The Abortion Prosecution No One Is Talking About
A test case in Texas shows the next frontier for "abortion abolitionists": homicide charges
By Dana Sussman
A Texas man is facing a capital murder charge for allegedly slipping abortion medication in his girlfriend's drink, causing her to lose her pregnancy at six weeks. This is a heinous act by any measure, but what it shouldn't be is a capital offense.
Texas defines a “person” to include an embryo or fetus throughout its criminal code, and the death penalty is available in murder charges in specific situations—including when a victim is under 10 years old. In this case, by Texas’ definition, the victim is a 6-week-old embryo. While we don’t know all the facts of the case, the state very clearly doesn’t count as a victim the woman who was given medication without her knowledge or consent, had her bodily autonomy violated, and suffered a physical injury in addition to a deep emotional trauma. She’s just a footnote in this case. Texas is also among 38 states that have feticide laws, a unique homicide charge for “killing a fetus” through an injury to a pregnant woman. Notably, that is not the charge here. Similarly, the prosecutor is not bringing charges of assault against the woman for the harm done to her body.
As far as we know, this is the first case involving capital murder charges for an unconsented-to abortion, and pursuing it this way is an entirely strategic move. No one will rush to defend this man's actions, and these charges are not provoking national outrage. But the stakes here could not be higher. Make no mistake, women are next.
Eleven states have laws that redefine “person” to include embryos and fetuses; five more states, Texas included, do the same in their criminal codes. As many have written, giving full legal rights and protections to fertilized eggs, embryos, and fetuses is the anti-abortion movement's highest goal. And this case is a clear and present step in the climb to that zenith.
During this legislative session, lawmakers in at least 15 states introduced bills that would allow prosecutors to bring charges of homicide if a pregnant person has an abortion. In 12 of those states, this would be a capital offense. None of the bills passed. And while prosecutors across the country have long used other laws to prosecute abortions and pregnancy outcomes, these bills and the Texas prosecution serve to push the boundary of what was once unthinkable: charging women with homicide for having an abortion.
If this man’s actions warrant a capital murder charge, it lays a very dangerous foundation. So-called “abortion abolitionists”—the people behind these dangerous bills—believe deeply that abortion is murder, and the women who get them are murderers. We cannot let the horrific facts of this case be manipulated to further their dangerous agenda.
Dana Sussman is the senior vice president of Pregnancy Justice, a legal defense and advocacy nonprofit that advances and defends the rights of pregnant people, no matter if they give birth, experience a pregnancy loss, or have an abortion.
Welcome to Texas, where:
1. women love to be third class citizens, behind white males and embryos/zygotes
2. many citizens are regularly killed by floods, which are known to happen on a regular basis and no early warning system is even discussed, much less put in action
3. the same goes for tornadoes, hurricanes, all other natural disasters
3. where people regularly freeze to death in winter, because they can't afford food and heat, or the entire system breaks down, every winter
4. where people keep voting for the same damn criminals (Paxton) and cruel idiots like Abbott, Cruz, Cornyn, Crenshaw, Jackson, Roy, etc. (just to name a few of the many brain- and spineless monsters who keep collecting paychecks without doing anything for it)
I feel sorry for all the blue voters in Texas. You are in as bad a shape as we are in Arkansas.
That was a crime against the pregnant woman and her 6 week old embryo. The only individual that is defined as a person in this case is the embryo. According to Texas’ f***** up laws had that man killed both of those individuals then under their laws they should not be allowed to charge but only one count of murder and that would only be to the embryo. Why? Because the state redefined the definition of person by including zygotes, embryos and fetuses and the exclusion of the other body that sequesters the embryonic body. The prosecution should go after not only the defendant but they should also put the sorry state of Texas on trial for redefining person/personhood and the de-person-ization of one victim at the expense of the other victim.
I did not use the term dehumanization that is so often used in this context. Human refers to a species. You cannot make someone who is a human unhuman or not a human but you can certainly deprive someone from having personal rights as in personhood rights which is what Donald Trump does to immigrants he despises.