Posted on 12/20/2024 11:23:01 PM PST by Morgana
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton is suing an abortionist to stop her from illegally mailing dangerous abortion pills to people in Texas.
The top state law enforcement official has filed a lawsuit Dr. Margaret Daley Carpenter of Abortion Coalition for Telemedicine in New York for unlawfully mailing abortion drugs to a Texas resident. The dangerous drugs ended the life of an unborn child and caused the mother to hemorrhage and require treatment in the ER.
For practicing without a license and mailing abortion drugs, Paxton has asked the court to penalize the abortionist $100,000 for each violation of the law.
Paxton said in a press release:
“In Texas, we treasure the health and lives of mothers and babies, and this is why out-of-state doctors may not illegally and dangerously prescribe abortion-inducing drugs to Texas residents.”
A leading pro-life group celebrated the news.
SBA Pro-Life America Director of Legal Affairs Katie Daniel told LifeNews, “For the mail-order abortion industry that sells high-risk drugs without any in-person doctor visit, life is cheap and ‘DIY’ abortion highly profitable.”
Daniel continued: “Thanks to extreme blue-state politicians who shield them, abortionists in states like New York openly violate the protective laws of pro-life states, killing unborn children and sending women to the emergency room in dire condition – all while sitting comfortably thousands of miles away. We thank Attorney General Ken Paxton for leading the charge to hold out-of-state abortion businesses accountable for preying on Texas’ unborn children and their mothers. We hope his example will embolden other pro-life leaders and begin the undoing of the mail-order abortion drug racket.”
A Texas-based pro-life group also supported the lawsuit.
Texas Alliance for Life commended Paxton for taking decisive action against the New York-based abortionist who illegally sold abortion-inducing drugs to a Texas woman in violation of the Human Life Protection Act and multiple other state laws.
The Texas Human Life Protection Act protects unborn children from abortion, by surgical and chemical methods, except when medically necessary to prevent the loss of the mother’s life or health. That law empowers the Texas Attorney General to bring a lawsuit against violators for at least $100,000 per violation. Texas law further prohibits the distribution of abortion-inducing drugs through courier, delivery, or mail services and telemedicine prescriptions from out-of-state doctors who do not possess a full Texas medical license.
“This case underscores the importance of protecting the health and safety of women and unborn babies in Texas,” said Amy O’Donnell, Communications Director for Texas Alliance for Life. “When an out-of-state doctor flagrantly violates our laws and endangers women’s lives, accountability is critical. Texas’ pro-life laws exist to protect women and babies, and this lawsuit is a necessary step in defending those protections.”
Paxton’s lawsuit seeks to enjoin Dr. Carpenter from further violations of Texas law and to impose civil penalties of no less than $100,000.
“We stand with Attorney General Paxton in his efforts to hold violators of Texas’ pro-life laws accountable,” O’Donnell continued. “This is a stark reminder of the risks posed by illegally trafficking chemical abortion drugs and the importance of enforcing laws designed to safeguard women’s health and lives.”
Texas is not playing around when it comes to these pro life laws
[The top state law enforcement official has filed a lawsuit Dr. Margaret Daley Carpenter of Abortion Coalition for Telemedicine in New York for unlawfully mailing abortion drugs to a Texas resident]
Crossing state lines? (by) Using the Federal mail system?
Comstock laws
On March 3, 1873, Congress passed the new law, later known as the Comstock Act. The statute defined contraceptives as obscene and illicit, making it a federal offense to disseminate birth control through the mail or across state lines.
Anthony Comstock, the man behind this act chased Margaret Sanger to the gates of hell (or France). Marg ran out of the country to avoid arrest because of Comstock.
Still in effect?
Thank you, Texas.
Then have Texas business sell firearms to New York customers, especially to individuals who New York politicians won't allow to own them.
Law Enforcement in New York would have no standing against any of it - their own state government set precedent that laws in other states don't apply.
In 1971, the U.S. Congress removed the reference to contraceptives from the federal-level Comstock Act, but left much the rest of the Act stand as it had been written.
However if the state has barred the use of this drug then yes it’s still illegal and this law would be in effect.
Yup. He’s setting NY up for violating interstate laws.
Is it really Texas’ business in this case. The big problem with the feds saying you can’t was it was not Constitutional. By crashing Roe it put the decision back into the hands of the people...or did it? This is trading one big brother for another and if the person wishes to make the business in a state where it is legal, then Texas is not in that state. They are entering someone’s life again. So it hasn’t changed. Texas can only dictate the services they provide. Not other states. This isn’t freedom.
wy69
Is it really Texas’ business in this case. The big problem with the feds saying you can’t was it was not Constitutional. By crashing Roe it put the decision back into the hands of the people...or did it? This is trading one big brother for another and if the person wishes to make the business in a state where it is legal, then Texas is not in that state. They are entering someone’s life again. So it hasn’t changed. Texas can only dictate the services they provide. Not other states. This isn’t freedom.
wy69
Then these women may go to New York and take the baby killing pill there.
No problem. It’s legal in New York so take the baby killing pill in New York.
Why is this a problem for Texas you ask?
Well for starters they have said “no more baby killing in our state” That is the law.
Second the baby killing pill is dangerous, more so than even surgical abortion. It puts a lot of women in the ER. Texas would have to pay for these women and not New York. So I see Texas would prefer these women take the baby killing pill in New York and if they have to enter the ER it’s done in New York.
Texas ER doctors don’t want to do “clean up” for New York abortionist. Texas ER doctors have better things to do than d&c’s on women who had incomplete abortions from the baby killing pill.
Remember that situation in Georgia where women died from taking the baby killing pills? Texas does not want that either.
Texas is a safe haven for unborn babies.
Now have I explained this well enough? Do you need more info?
