Louisiana legislature passes bill that makes abortion pills controlled substances

[Landslide Lyndon]

While some people are too busy shouting "genocide!!!" Republicans keep their eyes on the prize.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2024/05/21/louisiana-legislature-abortion-mifepristone-misoprostol/

The Louisiana House on Tuesday passed a bill that classifies the two drugs used to induce an abortion as “controlled dangerous substances.” Abortion opponents hope the measure, now on its way to Gov. Jeff Landry, will be a template for conservative states trying to end the procedure.

[Rubensim]

I support this
Banning abortion and not including abortion pill is like making it illegal to murder a person with a gun but legal with a knife
it just doesn't make sense.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

If S.B. 276 is signed into law as expected by Landry (R), Louisiana would become the first state in the country to include mifepristone and misoprostol in the same category as opioids, depressants and other drugs that can be highly addictive.

The bill includes the threat of incarceration and fines for an individual possessing the pills without a valid prescription or outside of professional practice. It exempts pregnant women from prosecution.

It seems that this bill was quite calculated.

[patzer]

It exempts pregnant women from prosecution.

Struggling to see the point of the law if pregnant women are exempted. Surely they can just order the stuff online and face no consequence then?

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

It exempts pregnant women from prosecution.

Struggling to see the point of the law if pregnant women are exempted. Surely they can just order the stuff online and face no consequence then?

"Pregnant women locked up for abortions" feels like a bit of a PR risk. Not necessarily a given it's wise to inject that into abortion legislation.

[Steve from Lambeth]

This is like when Bob Wiggin tried to pass a bill in the UK Parliament in 2019 that would have banned people consuming dog meat and, when pressed on the matter, said he had no evidence of anybody in the UK actually eating dog meat and his bill was just intended as a symbol of solidarity with anti-dog-meat protestors in China

[Fight for Trump]

It exempts pregnant women from prosecution.

Struggling to see the point of the law if pregnant women are exempted. Surely they can just order the stuff online and face no consequence then?

They could actually still get it at a local pharmacy. It's basically pure show.

[No War, but the War on Christmas]

I support this
Banning abortion and not including abortion pill is like making it illegal to murder a person with a gun but legal with a knife
it just doesn't make sense.

Good luck trying to stop all of us who are willing to do whatever it takes to make sure women and girls receive the medication they need. And rest assured, there are plenty of Aunties and even a few Uncles who are ready to receive others for 'Camping Trips' or even possibly send some camping supplies their way. ; )

[Del Tachi]

It exempts pregnant women from prosecution.

Struggling to see the point of the law if pregnant women are exempted. Surely they can just order the stuff online and face no consequence then?

As a local, I'll give some added context to this story.

The bill's sponsor Thomas Pressley (R-Shreveport) has a sister in Houston who's husband tried to induce an abortion by crushing up mifepristone and putting it in her drink.  The bill creates the crime of "coerced criminal abortion by means of fraud", which would carry a prison sentence of up to 20 years. 

After being passed in the State Senate, the House amended the bill to label mifepristone and misoprostol as Schedule IV drugs.  The Senate now has to concur to the House's amendment, but state senate majority leader Cameron Henry (R-Metairie) has so far refused to commit to holding a vote.  If he doesn't schedule one by the middle of next week, the bill will die. 

[DrScholl]

It exempts pregnant women from prosecution.

Struggling to see the point of the law if pregnant women are exempted. Surely they can just order the stuff online and face no consequence then?

As a local, I'll give some added context to this story.

The bill's sponsor Thomas Pressley (R-Shreveport) has a sister in Houston who's husband tried to induce an abortion by crushing up mifepristone and putting it in her drink.  The bill creates the crime of "coerced criminal abortion by means of fraud", which would carry a prison sentence of up to 20 years. 

After being passed in the State Senate, the House amended the bill to label mifepristone and misoprostol as Schedule IV drugs.  The Senate now has to concur to the House's amendment, but state senate majority leader Cameron Henry (R-Metairie) has so far refused to commit to holding a vote.  If he doesn't schedule one before June 3rd, the bill will die. 

Drugging someone is already illegal and it's likely that such a crime could be prosecuted without a new law, especially one that isn't really focused on men drugging women to induce abortions. I don't even think that's a true concern of Republicans.

[Del Tachi]

It exempts pregnant women from prosecution.

Struggling to see the point of the law if pregnant women are exempted. Surely they can just order the stuff online and face no consequence then?

As a local, I'll give some added context to this story.

