Texas man files legal action to probe ex-partner’s out-of-state abortion

[Zincwarrior]

Interesting connotations here. Thoughts?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/2024/05/03/texas-abortion-investigations/Texas man files legal action to probe ex-partner’s out-of-state abortion

Texas man files legal action to probe ex-partner’s out-of-state abortion​

The previously unreported petition reflects a potential new antiabortion strategy to block women from ending their pregnancies in states where abortion is legal.

By Caroline Kitchener
May 3, 2024 at 5:00 a.m. EDT


As soon as Collin Davis found out his ex-partner was planning to travel to Colorado to have an abortion in late February, the Texas man retained a high-powered antiabortion attorney — who court records show immediately issued a legal threat.

If the woman proceeded with the abortion, even in a state where the procedure remains legal, Davis would seek a full investigation into the circumstances surrounding the abortion and “pursue wrongful-death claims against anyone involved in the killing of his unborn child,” the lawyer wrote in a letter, according to records.

Now, Davis has disclosed his former partner’s abortion to a state district court in Texas, asking for the power to investigate what his lawyer characterizes as potentially illegal activity in a state where almost all abortions are banned.

Advertisement


The previously unreported petition was submitted under an unusual legal mechanism often used in Texas to investigate suspected illegal actions before a lawsuit is filed. The petition claims Davis could sue either under the state’s wrongful-death statute or the novel Texas law known as Senate Bill 8 that allows private citizens to file suit against anyone who “aids or abets” an illegal abortion.

If the woman proceeded with the abortion, even in a state where the procedure remains legal, Davis would seek a full investigation into the circumstances surrounding the abortion and “pursue wrongful-death claims against anyone involved in the killing of his unborn child,” the lawyer wrote in a letter, according to records.

Now, Davis has disclosed his former partner’s abortion to a state district court in Texas, asking for the power to investigate what his lawyer characterizes as potentially illegal activity in a state where almost all abortions are banned.

The previously unreported petition was submitted under an unusual legal mechanism often used in Texas to investigate suspected illegal actions before a lawsuit is filed. The petition claims Davis could sue either under the state’s wrongful-death statute or the novel Texas law known as Senate Bill 8 that allows private citizens to file suit against anyone who “aids or abets” an illegal abortion.
The decision to target an abortion that occurred outside of Texas represents a potential new strategy by antiabortion activists to achieve a goal many in the movement have been working toward since Roe v. Wade was overturned: stopping women from traveling out of state to end their pregnancies. Crossing state lines for abortion care remains legal nationwide.
The case also illustrates the role that men who disapprove of their partners’ decisions could play in surfacing future cases that may violate abortion bans — either by filing their own civil lawsuits or by reporting the abortions to law enforcement.




Under Texas law, performing an abortion is a crime punishable by up to a lifetime in prison and up to $100,000 in civil penalties. Women seeking abortions cannot be charged under the state’s abortion restrictions, but the laws target anyone who performs or helps to facilitate an illegal abortion, including those who help distribute abortion pills.
Davis’s petition — filed under Texas’s Rule 202 by Jonathan Mitchell, a prominent antiabortion attorney known for devising new and aggressive legal strategies to crack down on abortion — follows a lawsuit filed last spring by another Texas man, Marcus Silva, who is attempting to sue three women who allegedly helped his ex-wife obtain abortion pills.

 

[alang1216]

Interesting connotations here. Thoughts?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/2024/05/03/texas-abortion-investigations/Texas man files legal action to probe ex-partner’s out-of-state abortion

It is obvious why he is an ex-partner. What does he hope to get out of it besides revenge? What a dick.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

It is obvious why he is an ex-partner. What does he hope to get out of it besides revenge? What a dick.

States are pushing for the power to be able to punish a woman that resides in their state for getting an abortion in a different state.

This is the first step in that direction.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Interesting connotations here. Thoughts?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/2024/05/03/texas-abortion-investigations/Texas man files legal action to probe ex-partner’s out-of-state abortion

It is a step towards what many states want....https://www.usmessageboard.com/threads/tracking-pregnancies-by-the-state.1100819/

 

[martybegan]

States are pushing for the power to be able to punish a woman that resides in their state for getting an abortion in a different state.

This is the first step in that direction.

Won't happen. The constitution is clear that State laws only apply to things that happen in the State.

More fearmongering.

 

[martybegan]

It is a step towards what many states want....https://www.usmessageboard.com/threads/tracking-pregnancies-by-the-state.1100819/

And as long as the Constitution is followed, they won't get.

 

[alang1216]

States are pushing for the power to be able to punish a woman that resides in their state for getting an abortion in a different state.

This is the first step in that direction.

I wonder if Colorado will outlaw rodeos and tries to prosecute anyone who attends one in any other state?

 

[martybegan]

I wonder if Colorado will outlaw rodeos and tries to prosecute anyone who attends one in any other state?

The thing is California did this with their pork livestock rules in an inadvertent way and the court allowed it.

Because it was related to selling IN California, which doesn't cross the line evidently.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Won't happen. The constitution is clear that State laws only apply to things that happen in the State.

More fearmongering.

They will find a way and our current SCOTUS would be more than happy to allow it.

 

[martybegan]

They will find a way and our current SCOTUS would be more than happy to allow it.

Actually they won't, because they decided Roe on Strict Constructional grounds, and any decision in these matters will follow the same pattern.

 

[alang1216]

The thing is California did this with their pork livestock rules in an inadvertent way and the court allowed it.

Because it was related to selling IN California, which doesn't cross the line evidently.

If CA banned Californians from going to another state and eating pork there that did not meet CA rules, that would be analogous.

 

[martybegan]

If CA banned Californians from going to another state and eating pork there that did not meet CA rules, that would be analogous.

good point.

The way to punish cali trying to dictate terms to out of state producers is to stop selling there.

 

[alang1216]

good point.

The way to punish cali trying to dictate terms to out of state producers is to stop selling there.

Not going to happen, CA is the dog, not the tail.

California remains the 5th largest economy in the world since 2017. California is the 5th largest economy in the world for the seventh consecutive year, with a nominal GDP of nearly $3.9 trillion in 2023 and a growth rate of 6.1% since the year prior, according to the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA).

 

[martybegan]

Not going to happen, CA is the dog, not the tail.

California remains the 5th largest economy in the world since 2017. California is the 5th largest economy in the world for the seventh consecutive year, with a nominal GDP of nearly $3.9 trillion in 2023 and a growth rate of 6.1% since the year prior, according to the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA).

All depends on if the Cali market share value is worth the added investments, either just for cali production or for all production.

 

[alang1216]

All depends on if the Cali market share value is worth the added investments, either just for cali production or for all production.

With almost 12% of the US population, I'd bet most of the big pork raisers west of the Mississippi sell to Cali.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Interesting connotations here. Thoughts?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/2024/05/03/texas-abortion-investigations/Texas man files legal action to probe ex-partner’s out-of-state abortion

The right-wing war on women continues.

 

[martybegan]

With almost 12% of the US population, I'd bet most of the big pork raisers west of the Mississippi sell to Cali.

But will selling to them be worth the modifications they have to make to their processes?

It's the same thing Cali may learn from this whole $20 an hour wage thing.

Good intentions don't override economics.

 

[1srelluc]

He should have a say, they were his "swimmers".....You can damn sure believe if she carried it to term he would have to pay for it for the next 18 + years.

 

[Zincwarrior]

He should have a say, they were his "swimmers".....You can damn sure believe if she carried it to term he would have to pay for it for the next 18 + years.

Actually, he would not be able to prove it.