Her initial question even stated that there was no restriction BASED ON THE TERM of the pregnancy, that is, how many weeks into the pregnancy the woman is.
Then she asks if it is true that there are NO LIMITS on abortion in his state.
He should ALWAYS reply, no that is not true. Directly. Not after "Kamala and I have been very clear, blah blah." (I LOVE this guy and I get tired of hearing that in every reply.)
Of course the interviewer will jump all over him but he can easily say that it is of course limited by the conscience of the doctor. Hopefully he can say more. Presumably it is also limited by medical board and licensure rules. I hope - but don't know if it is true - that there is a rule that if the fetus is viable and in the judgment of the medical team, the fetus can be delivered without excessive risk to the mother, then it MUST be delivered vs. opting for some approach that would kill this viable fetus. (This is the confusion for people on the anti side of the abortion debate - they seem to think that viable fetuses are being routinely killed. I do not believe this is true, and we should make that clear).
If I were a father to-be and the doctor killed my viable baby rather than deliver it alive, for no good reason - then I would probably be a bit pissed and probably sue that doctor. THAT is a "limit" on doctors just willy-nilly killing viable fetuses for no good reason.
I am sure there are more nuances to the legal details but this question will be asked over and over (and already has been). He needs a firm, direct, truthful, and compelling and SUCCINCT reply.
Edit to add (speaking of failure to be succinct, ha ha): the point is that the limit on abortion is NOT based on the term of the pregnancy, but that does NOT mean that there are NO Limits on abortion. Just that it is not based on gestational age.
= new reply since forum marked as read