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

DateAction
01/04/2017Committee
01/04/2017Prefiled and ordered printed; offered 01/11/17 17103527D
01/04/2017Referred to Committee on Rules
02/07/2017Left in Rules

Comments

Carol Lindstrom writes:

gotta wonder exactly what Marshall is laying the groundwork for with all of these bills clearing up definitions and existing penalties.

Victoria Esarey writes:

Are the Republicans laying the groundwork for prosecution of women seeking abortion? Are we come to that?

ACLU-VA Women's Rights and Reproductive Freedom, tracking this bill in Photosynthesis, notes:

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.

ACLU-VA Legislative Agenda, tracking this bill in Photosynthesis, notes:

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.