Congress should “consider taking action preempting abortion shield laws” in blue states, according to Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall.
Marshall and 15 attorneys general from red states said in a letter to U.S. House and Senate leadership on Tuesday that “shield laws” passed in Democrat-run states were hindering pro-life laws in other states.
“We, the undersigned Attorneys General, write urging Congress to consider taking action preempting abortion shield laws. Since the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Org., several States have greatly restricted or prohibited abortion, including non-surgical abortions that rely on the use of abortion drugs. In response, different States passed laws purporting to 'shield' abortion providers from liability and prosecution for performing or aiding in abortions in other States. These laws are blatant attempts to interfere with States’ ability to enforce criminal laws within their borders and disrupt our constitutional structure. Therefore, we are asking Congress to assess the constitutional authority it may have to preempt shield laws,” Marshall and the attorneys general said in the letter.
“The landmark Dobbs decision in 2022 returned regulation of abortion to the respective States. Ever since that decision, Democrat-run, pro-abortion States have been attempting to hinder other States from regulating abortion by enacting 'shield laws,'" the attorney generals added. "These shield laws attempt to protect shield-state residents from liability and prosecution when they violate pro-life States’ abortion laws. For example, some protect shield-state residents from extradition when they violate another State’s abortion laws by mailing abortion drugs to an individual in a State where abortion is illegal. By encouraging medical professionals in pro-abortion states to violate pro-life States’ abortion laws, shield laws are antithetical to the spirit of federalism and the Dobbs decision by not allowing each State to regulate abortion as it sees fit. Shield laws also raise serious constitutional concerns. For example, they violate the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the Constitution because they do not give 'full faith and credit' to the judicial proceedings occurring in other States. U.S. Const. art. IV, § 1. When New York or California refuses to respect a criminal prosecution or a civil judgment against an individual who is accused of violating the abortion laws of another State, they are refusing to give full faith and credit to that State’s judicial proceedings. Similarly, shield laws could run afoul of the Extradition Clause of the Constitution.”
They continued, “Congress should consider stepping in to remedy this problem. Instead of allowing proabortion States to disrespect the decisions of other States regarding abortion and trample the Constitution, Congress should assess whether it should tackle this issue head on with legislation that preempts state shield laws. This may ensure that each State retains the ability to restrict abortions as it sees fit within its borders without interference from other States and preserves federalism principles.”
Letter to Congress Marshal Lags by Caleb Taylor on Scribd
To connect with the author of this story or to comment, email [email protected].
Don't miss out! Subscribe to our newsletter and get our top stories every weekday morning.
