Helping Women Get Abortions Out of State Is ‘Criminal Conspiracy’: Alabama Attorney General

Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall insisted in a recent court filing that prosecuting people who make arrangements for women to travel to other states for abortions is well within the scope of Alabama law.

In July, abortion advocates filed lawsuits against Mr. Marshall following his statement that organizations that aid pregnant women in Alabama to get an abortion out of state could be put under criminal investigation. One of the groups that filed a lawsuit is the Yellowhammer Fund, which provides funding and practical support to Alabama women trying to obtain abortions in other states.

The pro-abortion groups claimed that Mr. Marshall’s comments violated their constitutional rights.

In a court filing on Monday, Mr. Marshall dismissed such arguments.

“An elective abortion performed in Alabama would be a criminal offense; thus, a conspiracy formed in the State to have that same act performed outside the State is illegal. Plaintiffs identify no constitutional provision that would bar the State from enforcing that law,” Marshall said in the motion (pdf).

The motion criticized the plaintiffs for suggesting the provision only applies when the act, which is decided upon in Alabama, is also illegal in the state in which it is carried out.

“Nothing in the statute supports that interpretation,” the filing stated.

“The right to travel … does not grant Plaintiffs the right to carry out a criminal conspiracy simply because they propose to do so by purchasing bus passes or driving cars.”

The motion said that prosecuting someone for a conspiracy formed in Alabama which is then carried out in another state is not an extraterritorial application of Alabama law.

“Plaintiffs assert that there is some difference because the object of their conspiracy is legal where it might occur. But they don’t explain why that makes any constitutional difference, and it doesn’t. The conspiracy is what is being punished, even if the final conduct never occurs. That conduct is Alabama-based and is within Alabama’s power to prohibit.”

California Gov. Gavin Newsom responded to Mr. Marshall’s statements on social media.

“California will NOT cooperate with any state that attempts to prosecute women or doctors for receiving or providing reproductive care,” Mr. Newsom said in an Aug. 31 post on X.

Punishing Women for Abortion?

Mr. Marshall had earlier stirred controversy for suggesting that women may also be targeted by the law for terminating their pregnancies through the abortion pill under a different state law.

Passed in 2006, the chemical endangerment law was originally aimed at protecting children from exposure to dangerous fumes and chemicals used in home-based meth labs, Alabama.com reported.

District attorneys soon began using the law to prosecute women who abused drugs during pregnancy. The law has been used to incarcerate women who have had stillbirths or miscarriages after drug use.

Alabama’s abortion law prohibits the prosecution of women who obtain abortions or seek abortions, instead focusing on those who perform or help facilitate abortions.

But in a statement to The Washington Post in January, Mr. Marshall’s office said the state’s abortion ban “does not provide an across-the-board exemption from all criminal laws, including the chemical-endangerment law—which the Alabama Supreme Court has affirmed and reaffirmed protects unborn children.”

Mr. Marshall’s statement triggered severe criticism online.

“Alabama law could not be clearer: ‘No woman upon whom an abortion is performed or attempted to be performed shall be criminally or civilly liable,’” attorney Emma Roth said in a Jan. 12 post on X. “Yet @AGSteveMarshall’s statement will still have its intended effect: creating a culture of fear among pregnant women.”

Following the uproar, a spokesperson for Mr. Marshall subsequently issued another statement to The Washington Post clarifying the matter: “The Attorney General’s beef is with illegal providers, not women.”

Alabama has one of the strictest abortion laws in the country.

An abortion is only legally permitted in the state under three conditions: when a pregnant woman’s life is in danger, if the fetus is not expected to survive the pregnancy, and to prevent serious risk to the mother’s physical health.

Abortion Issue in 2024 Election

Mr. Marshall’s push to punish people who aid out-of-state abortion seekers comes as the 2024 presidential election has thrust into focus a potential abortion ban at the federal level.

Among Democrats, President Biden has already backed abortion. Three major abortion groups—Planned Parenthood Action Fund, NARAL: Pro-Choice America, and EMILY’s List—have announced support for President Biden in his reelection bid.

Another major Democrat candidate, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., had initially suggested that he supported a federal ban on abortion after three months of pregnancy. However, he later backtracked from the comment.

Among Republicans, former President Donald Trump has committed to a pro-life stance but has not yet supported instituting a 15-week federal ban on abortion.

At the GOP presidential debate in Milwaukee, former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley suggested instituting a ban on late-term abortions.

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis said that he would “stand on the side of life” but did not make it clear whether he would sign a federal ban.

Former Vice President Mike Pence called for a national abortion ban once a baby starts feeling pain. “A 15-week ban is an idea whose time has come,” he said.

Entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy opposed the idea of a nationwide ban on abortion as he thinks the federal government should not interfere in the matter. He advocated for a six-week abortion ban at the state level.