Well said.
Good
“Well for starters they have said “no more baby killing in our state” That is the law.”
And when will it become the state’s right to take children away from parents because they can? The states don’t have a right or privilege without determing the reasons or fact for the act to make such a broad and general finalization. And they know that.
“Texas would have to pay for these women and not New York.”
If a woman can afford the trip, the medication, and the responsibility, then she can afford the ER cost. So even if she does get sick, Texas most likely will pay nothing.
“Texas ER doctors don’t want to do “clean up” for New York abortionist. Texas ER doctors have better things to do than d&c’s on women who had incomplete abortions from the baby killing pill.”
So, naturally, of the 3,000 “self-managed” abortions in 2018 and 2019, 96.4 percent reported successfully ending their pregnancy without follow-up surgery”
A total of 26 in two years from all over the nation.
https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/cmte_testimony/2023/hgo/1x39oXfHOzLw24hR-mN0BG0Kn2z4tOJE5.pdf
“Do you need more info?”
Information? You didn’t provide any. All you said was your personal opinion because you don’t like abortion possibilities and are clinging to a Texas law that doesn’t say what you seem to think.
Sec. 170A.002. PROHIBITED ABORTION; EXCEPTIONS.
(a) A person may not knowingly perform, induce, or attempt an abortion.
(b) The prohibition under Subsection (a) does not apply if:
(1) the person performing, inducing, or attempting the abortion is a licensed physician;
(2) in the exercise of reasonable medical judgment, the pregnant female on whom the abortion is performed, induced, or attempted has a life-threatening physical condition aggravated by, caused by, or arising from a pregnancy that places the female at risk of death or poses a serious risk of substantial impairment of a major bodily function unless the abortion is performed or induced; and
(3) the person performs, induces, or attempts the abortion in a manner that, in the exercise of reasonable medical judgment, provides the best opportunity for the unborn child to survive unless, in the reasonable medical judgment, that manner would create:
(A) a greater risk of the pregnant female’s death; or
(B) a serious risk of substantial impairment of a major bodily function of the pregnant female.
(c) A physician may not take an action authorized under Subsection (b) if, at the time the abortion was performed, induced, or attempted, the person knew the risk of death or a substantial impairment of a major bodily function described by Subsection (b)(2) arose from a claim or diagnosis that the female would engage in conduct that might result in the female’s death or in substantial impairment of a major bodily function.
(d) Medical treatment provided to the pregnant female by a licensed physician that results in the accidental or unintentional injury or death of the unborn child does not constitute a violation of this section.
Your all encompassing law is not what you think it is with a ban on all abortions.
https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs/HS/htm/HS.170a.htm
So as you can see, the law is not an automatic no, it has circumstances and abortion is still legal in Texas. It just has to be done on paper by Texas doctors. I wasn’t aware the AMA was so picky as to who is a qualified doctor from what state. They need to put out a list so as niot to confuse patients.
wy69
“Well for starters they have said “no more baby killing in our state” That is the law.”
And when will it become the state’s right to take children away from parents because they can? The states don’t have a right or privilege without determing the reasons or fact for the act to make such a broad and general finalization. And they know that.
“Texas would have to pay for these women and not New York.”
If a woman can afford the trip, the medication, and the responsibility, then she can afford the ER cost. So even if she does get sick, Texas most likely will pay nothing.
“Texas ER doctors don’t want to do “clean up” for New York abortionist. Texas ER doctors have better things to do than d&c’s on women who had incomplete abortions from the baby killing pill.”
So, naturally, of the 3,000 “self-managed” abortions in 2018 and 2019, 96.4 percent reported successfully ending their pregnancy without follow-up surgery”
A total of 26 in two years from all over the nation.
https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/cmte_testimony/2023/hgo/1x39oXfHOzLw24hR-mN0BG0Kn2z4tOJE5.pdf
“Do you need more info?”
Information? You didn’t provide any. All you said was your personal opinion because you don’t like abortion possibilities and are clinging to a Texas law that doesn’t say what you seem to think.
Sec. 170A.002. PROHIBITED ABORTION; EXCEPTIONS.
(a) A person may not knowingly perform, induce, or attempt an abortion.
(b) The prohibition under Subsection (a) does not apply if:
(1) the person performing, inducing, or attempting the abortion is a licensed physician;
(2) in the exercise of reasonable medical judgment, the pregnant female on whom the abortion is performed, induced, or attempted has a life-threatening physical condition aggravated by, caused by, or arising from a pregnancy that places the female at risk of death or poses a serious risk of substantial impairment of a major bodily function unless the abortion is performed or induced; and
(3) the person performs, induces, or attempts the abortion in a manner that, in the exercise of reasonable medical judgment, provides the best opportunity for the unborn child to survive unless, in the reasonable medical judgment, that manner would create:
(A) a greater risk of the pregnant female’s death; or
(B) a serious risk of substantial impairment of a major bodily function of the pregnant female.
(c) A physician may not take an action authorized under Subsection (b) if, at the time the abortion was performed, induced, or attempted, the person knew the risk of death or a substantial impairment of a major bodily function described by Subsection (b)(2) arose from a claim or diagnosis that the female would engage in conduct that might result in the female’s death or in substantial impairment of a major bodily function.
(d) Medical treatment provided to the pregnant female by a licensed physician that results in the accidental or unintentional injury or death of the unborn child does not constitute a violation of this section.
Your all encompassing law is not what you think it is with a ban on all abortions.
https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs/HS/htm/HS.170a.htm
So as you can see, the law is not an automatic no, it has circumstances and abortion is still legal in Texas. It just has to be done on paper by Texas doctors. I wasn’t aware the AMA was so picky as to who is a qualified doctor from what state. They need to put out a list so as niot to confuse patients.
wy69
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.