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
Charlotte Lozier Institute’s Analysis on Shield Laws
Abortion pills are now being shipped to all 50 states through little-known “shield laws” in blue states, but these legal protections have yet to be tested in court.

Related Articles
A Letter to the National Board of Boy Scouts of America
Never in my life have I felt as vulnerable or bewildered as I have following the recent statement by the Boy Scouts of America regarding its possible shift in national membership policies. My name is Kenneth J. Hager, and Scouting has always been my life. I am an...
March for Life 40=55M
by Tom Shaheen This year's March for Life theme is 40=55M. 40 years of abortion-on-demand in these United States have brought us 55 million babies aborted since the infamous Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision overturning state abortion laws. Hundreds of thousands will...
Forty Years in the Land of Roe
by Brandon McGinley Roe v. Wade is an historic stain on the United States of America. Unimaginable evil has been perpetrated under this single judicial decision, which has guaranteed to our nation one of the most "liberal"--to the extent that that word can be used to...
Hundreds of Thousands of Frenchmen Protest Same-Sex ‘Marriage’
Good news, from France! From Bloomberg.com: Protests against French President Francois Hollande’s proposal to allow same-sex marriage drew hundreds of thousands of people into the streets in Paris. Read more...
Think Planned Parenthood is “good” enough for taxyaper funding? Think again!
by Tom Shaheen, Pennsylvania Family Institute Yesterday, Planned Parenthood released its 2011-2012 annual report. Here are just three stats from that report, as analyzed by our friends at SBA-list.org Still think that Planned Parenthood is a "health" organization or...
How should we respond to the last 40 years?
"For you formed my inward parts; you covered me in my mother's womb. I will praise You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made." ~ Psalm 139:13-14a A sad truth of our culture is that one in five pregnant women will end their baby's life with an abortion. 40...
Schools Already Experience (Un)intended Consequences of Redefining Marriage
by Tom Shaheen, Vice President for Policy Our team at the Pennsylvania Family Institute/Council and Pro-marriage advocates around the country - have been warning our state lawmakers and you, our state's churches and families, about the need to protect the legal...
Pennsylvania Resolutions
With the New Year upon us, lots of folks, including me, are drafting up New Years resolutions, hoping to institute some change in our lives to improve ourselves – or live more God glorifying lives, or simply shed a few pounds or add some body tone and muscle. If you...