§2 Finding: The state never repealed the abortion statutes pre-dating Roe v. Wade, 410 US 113 (1973)
§3 Amendments to Ch. 171 of Health and Safe Code, adding subch. H, regarding detection of fetal heartbeat
2/
§3 (cont) H&S Code, Ch. 171
- §171.201 Defs (1) “Fetal heartbeat” - cardiac activity, steady/repetitive rhythmic contraction of fetal heart w/i gest sac (2) “Gestational age” - time from 1st day of woman’s last period
3/
§3 cont
(3) “Gestational sac” - struct comprising extraembryonic membrance enveloping unborn child (typ visible 4th wk via U/S) (4) “Physician” - MD or DO lic to perform med in state
4/
§3 cont
(5) “Pregnancy” - human female repro condition
- (A) from fertilization
- (B) carrying developing human offspring
- (C) calc’d from 1st dy last period (6) “Standard medical practice” - deg of skill/care/diligence that OB of ord judg/learning/skill would employ
5/
§3 cont
(7) “Unborn child” human fetis/embryo from fert to birth
- §171.203 Determination of fetal heartbeat
(a) use standard med practice
(b) must determine if present (except §171.205)
(c) determine w/ (1) good faith, (2) appropriate for gest age
6/
§3 cont
(d) log to med record (1) est gest age, (2) method used for age, (3) test used for heartbeat, inc. date, time, test results
7/
§3 cont
- §171.204 Prohibited Abortion of Unborn Child w/ Detectable Fetal Heartbeat
(a) Phys may not knowingly perf/induce abortion if fetal heartbeat (ex §171.205)
(b) Not in violation if no heartbeat
(c) No affect to (1) particular abortion method, (2) other abortion laws
8/
§3 cont
§171.205 Exception for Med Emergency
(a) 171.203, 171.204 don’t apply if emergency presents compliance
(b) Physician perf abortion shall not to med record (1) belief of med emerg, (2) the med condition of woman
(c) Physician must keep records in own practice records
9/
§3 cont
- §171.206 Construct of Subch
(a) Does not create/recognize a right to abortion before fetal heartbeat detected
(b) MAY NOT construe to (1) init action against woman, (2) repeal other statutes, (3) restrict political subdiv from making laws ≥stringent as state laws
10/
§3 cont
- §171.207 Limits on Public Enforcement
(a) Ex §171.005 or other laws, all req’s enforced through civil action in §171.208 (none by state or its subdivs)
(b) MAY NOT construe to (1) legalize prohibited conduct (2) limit avail remedy (3) limit enforcing other laws
11/
§3 cont
- §171.208 Civil Liab for Viol/Aid/Abet
(a) Any person (except gov official) may bring civil action against person who (1) performs/induces abortion violation, (2) aids/abets/pays/reimb regardless of knowledge, or (3) intends conduct in 1 or 2
12/
- §171.208 cont
(b) Prevailing claimant awarded (1) injunctive relief to prevent further violations, (2) $10k statutory damages per violation, (3) attorney fees
(c) 1 award per violation
(d) 4yr limit
13/
- §171.208 cont
(f) Valid defense: (1,2) reasonable belief of own/physician compliance
(f-1) Burden of affirm defense on defendent
(g) MAY NOT construe to impose liability violating 1st Amendment
(h) No intervention by district/county attorney (exc. amicus curiae brief)
15/
- §171.208 cont
(i) No awards to defendant
(j) No civil action allowed by person who impregnated through rape, sexual assault, incest, or acts banned under Penal Code §22.011/§ 22.021/§25.02
16/
§3 cont
- §171.209 Civil Liability: Undue Burden Defense
(a) No standing by defendent to assert rights of woman unless (1) US Supreme Court finds otherwise or (2) has standing under 3rd-party standing test by US Supreme Court
17/
- §171.209 cont
(b) Defendant may assert affirm defense if (1) has 3rd-party standing of women seeking abortion, (2) proves relief sought created undue burden on woman
(c) No undue burden found unless (1,2) relief would prevent or cause obstacles for women from abortions
18/
- §171.209 cont
(d) No undue burden if (1) relief would prevent assistance women seeking abortions or (2) relief against other defendants would cause undue burden
(e) No affirm defense if Roe v. Wade or PP v. Casey overruled.
