Unborn children; construing the word 'person' under Virginia law to include. (HB1)

Introduced By

Del. Bob Marshall (R-Manassas) with support from co-patrons Del. Ben Cline (R-Amherst), Sen. Chuck Colgan (D-Manassas), and Sen. Tom Garrett (R-Lynchburg)


Passed Committee
Passed House
Passed Senate
Signed by Governor
Became Law


Rights of unborn children.  Provides that unborn children at every stage of development enjoy all the rights, privileges, and immunities available to other persons, citizens, and residents of the Commonwealth, subject only to the laws and Constitutions of Virginia and the United States, precedents of the United States Supreme Court, and provisions to the contrary in the statutes of the Commonwealth. Read the Bill »


Bill Has Failed


11/21/2011Prefiled and ordered printed; offered 01/11/12 12100423D
11/21/2011Referred to Committee for Courts of Justice
02/10/2012Reported from Courts of Justice (14-Y 4-N) (see vote tally)
02/12/2012Read first time
02/13/2012Read second time
02/13/2012Floor substitute printed 12105413D-H1 (McClellan)
02/13/2012Speaker ruled floor Substitute by Delegate McClellan not germane 12105413D-H1
02/13/2012Motion to pass by Amendment by Delegate Watts agreed to (64-Y 34-N)
02/13/2012VOTE: PASS BY (64-Y 34-N) (see vote tally)
02/13/2012Pending question ordered
02/13/2012Engrossed by House
02/14/2012Read third time
02/14/2012Pending question ordered
02/14/2012Passed House (66-Y 32-N)
02/14/2012VOTE: PASSAGE (66-Y 32-N) (see vote tally)
02/15/2012Constitutional reading dispensed
02/15/2012Referred to Committee on Education and Health
02/23/2012Reported from Education and Health with amendment (8-Y 7-N) (see vote tally)
02/23/2012Motion to recommit to committee agreed to (24-Y 14-N) (see vote tally)
02/23/2012Recommitted to Education and Health
02/23/2012Pursuant to rule 20(g)
02/23/2012Continued to 2013 in Education and Health
11/30/2012Left in Education and Health


Karen Ruud writes:

I am opposed to this bill as it is clearly an attempt to limit the legal right women have to have an abortion. The Supreme Court clearly stated that women have this right, and it is NOT appropriate for politicians to continue to try to take away this right.

If the GOP is so concerned about this issue, why aren't they promoting birth control and/or ensuring that men who father a child are required to financially support the birth mother and child? In fact, the reverse is happening. The GOP is not only trying to limit women's access to health care, they have also introduced legislation to not require birth control coverage under health plans in Virginia. This confirms that in fact the GOP is waging a "war on women"

Tracy writes:

Karen I couldn't agree more.

Perhaps we need it to be illegal for men to father children when they do not live with or have a relationship with the woman. And if he does father a 2nd child that he doesn't live with he should be required by law to have a vasectomy which he will be required to pay for. No coverage of health plan or state or government funding.

Lets see how far that would fly.