Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

National Right to Life Committee Proposes Legislation to Protect the Unborn Post-Roe
National Right to Life Committee ^ | Mune 15, 2022 | MLRC

Posted on 06/24/2022 2:58:12 PM PDT by balch3

WASHINGTON — In a memo distributed today by James Bopp, Jr. of The Bopp Law Firm, PC, general counsel for the National Right to Life Committee, NRLC proposed a Post-Roe Model Abortion law for the states to adopt, in the event that, in the upcoming decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization or some future decision, the United States Supreme Court substantially expands states’ authority to legislate regarding abortion by overturning Roe v. Wade.

“For decades, National Right to Life and its state affiliates have led the effort to pass life-affirming laws at the state level that protect unborn children and their mothers – efforts that have drastically reduced the number of abortions and brought us to this moment in our nation’s history,” said Carol Tobias, president of National Right to Life. “With this model law, we a laying out a roadmap for the right-to-life movement so that, in a post-Roe society, we can protect many mothers and their children from the tragedy of abortion.”

The model law recommended by the National Right to Life Committee would first protect the lives of unborn children from abortion except when necessary to prevent the death of the mother, which has been the accepted policy of the pro-life movement since 1973 and for many years before. In addition, the model law ensures that no criminal or civil penalty will be imposed on a pregnant woman.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: abortionscotus; roe
Synopsis: Performing an abortion should be a felony.

Abetting an abortion should be a felony. This includes advising, giving information or referrals. Organizations engaging in such actions should be subject to RICO penalties.

Prohibition on trafficking in abortifacients.

Prohibition on transporting minors for abortions.

Attorneys general given prosecutorial authority in cases where local DA's refuse to prosecute.

1 posted on 06/24/2022 2:58:12 PM PDT by balch3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: balch3
I don't have a problem with this as long as they're working within the states that allow abortion.

If they start demanding a federal ban or restriction on abortion, it's going to be a non-starter.

We don't have the numbers in D.C. to enact a federal ban or a constitutional amendment.

This organization needs to just celebrate this victory for now. Getting way ahead if they want to do this nationally.

2 posted on 06/24/2022 3:02:10 PM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

VP Pence disagrees. I know he failed us on Jan 6, but he’s been consistently and unequivocally prolife. He believes in a national ban https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/pence-we-must-not-rest-until-abortion-is-outlawed-in-every-state/ar-AAYPW2q


3 posted on 06/24/2022 3:09:53 PM PDT by balch3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: balch3

Protecting Life is a national interest and banning abortion should occur on a national level and along with that federal prosecution for those who perform, obtain, have, arrange, or in any way conspire with a woman to have an abortion.


4 posted on 06/24/2022 3:15:27 PM PDT by Round Earther
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Round Earther

It is a state issue. The Constitution has never delegated power to the Federal Government to control abortions, in spite of the Courts ruling otherwise in Roe vs Wade.

It is a state issue, and I’m confident that 1/2 of the nation will outlaw abortions. (probably with a few exceptions)


5 posted on 06/24/2022 6:40:24 PM PDT by Texas Fossil ((Texas is not where you were born, but a Free State of Heart, Mind & Attitude!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Round Earther

If pro-life Constitutional amendments were made would they be:

1. specifically targeted to prohibit the orchestration of all infanticide including abortion and assisted dying

2. Broader scope, eg to protect the rights of the unborn AND born child against harms inspired or motivated by parental / communal / social indoctrination.

Just curious as to how a well crafted constitutional amendment might be used, say, to also reinforce the protective characteristic of biological sex, and end the transgender nonsense between birth and puberty.

I think if done carelessly a constitutional amendment could have unintended side effects.

For example, the practice of totally unnecessary (even where it’s performed for religious / cultural reasons) male AND female circumcisions could be impacted. Or the right of a parent to refuse lifesaving surgery for their newborn because of their own religious beliefs.

We Brits have had a bit of a problem for decades over what is and is not “reasonable chastisement” for a child. Bare bottom spanking, caning and whipping are generally regarded as pedo fetishes of the parent/teacher not as legitimate punishment of a child.

And so on.


6 posted on 06/24/2022 11:28:44 PM PDT by MalPearce
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson