Louisiana’s “Feticide” Bill

For indispensable reporting on the coronavirus crisis, the election, and more, subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter.


I have a new story up today on a bill in Louisiana that would ban all abortions in the state and allow for abortion providers and women who obtain abortions to be charged with “feticide,” a felony carrying a prison term of up to 15 years. John LaBruzzo (R), the Louisiana state representative behind the bill, claims that the inclusion of the line stipulating that women could be prosecuted for obtaining abortions was an accidental “mis-draft.”

The current text of the bill is pretty explicit, though: “Feticide is the killing of an unborn child by the act, procurement, or culpable omission of a person, including the mother of the unborn child.” In LaBruzzo’s proposal, the word “including” replaces the words “other than,” which appear in curent Louisiana law—a small change that completely alters the meaning of the provision.

It’s pretty hard to believe this language was changed accidentially. I believe the real reason LaBruzzo now plans to remove it was not that it was a “mis-draft,” but simply that, as LaBruzzo told the local news, including such a provision “would make [the law] too difficult to pass.” He acknowledges the fact that most people—no matter how anti-abortion they are—don’t actually think that a woman should be put in jail for up to 15 years, with hard labor, for obtaining an abortion.

Even if LaBruzzo removes the language on charging women with “feticide,” the legislation should still raise questions about how exactly anti-abortion lawmakers think the state should deal with women who violated the law. Someone should ask him, then, what he does think the punishment should be. I tried to, but he didn’t respond to my inquiries.

Writing about Louisiana’s proposed law reminded me of a video of abortion protestors in Libertyville, Illinois. In it, a cameraman from At Center Network asks the protestors the seemingly simple question: If you think abortion should be illegal, how should violators be punished? It quickly becomes clear that many of the demonstrators haven’t really thought that question through to its logical conclusion.

DOES IT FEEL LIKE POLITICS IS AT A BREAKING POINT?

Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest