Unborn children; abortion law and personhood. (HJ589)
Introduced By
Del. Bob Marshall (R-Manassas)
Progress
✓ |
Introduced |
✗ |
Passed Committee |
☐ |
Passed House |
☐ |
Passed Senate |
Description
Unborn children; abortion law and personhood. Recognizes that Virginia law consistently acknowledged that an unborn child was a person prior to the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Roe v. Wade regardless of how abortion was punished under the law. Read the Bill »
Outcome
Bill Has Failed
History
Date | Action |
---|---|
01/04/2017 | Committee |
01/04/2017 | Prefiled and ordered printed; offered 01/11/17 17103527D |
01/04/2017 | Referred to Committee on Rules |
02/07/2017 | Left in Rules |
Comments
gotta wonder exactly what Marshall is laying the groundwork for with all of these bills clearing up definitions and existing penalties.
Are the Republicans laying the groundwork for prosecution of women seeking abortion? Are we come to that?
The ACLU of Virginia strongly opposes HJ589, which would have wide-ranging, unforeseen, and unconstitutional consequences for a woman’s health and for a family’s private decision making. This bill could ban some methods of emergency contraception or prevent couples from using in-vitro fertilization to have a family. It could even deny a woman life-saving medical treatment for a disease, like cancer, if the treatment might harm her pregnancy or mean that a woman who suffers a miscarriage, and her doctor, could face an investigation and potentially a prosecution simply because an extreme politician thinks a miscarriage might be “suspicious”. This bill is way too extreme for our state.
The ACLU of Virginia strongly opposes HJ589, which would have wide-ranging, unforeseen, and unconstitutional consequences for a woman’s health and for a family’s private decision making. This bill could ban some methods of emergency contraception or prevent couples from using in-vitro fertilization to have a family. It could even deny a woman life-saving medical treatment for a disease, like cancer, if the treatment might harm her pregnancy or mean that a woman who suffers a miscarriage, and her doctor, could face an investigation and potentially a prosecution simply because an extreme politician thinks a miscarriage might be “suspicious”. This bill is way too extreme for our state.