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.
Interesting connotations. 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
This violates the laws of the State of Colorado and will create an incident. The attorney is question needs to be immediately disbarred. The individual in question needs to face arrest for stocking and menacing.Interesting connotations. 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
She made the right decision. Obviously, she wouldn't want to co-parent with a controlling, abusive man like that.Interesting connotations. 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 Texas nutter is obsessed, she's not even with him anymore, and likely regrets ever knowing him. He's stalking her and he should suffer the consequences. Surprised any woman even wants to live in a shithole like Texas, seems that more bad than good goes on in that state for its citizens.Interesting connotations. 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
I THINK...when she returns to Texas he could sue her and anyone who helped her that lived in Texas including friends and I think even try to go after the airline/bus if one was taken.How would this not violate the Interstate Commerce Clause?
The Texas nutter is obsessed, she's not even with him anymore, and likely regrets ever knowing him. He's stalking her and he should suffer the consequences. Surprised any woman even wants to live in a shithole like Texas, seems that more bad than good goes on in that state for its citizens.
I THINK...when she returns to Texas he could sue her and anyone who helped her that lived in Texas including friends and I think even try to go after the airline/bus if one was taken.
I hope it's taken that far just to show America how insane Republicans have become about controlling women and anyone who helps them.I THINK...when she returns to Texas he could sue her and anyone who helped her that lived in Texas including friends and I think even try to go after the airline/bus if one was taken.
Doesn't sound like the United States of America anymore. The trump party is on a roll.I hope it's taken that far just to show America how insane Republicans have become about controlling women and anyone who helps them.
This is a reasonable compromise. Men have an interest in their offspring and should be entitled to compensatory damages for a unilateral decision to terminate his offspring just as he would be held liable for financial support in the opposite case.Interesting connotations. 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 man thinks he owns his wife's uterus, what an asshole.
the laws target anyone who performs or helps to facilitate an illegal abortion, including those who help distribute abortion pills.
Why? He's not the one having his body used for gestation.This is a reasonable compromise. Men have an interest in their offspring and should be entitled to compensatory damages for a unilateral decision to terminate his offspring just as he would be held liable for financial support in the opposite case.
For the same reason he his held liable for financial support.Why? He's not the one having his body used for gestation.
Financial support typically involves born children, not unborn. Sounds like the woman did this guy a favor.For the same reason he his held liable for financial support.
If a man is set on having children he should only sleep with women who agree to have his children. There's your compromise.This is a reasonable compromise. Men have an interest in their offspring and should be entitled to compensatory damages for a unilateral decision to terminate his offspring just as he would be held liable for financial support in the opposite case.
Not even his wife.The man thinks he owns his wife's uterus, what an asshole.
He couldn't keep his pants zipped, eh?This is a reasonable compromise. Men have an interest in their offspring and should be entitled to compensatory damages for a unilateral decision to terminate his offspring just as he would be held liable for financial support in the opposite case.
This is a reasonable compromise. Men have an interest in their offspring and should be entitled to compensatory damages for a unilateral decision to terminate his offspring just as he would be held liable for financial support in the opposite case.
Thoughts?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?