The bill's sponsor Thomas Pressley (R-Shreveport) has a sister in Houston who's husband tried to induce an abortion by crushing up mifepristone and putting it in her drink.  The bill creates the crime of "coerced criminal abortion by means of fraud", which would carry a prison sentence of up to 20 years. 

After being passed in the State Senate, the House amended the bill to label mifepristone and misoprostol as Schedule IV drugs.  The Senate now has to concur to the House's amendment, but state senate majority leader Cameron Henry (R-Metairie) has so far refused to commit to holding a vote.  If he doesn't schedule one before June 3rd, the bill will die. 

Drugging someone is already illegal and it's likely that such a crime could be prosecuted without a new law, especially one that isn't really focused on men drugging women to induce abortions. I don't even think that's a true concern of Republicans.

Drugging someone is going to get you prosecuted for simple assault in most jurisdictions.  The pro-life position is that assault against a pregnant woman in order induce an abortion is an especially heinous act, and should be subject to additional penalties.  In the aforementioned Texas case, the guy was able to plead down and spent only 180 days in jail.  He would be getting a minimum sentence of 5 years under the proposed Louisiana bill. 

Also, you're operating in extremely bad faith when you say this isn't the "real reason" Republicans support the bill.  This type of assault literally happened to the sponsor's sister!  And, as has been already mentioned, the bill exempts pregnant women from prosecution.   

[DrScholl]

It exempts pregnant women from prosecution.

Struggling to see the point of the law if pregnant women are exempted. Surely they can just order the stuff online and face no consequence then?

As a local, I'll give some added context to this story.

The bill's sponsor Thomas Pressley (R-Shreveport) has a sister in Houston who's husband tried to induce an abortion by crushing up mifepristone and putting it in her drink.  The bill creates the crime of "coerced criminal abortion by means of fraud", which would carry a prison sentence of up to 20 years. 

After being passed in the State Senate, the House amended the bill to label mifepristone and misoprostol as Schedule IV drugs.  The Senate now has to concur to the House's amendment, but state senate majority leader Cameron Henry (R-Metairie) has so far refused to commit to holding a vote.  If he doesn't schedule one before June 3rd, the bill will die. 

Drugging someone is already illegal and it's likely that such a crime could be prosecuted without a new law, especially one that isn't really focused on men drugging women to induce abortions. I don't even think that's a true concern of Republicans.

Drugging someone is going to get you prosecuted for simple assault in most jurisdictions.  The pro-life position is that assault against a pregnant woman in order induce an abortion is an especially heinous act, and should be subject to additional penalties.  In the aforementioned Texas case, the guy was able to plead down and spent only 180 days in jail.  He would be getting a minimum sentence of 5 years under the proposed Louisiana bill. 

Also, you're operating in extremely bad faith when you say this isn't the "real reason" Republicans support the bill.  This type of assault literally happened to the sponsor's sister!  And, as has been already mentioned, the bill exempts pregnant women from prosecution.   

The bill was about anti-choice extremism. He could have easily written a bill that applied to that specific sort of crime and not extended it to reclassification of abortion drugs. Operating in bad faith is clout chasing off a relatives name.

[Del Tachi]

It exempts pregnant women from prosecution.

Struggling to see the point of the law if pregnant women are exempted. Surely they can just order the stuff online and face no consequence then?

As a local, I'll give some added context to this story.

The bill's sponsor Thomas Pressley (R-Shreveport) has a sister in Houston who's husband tried to induce an abortion by crushing up mifepristone and putting it in her drink.  The bill creates the crime of "coerced criminal abortion by means of fraud", which would carry a prison sentence of up to 20 years. 

After being passed in the State Senate, the House amended the bill to label mifepristone and misoprostol as Schedule IV drugs.  The Senate now has to concur to the House's amendment, but state senate majority leader Cameron Henry (R-Metairie) has so far refused to commit to holding a vote.  If he doesn't schedule one before June 3rd, the bill will die. 

Drugging someone is already illegal and it's likely that such a crime could be prosecuted without a new law, especially one that isn't really focused on men drugging women to induce abortions. I don't even think that's a true concern of Republicans.

Drugging someone is going to get you prosecuted for simple assault in most jurisdictions.  The pro-life position is that assault against a pregnant woman in order induce an abortion is an especially heinous act, and should be subject to additional penalties.  In the aforementioned Texas case, the guy was able to plead down and spent only 180 days in jail.  He would be getting a minimum sentence of 5 years under the proposed Louisiana bill. 

Also, you're operating in extremely bad faith when you say this isn't the "real reason" Republicans support the bill.  This type of assault literally happened to the sponsor's sister!  And, as has been already mentioned, the bill exempts pregnant women from prosecution.   

