{"id":1236104,"date":"2023-09-29T21:15:14","date_gmt":"2023-09-29T21:15:14","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/theintercept.com\/?p=446243"},"modified":"2023-09-29T21:15:14","modified_gmt":"2023-09-29T21:15:14","slug":"texas-anti-abortion-crusader-demands-abortion-patient-information-in-court","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/2023\/09\/29\/texas-anti-abortion-crusader-demands-abortion-patient-information-in-court\/","title":{"rendered":"Texas Anti-Abortion Crusader Demands Abortion Patient Information In Court"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"Abortion\n

Abortion rights demonstrators gather near the State Capitol in Austin, Texas, on June 25, 2022.<\/p>\n

Photo: Suzanne Cordeiro\/AFP via Getty Images<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n

The notorious far-right<\/u> attorney who helped craft Texas\u2019s bounty-hunter abortion ban<\/a>, Senate Bill 8, is now attempting to force abortion funds to hand over scores of information on every abortion the organizations have supported since 2021. This includes the city and state where each patient lived, the names of the abortion providers, and the identities of nearly every person who helped the patients access abortion care.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Earlier this month, Jonathan Mitchell \u2014 himself not a Texan but based in Washington state \u2014 served requests to nine Texas abortion funds and one Texas doctor. The brazen attempt to acquire sensitive information about abortion patients and the funds that assist them is a disturbing turn in the ongoing legal battle over Texas\u2019s six-week abortion ban.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In August of last year, a coalition of abortion funds and doctors filed a class action lawsuit<\/a> against Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and other state officials. The suit, Fund Texas Choice v. Paxton, aims to challenge Senate Bill 8, or S.B. 8, and its devious method of civil enforcement to evade federal court scrutiny. In response, Mitchell, on behalf of the Texas government, is using the legal discovery process to harass those defending reproductive freedoms.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

\u201cThis is a stunning escalation attacking the free speech and privacy rights of so many people,\u201d Neesha Dav\u00e9, executive director of Lilith Fund, one of the abortion funds in the case, said in a statement. \u201cWe are talking about thousands of people among Lilith Fund\u2019s supporters, followers, donors, clients, and volunteers. It is objectively terrifying to think about what anti-abortion extremists want to do with this personal information and how low they are willing to go to get it. But let\u2019s be clear: under no circumstances will we ever willingly hand over this personal information.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The abortion funds\u2019 case asks a question of law: whether S.B. 8 is constitutional. Details about abortion fund patrons and their medical procedures have no bearing on this specific legal question. Mitchell and his clients in the Texas government are no doubt aware of this; the discovery requests are an intimidation tactic, in the spirit of the bounty-hunter law itself.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

S.B. 8 introduced a novel approach for banning abortion through civil litigation while Roe v. Wade was still on the books. The law permits any private individual, even from outside the state, to file suits against anyone they speculate has \u201cabetted\u201d an abortion. This could include an Uber driver who takes a patient to an appointment or a pastor who has counseled a person on ending a pregnancy. The plaintiff need not even prove that they have been harmed in any way. Those who bring successful suits are promised $10,000, hence the \u201cbounty hunter\u201d moniker. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

While Mitchell has<\/u> not yet been forced by the court to give reasons for his discovery requests, The Guardian reported<\/a>, \u201cIn past litigation, Mitchell has argued that, in order to sue over the six-week ban, someone must show they have either violated it already or plan to do so in the future.\u201d Discovery could thus be used to undermine the plaintiffs\u2019 standing in the case or to place targets on the backs of abortion \u201cabettors\u201d who seek to file S.B. 8 civil suits. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

In response, the abortion funds filed a motion this week for a protective order to keep the names and information of clients and workers private.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

\u201cWe will never willingly hand over personal information, and we will fiercely protect our staff, donors, volunteers, and supporters,\u201d Maleeha Aziz, acting executive director of Texas Equal Access Fund, said in a statement shared with The Intercept.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Given the discovery requests\u2019 total irrelevance to the questions of the case, it\u2019s unlikely that the presiding U.S. District Judge Robert Pitman will force the funds to comply \u2014 not to mention that handing over such information could constitute a violation of First Amendment protections. \u201cThe First Amendment guarantees the right to associate, speak, and petition the government \u2014 it protects the very information Mitchell and his clients wish to obtain,\u201d Lilith Fund noted in a press release.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As the very existence of vigilante laws like S.B. 8 makes clear, threats and intimidation are favored techniques of Texas Republican rule, regardless of whether the right thinks its tactics will hold up in the court of law. And as proven by the Dobbs decision overturning Roe v. Wade, among other troubling rulings from our activist Supreme Court, Republicans have every reason to believe the law can be bent to their agenda.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

\u201cWhether or not the anti-abortion lawyers here are successful or not, the very presence of the inquiry will likely cause chilling effects: Patients, funds, and providers will be continuing to operate in states of uncertainty, unsure if the law will protect them,\u201d Greer Donley, an associate professor at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law who focuses on abortion and the law, told me. \u201cPatients are leaving their homes in the dark of night to get abortions out of state, telling no one what they are doing, thinking they are committing a crime. They are not, but creating a culture of fear is the point. And it\u2019s horrible.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Fund Texas Choice case, even if successful, can\u2019t return robust reproductive care to the vast abortion desert that is Texas. The fall of Roe has ensured that Texas will be a state where abortion is banned, with or without S.B. 8 on the books. According to the Guttmacher Institute<\/a>, a reproductive rights and health research organization, the average Texan has to travel more than 500 miles to the nearest out-of-state clinic for care.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Assisting with this travel and access to reproductive care is the core work of Texas abortion funds \u2014 and the very activities Paxton seeks to criminalize. In February, Pitman temporarily blocked<\/a> prosecutors in eight counties from pursuing charges against anyone who helps abortion seekers obtain care out of state. This ruling should be made permanent and expanded.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A successful challenge to S.B. 8\u2019s vigilante enforcement mechanism would also be crucial amid the rising tide of similar astroturfed laws. Bounty-hunter bills, including ones that would de facto ban gender-affirming care<\/a> and drag shows<\/a>, have been proposed or passed in several Republican-led states<\/a>. Mitchell\u2019s discovery requests deliver the same message: Those fighting for bodily autonomy will be personally targeted.<\/p>\n

The post Texas Anti-Abortion Crusader Demands Abortion Patient Information In Court<\/a> appeared first on The Intercept<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n

This post was originally published on The Intercept<\/a>. <\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The lawyer behind Texas’s bounty hunter abortion ban is retaliating against people who get abortions and those who help them.<\/p>\n

The post Texas Anti-Abortion Crusader Demands Abortion Patient Information In Court<\/a> appeared first on The Intercept<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1764,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[118,6145,14,29],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1236104"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1764"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1236104"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1236104\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1256532,"href":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1236104\/revisions\/1256532"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1236104"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1236104"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1236104"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}