position.