Issue
Abortionist Shield Laws
Key Points:
-
Abortionist shield laws make it harder to bring doctors who harm women during abortions to justice.
-
These laws would stop an abortionist from being sued or subpoenaed for malpractice.
-
They make it harder to bring relief to victims and their families.
-
Abortionist shield laws are also categorically unconstitutional.
Abortionist shield laws, like House Bills 1786 and 1788, are intended to protect abortionists at all costs, at the expense of women and their families. By carving out exceptions to interstate cooperation laws, these bills create a safe haven in Pennsylvania for abortionists and all related “service providers” who facilitate abortions for women and children outside of Pennsylvania. These bills would shield abortionists from liability for the harms they cause to women, even where that harm involves criminal or negligent actions.
These bills would stop Pennsylvania from cooperating with out-of-state criminal prosecutions and civil lawsuits that seek to hold a law-breaking abortionist accountable for their actions and the harm that they have caused. HB 1786 would even stop someone from being sued or subpoenaed for malpractice when performing an abortion or providing medical care, such as hysterectomies, for pregnancy-related reasons.
This includes abortionists who send women chemical abortion pills, which can be especially dangerous when taken later in pregnancy and where the abortionist negligently fails to verify gestational age. Complications for chemical abortions are exponentially rising and risks can include internal bleeding and even death.
House Bill 1785 creates a new section to Pennsylvania’s law on medical liability, which has a stated purpose of “providing for patient safety.” Proposed section 741.1 carves out a special exception prohibiting “adverse actions against legal reproductive health care” for a provider who uses chemical abortion “to terminate a pregnancy to an out-of-state patient by means of telemedicine.” By creating this exception to “patient safety,” it is clear that this new legal protection for the abortionist, even a negligent abortionist who causes great harm, is provided without regard to the risk and detriment to the patient.
Abortionist shield laws would stop abortionists from facing accountability and the families of victims from receiving justice.
This is shocking considering Pennsylvania’s experience with the gruesome practices of Kermit Gosnell and his Philadelphia “House of Horrors” – or the infamous Dr. Steven Brigham who was responsible for consistently harming women through botched abortions while practicing in various states, including a stint in Pennsylvania.
The abortion industry knew about Kermit Gosnell and chose to do nothing. The abortion industry is about protecting abortion – their big moneymaker – not women. Their support of these bills just shows their continued support for abortion – no matter what.
Additionally, this type of legislation is categorically unconstitutional. The United States Constitution’s Full Faith and Credit clause, Article 4, section 1, reads as follows: “Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceeding of every other State. . .” This constitutional provision has, from the founding of our country, ensured that courts of each state will honor the court orders and judgments from another state. The proposed abortion shield laws not only deny that interstate cooperation, but they provide new legal tools and protections that will be used proactively to prevent other states from enforcing their laws. Any law that prohibits another state from enforcing its own laws blatantly violates the Full Faith and Credit clause.
HB 1786 carves out a special exception to Pennsylvania’s Uniform Criminal Extradition Act to protect abortionists from arrest. This special exception amends section 9123 of the Act to prohibit the extradition of any person charged in another state “with treason, felony or other crime, who has fled from justice and is found in this Commonwealth” when that person is charged with “a criminal offense of another state involving the provision or delivery of reproductive health care services that would be lawful under the laws of this Commonwealth.” (emphasis added). No matter what the crime is, if it can be characterized as “involving reproductive services” that would be lawful in Pennsylvania, the offender who flees to or stays in Pennsylvania is shielded from extradition to face justice in another state.
RELATED RESOURCES

Related Articles
Missed Opportunity to Hold Pitt Accountable for Experiments with Aborted Babies
Identifying the Next Steps in Stopping Pitt’s Horrific Fetal Experimentation The PA General Assembly has approved state taxpayer funding to the University of Pittsburgh in the annual state budget, sadly without any conditions or limitations on the university’s...
Victory for Needy Children, Religious Freedom: Response to Fulton v. Philadelphia SCOTUS Decision
(Harrisburg, PA) The following statement may be attributed to Randall Wenger, Chief Counsel for the Independence Law Center, which filed an amicus brief in the Fulton v. City of Philadelphia case decided by the United States Supreme Court today: We’re pleased with the...
Compassionate ‘Unborn Child Dignity Act’ Overcomes Lies By Abortion Lobby, Passes PA House
Opponents continue to spread misinformation, showing extreme pro-abortion bias that is out of touch with basic human decency. The PA House of Representatives, despite the swarm of misinformation spread by extreme pro-abortion politicians that captured national...
Down syndrome is a life meant to be lived: PA House passes Down Syndrome Protection Act
Bipartisan vote puts protecting unborn people with Down syndrome over extreme pro-abortion views of politicians like Gov. Tom Wolf. A bipartisan majority of PA State Representatives voted to affirm and support people living with Down syndrome by passing the Down...
Frankel, Arkoosh, Pro-Abortion Lobby Called Out for Spreading Lies About Bipartisan ‘Unborn Child Dignity Act’
Snopes fact-checker calls out false claims; House Bill 118 would not require a death certificate or place any fines on women who have a miscarriage. Members of Pennsylvania’s pro-abortion lobby, State Representative Dan Frankel (D-Allegheny), U.S. Senate candidate Val...
Three Pro-Life Bills Advance in Pennsylvania, Including First-Ever Vote on Heartbeat Bill
Heartbeat Bill, Unborn Child Dignity Act, Down Syndrome Protection Act all receive passing votes out of the House Health Committee. (HARRISBURG - May 25, 2021) Today, efforts to update Pennsylvania’s abortion law made a significant first-step forward as the PA House...
Three Pro-Life Bills Expected to Be Voted on Tuesday in House Health Committee
(HARRISBURG, PA) - The House Health Committee is scheduled to vote tomorrow, Tuesday, May 25th, on three important pro-life bills, the Unborn Child Dignity Act (HB 118), the Heartbeat Bill (HB 904), and the Down Syndrome Protection Act (HB 1500). Take Action:...
Three Takeaways from Important Hearing on Abortion with David Daleiden and University of Pittsburgh
By: Dan Bartkowiak This week, the PA House Health Committee held a fourth hearing on abortion, this time centered on fetal experimentation. There were four testifiers: investigative journalist David Daleiden; a former abortionist; an ethics professor from Stanford;...