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
Win for Freedom: First Judicial Order Against HHS Mandate
From Alliance Defending Freedom: A federal court issued an order that halts enforcement of the Obama administration’s abortion pill mandate against a Colorado family-owned business while an Alliance Defending Freedom lawsuit challenging the mandate continues in court....
US Funds UN Study Calling for Legalizing Prostitution
From CNSNews.com: A report issued by the United Nations-backed Global Commission on HIV and the Law; recommends that nations around the world get rid of “punitive” laws against prostitution – or what it calls “consensual sex work” -- and decriminalize the voluntary...
Penn State Falls Into a Pit
by Michael Geer, President The release of the Freeh Report today regarding the Penn State- Jerry Sandusky child sex abuse scandal brought to mind words spoken at a Pennsylvania House Appropriations Committee hearing more than a decade ago. Those words, spoken by then-...
Don’t be Fooled! Federal Healthcare Law Upheld Today, Still Forces Americans to Pay for Abortions
by Tom Shaheen, Vice President, Pennsylvania Family Institute This is another INSIDE look at what the Supreme Court upheld today. It's STILL bad law! Make no mistake, despite the promises and empty claims of President Obama and defenders of the controversial...
Pennsylvania Family Institute Denounces Today’s ObamaCare Ruling
(Harrisburg, PA - June 28) - The Pennsylvania Family Institute finds today’s decision by the U.S. Supreme Court upholding the controversial federal healthcare law alarming and deeply wrong. The law is a threat to personal liberty, religious freedom and family...
Common Sense Comes to Pennsylvania
Never Again Can We Allow Another Gosnell Scandal to Take Place (Harrisburg,PA) This week, a long-overdue law, Act 122, takes effect to more properly and effectively regulate surgical abortion facilities. The act is aimed at ensuring that Pennsylvania never again...
Claiming the Right to Unhappiness: Aldous Huxley’s Warning from the Future
By Chris Wetzel, PFI Intern Like most prophets, Aldous Huxley is without honor in his own country. Eighty years ago, Huxley’s dystopian novel Brave New World warned of a future Britain where children are manufactured to precise specifications with fertilization done...
New Mexico Says “No” To Religious Liberty
By Eleanor Linton, PFI Intern With New Mexico’s Court of Appeals ruling on Tuesday June 5, religious liberties protected by the First Amendment took a severe blow. The Court upheld an opinion from the New Mexico Human Rights Commission that a photography company could...