(f) No limitation on defendant’s constit rights
19/
§3
-§171.210 Civil Liability: Venue
(a) Action brought in county (1) where event/omission occurred, (2,3) defendant’s residence/office, (4) claimant’s residence
(b) Written consent for venue change
-§171.211 Sovereign, Gov, Official Immunity Preserved (statement of)
20/
§3 cont
-§171.212 Severability (detailed explanation of what stands if part invalidated)
§4 New section to Ch.30, Civil Practice & Remedies Code
-§30.022 Award of Atty Fees
(a) Anyone suing state for injunction against abortion limits must pay atty fees of prevailing party
21/
-§30.022 cont
(b) Prevailing party is one who dismisses claim or enters judgment
(c) Prev party may sue for recov atty fees, limit 3yr
(d) Not a defense: (1) failure to seek recov, (2) no court recognition, (3) underlying action invalidated
22/
§5 Section added to Ch. 311(C) of Gov’ment Code
-§311.036 Construction of Abortion Statutes
(a,b) May not construe statutes regulating/limiting abortion to repeal others or limiting subdivisions from statutes ≥ stringent as state
(c) Stmt on severability of individ statutes
23/
§6 Amend §171.005, Health and Safety Code (text for civil enforcement added)
§7 Section added to §171(A), Health and Safety Code
-§171.008 Req’d Docu
(a,b) Physician must document med necess for abortion & shall (1) place in woman’s record (2) keep copy in practice records
24/
-§171.008 cont
(c) Physician shall
- (1) for woman’s health: document (A) med condition & (B) provide med rationale for abortion
- (2) not for woman’s health: Document that health not the reason
(d) Physician shall keep in practice records
25/
§8 Health and Safety Code, §171.012(a)
Several repeated textual changes relating to informed consent:
- “perform abortion” —> “perform _or_induce_ abortion”
- “performed abortion” —> “performed _or_induced_ abortion”
- “department” —> “commission”
- “fetus” —> “unborn child”
26/
§9 Health and Safety Code, §245.011(c) amended, adding to the report: (10) Whether abortion was performed/induced for med emergency (11) Info req’d under §171.008(a,c)
§10 Stmt on Severability
§11 Stmt on no ex post facto
§12 Effective September 1, 2021
That concludes SB8.
27/
Since the legislation amended existing code sections, here are links for full their context:
Note that none of these have been updated yet w/ SB8’s amendments.
29/
Final note: I am not an attorney, so don’t take this summary as legal advice. If you find any errors or omissions, please let me know, & I will do my best to correct them by appending to this thread.
30/30
Some key provisions of SB8 for Health & Safety Code:
§171.203 Must check fetal heartbeat
§171.204 No abortion when fetal heartbeat
§171.205 Med emerg exemption, must be doc’d
§171.206 No action against the woman
§171.208 Only non-gov people enforce, no standing for rapist
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
It appears that it is Ms. Sherman who needs to read a book.
Induced abortions were homicidal acts under common law at the nation’s founding. Post-quickening ones were felonies; pre-quickening ones were misdemeanors. Statute laws started clarifying in 1821 & evolved w/ embryology
Last year, I published Prenatal Child Support Across the United States, a book w/ original legislation scans for every state/territory going back as far as 1793.
I originally started researching legal history after seeing how the mainstream media gave no effort in research.
1/
This year, Utah’s legislature expanded (Fig 1) the state’s existing prenatal child support requirements from those of 1996 (Fig 2) & 1997 (Fig 3), bringing the state from the bare minimum Federal requirements (Fig 4) to being at the forefront in the nation.
2/
Obviously, UT wasn’t the 1st state w/ reqs. (It was 46th.) Yet, the media reported otherwise, using Planned Parenthood & (sometimes) the bill’s sponsor as their sources, rather than actually referencing the Utah Code.
Let this thread serve as a wall-of-shame for lazy media:
3/
I had made a statement earlier today that induced abortions cause more pregnant women to die annually than the lives of pregnant women who are saved by them. This topic seemed worth making into a thread to explain in detail, so here we are. The focus will be on the US.
1/
First, it’s important to decide on a definition for an induced abortion. As is standard, this CDC definition excludes treatment for ecoptic pregnancies & post-miscarriage treatment. Since the focus is only legally induced abortions, we will discuss illegal ones separately.
2/
We will exclude the more-encompassing general terms “fetal homicide” or “feticide”, & focus only on actions performed or consented by the pregnant woman.
3/
It has come to my attention that this viral TikTok video has been spreading the claim that women can be arrested for miscarriages in 38 states. This video is propagating serious misinformation that I would like to correct.
When claims like this were made last year about Georgia’s LIFE Act, I became suspicious & decide to read the legislation for itself. It said nothing of the sort. The fears seemed to stem from the declaration of personhood to the unborn.
1. Hillman v. State (232 Ga. App. 741) established maternal immunity for fetal demise in 1998. In this case, Hillman attempted a self-induced abortion w/ a handgun & was charge w/ criminal abortion...
W/ Judge Jones striking down Georgia’s LIFE Act (HB481, 2019), the topic of #PrenatalChildSupport has, once again, returned to the media discourse, due to §5 of the act. Unfortunately, authors of the articles on HB481 are doing a disservice by being unfamiliar w/ the topic.
1/
Here is an excerpt of the Act & the resulting Official Code of Georgia Annotated § 19-6-15(a.1)(2), for reference.
The typical discussion is that Georgia had a wild, new idea of allowing a pregnant woman to collect child support for her unborn child.
There are multiple problems w/ the media reports:
* #PrenatalChildSupport isn’t a new concept
* Georgia already had such requirements
* OCGA § 19-6-15(a.1)(2) was simply meant to clarify what already existed for the state.
3/
So far, Kansas is the last state I’ve found to enact prenatal child support, doing so in 1990 & 2006. What’s unique is *how* the legislature worded it. The presumption is that the father *did* provide support during pregnancy, & the statutes list penalties when he did not.
1/
The 1990 legislation (SB 431) makes changes to Chapter 59 (Probate Court) of the Kansas Statutes in relation to adoption. If it can be proven that the father knew of the pregnancy & neglected to provide support, the mother can place the child for adoption w/o his veto.
2/
This legislation also specifically allows for the adoptive parents to provide support as part of the adoption contract. (All references to support are 2nd trimester onward.)
3/