A lawsuit of man from Texas against a doctor from California, whom he accused of sending abortion tablets to his partner, is the first test of the Act on the protection of reproductive health in the Federal Court. (Photo Tiago Fernandez/Getty Images)
In the first federal lawsuit questioning the provisions regarding the shield, a man from Texas sued a doctor from California about allegedly sending abortion tablets to his partner.
This is the latest test of the provisions on the shield that protects doctors who prescribe abortion drugs to patients in the states in which this is prohibited. Texas prohibits all abortion with narrow exceptions to save the patient’s life, while California protects abortion to fetal life, and later to save the patient’s health or life.
Skye Perryman, General Director and President of Democracy Forward, a leftist legal group involved in court disputes mifepriston AND Emergency abortion careStates newsroom said that the claim emphasizes the long -term goal of opponents in the right: limiting access to medical abortion, which increased despite the decision of the US Supreme Court to overthrow REE against Wade three years ago.
“It shows that the anti-abortion movement and administration allies do not stop at Dobbs,” said Perryman. “This is the escalation of their strategy.”
Jonathan Mitchell, a former lawyer of Texas, filed a lawsuit on July 20 at the American District Court in the Southern Texas Division, Galveston Division, on behalf of Jerry Rodriguez.
Dr. Rémy Coeytaux “intentionally and consciously sent sending drugs causing abortion to Texas,” says the complaint and is accused of “help in illegal independent abortion,” which led to the death of the fetus.
Neither Mitchell nor Coeytaux will comment on the record on Wednesday.
Rodriguez met with a married woman who became pregnant twice last year and whose husband ordered abortion drugs from California, according to the complaint. She became pregnant again in May, says a lawsuit, and Rodriguez is afraid that her husband will drill pressure on her abortion pills.
Rodriguez is looking for over USD 75,000 compensation and order to prohibit the doctor to prescribe abortion drugs to Texan.
Several provisions are cited in the complaint, including the Act on Abortion in Texas, the unlawful claim of death and Law of the 19th century That opponents with abortion rights argue can be used to limit the shipment of abortion pills.
“This is a typical approach that we see from anti-abortion movement, especially Jonathan Mitchell, which involves throwing all spaghetti to the wall and see what sticks,” said Perryman.
Mitchell is often associated with the creation of a six -week prohibition of abortion “in the style of prizes”, which came into force in Texas in September 2021. He dropped the claim in October, Texas Tribune Reported.
Recipes in California, where a doctor lives, offer broad protection to suppliers and patients. Gavin Gavin Governor and Prosecutor General Rob Bonta, both Democrats, have I swear Down defend Access to abortion in California.
Condition Shield rightIn force since January 2024, it prohibits officials to provide the accused person or accused of a crime related to providing reproductive health care before the state of law enforcement officers.
But California’s protection for abortion suppliers has not been tested. New York law was the goal of prosecutors in the States prohibiting abortion.
In December, the Prosecutor General of Texas Ken Paxton submitted A Civil law Against the New York provider of abortion for alleged rewriting pills to a woman of Collin. In January, the District Prosecutor in Louisiana submitted Penalties against the same doctor for allegedly sending abortion tablets to a teenager.
New York officials undertook to protect himself doctor. A clerk of the unit in New York rejected the next Paxton’s request to submit a judgment in the case this month.
“Our response to their unfounded claim is clear: there is no question in hell,” said Democratic Governor Kathy Hochul on July 14 statement. “New York will not be intimidated. And I will never withdraw from this fight.”
Eight states, including California and New York, clearly allows suppliers to rewrite Abortion drugs For patients in conditions where pregnancy is forbidden.
Rodriguez’s lawsuit is the first to question the law of the shield in the federal court. Dr. Angel Foster, co -founder of the abortion access project in Massachusetts, said that suppliers of tearing abortion treating patients in the United States with prohibitions “they always imagined that there were legal challenges for the work we do.”
But Foster said her team was undetermined. “You can’t put this genie back into the bottle,” she said. “Pills for medical abortion remain here, regardless of what is happening to these tablets and how they are regulated in the United States.”
Sophical abortions constitute 1 out of 4 of all pregnancy endings in the US report Released last month. The report showed that almost 50% of all teeth abortions provided in 2024 were supervised by doctors or other qualified healthcare professionals living in the state of the shield.
In addition to the hard regulations regarding the shield, the Rodriguez argument partly bends about the personality of the fetus – the theory that fetuses and embryos should have rights similar to people – looking for monetary damage to the interruption of the fetus.
Rodriguez wants to keep the producers and distributors of abortion pills, which were applied to responsibility “for the unlawful death of the unborn child of Mr. Rodriguez”, states the lawsuit, “and will be added as defendants after identification.”
He also accuses the doctor of violation Comstock Act from 1873who banned the shipment of everything that he considered “indecent, dirty, lustful” or morally unclean, including abortion and materials related to abortion. The statute was weakened in the mid -twentieth century, but Congress never repealed it.
Mitchell and Anti -Antivor Mark Lee Dickson led fragmentary efforts to resurrect Comstock in cities and poviats Texas and New Mexico with proposed regulations against abortion based on law.
In 2022, the Office of Legal Advisory of the US Department of Justice under the former democratic president Joe Biden issued a memorandum opinion This, having said the American postal service can send abortion drugs because broadcasters do not know that they can be used illegally. Mifepriston and mizoprostol are also used Treat miscarriagesAnd mizoprostol is used for various reproductive diseases, such as hemorrhage after delivery.
The administration of the Republican President Donald Trump did not say publicly whether Comstock is feasible. In January letterAmericans united for life and other anti -abortion groups called officials to dismiss the note.
All efforts to repeal Comstock would be unlikely, taking into account the control of GOP on the capitol. But the democratic senator Minnesota Tina Smith restored in March the bill on withdrawal of a part of law that could limit access to abortion. . legislation He did not go beyond the commission.
“These extreme Republicans and dust regulations from 1873 should not direct the woman’s right to make their own healthcare decisions,” senator John Hickenlooper, a democrat of Colorado, who co -consists of Smith’s measure, – he said during a conversation with reproductive health workers at the beginning of this month.
The Republican Senator Missouri Josh Hawley was one of the most thunderous opponents of the Congress abortion pills. Hawley introduced measure In May, this would require federal health officials to restore older regulations regarding mifepriston, which would effectively stop suppliers from sending abortion drugs to patients.
“I am introducing the act on restoring security for dangerous abortion drugs after a bomb examination revealed the truth about Mifepristone: it is dangerous,” said Hawley Wa statement.
The article he mentioned was checked and issued by a Think Rainbow Tank, States Newsroom Reported. But the Secretary of Health and Human Services in the USA Robert F. Kennedy Jr. He ordered a review of Mifepriston, despite his decades evidence indicating the safety of the drug.