The bill was about anti-choice extremism. He could have easily written a bill that applied to that specific sort of crime and not extended it to reclassification of abortion drugs. Operating in bad faith is clout chasing off a relatives name.

...his bill does apply to that specific type of crime!  The amendment scheduling mifepristone was offered up and passed by the House, and the Senate has not yet scheduled a vote for concurrence (which they are quickly running out of time to do.)

The House amendment specifically allows Louisiana doctors to prescribe the drugs and for pregnant women to possess them.  It would only become illegal for a man to possess mifepristone...which should be fine because men don't get to make reproductive decisions, amirite? 

[DrScholl]

It exempts pregnant women from prosecution.

Struggling to see the point of the law if pregnant women are exempted. Surely they can just order the stuff online and face no consequence then?

As a local, I'll give some added context to this story.

The bill's sponsor Thomas Pressley (R-Shreveport) has a sister in Houston who's husband tried to induce an abortion by crushing up mifepristone and putting it in her drink.  The bill creates the crime of "coerced criminal abortion by means of fraud", which would carry a prison sentence of up to 20 years. 

After being passed in the State Senate, the House amended the bill to label mifepristone and misoprostol as Schedule IV drugs.  The Senate now has to concur to the House's amendment, but state senate majority leader Cameron Henry (R-Metairie) has so far refused to commit to holding a vote.  If he doesn't schedule one before June 3rd, the bill will die. 

Drugging someone is already illegal and it's likely that such a crime could be prosecuted without a new law, especially one that isn't really focused on men drugging women to induce abortions. I don't even think that's a true concern of Republicans.

Drugging someone is going to get you prosecuted for simple assault in most jurisdictions.  The pro-life position is that assault against a pregnant woman in order induce an abortion is an especially heinous act, and should be subject to additional penalties.  In the aforementioned Texas case, the guy was able to plead down and spent only 180 days in jail.  He would be getting a minimum sentence of 5 years under the proposed Louisiana bill. 

Also, you're operating in extremely bad faith when you say this isn't the "real reason" Republicans support the bill.  This type of assault literally happened to the sponsor's sister!  And, as has been already mentioned, the bill exempts pregnant women from prosecution.   

The bill was about anti-choice extremism. He could have easily written a bill that applied to that specific sort of crime and not extended it to reclassification of abortion drugs. Operating in bad faith is clout chasing off a relatives name.

...his bill does apply to that specific type of crime!  The amendment scheduling mifepristone was offered up and passed by the House, and the Senate has not yet scheduled a vote for concurrence (which they are quickly running out of time to do.)

The House amendment specifically allows Louisiana doctors to prescribe the drugs and for pregnant women to possess them.  It would only become illegal for a man to possess mifepristone...which should be fine because men don't get to make reproductive decisions, amirite? 

Why not pass a law that specifically criminalizes drugging a woman to induce an abortion? Because that's not what the law is really about, it about banning abortion.

[Badger]

It exempts pregnant women from prosecution.

Struggling to see the point of the law if pregnant women are exempted. Surely they can just order the stuff online and face no consequence then?

As a local, I'll give some added context to this story.

The bill's sponsor Thomas Pressley (R-Shreveport) has a sister in Houston who's husband tried to induce an abortion by crushing up mifepristone and putting it in her drink.  The bill creates the crime of "coerced criminal abortion by means of fraud", which would carry a prison sentence of up to 20 years. 

After being passed in the State Senate, the House amended the bill to label mifepristone and misoprostol as Schedule IV drugs.  The Senate now has to concur to the House's amendment, but state senate majority leader Cameron Henry (R-Metairie) has so far refused to commit to holding a vote.  If he doesn't schedule one before June 3rd, the bill will die. 

Drugging someone is already illegal and it's likely that such a crime could be prosecuted without a new law, especially one that isn't really focused on men drugging women to induce abortions. I don't even think that's a true concern of Republicans.

Drugging someone is going to get you prosecuted for simple assault in most jurisdictions.  The pro-life position is that assault against a pregnant woman in order induce an abortion is an especially heinous act, and should be subject to additional penalties.  In the aforementioned Texas case, the guy was able to plead down and spent only 180 days in jail.  He would be getting a minimum sentence of 5 years under the proposed Louisiana bill. 

Also, you're operating in extremely bad faith when you say this isn't the "real reason" Republicans support the bill.  This type of assault literally happened to the sponsor's sister!  And, as has been already mentioned, the bill exempts pregnant women from prosecution.   

Utter bull inks like most of your posts. Doing something like this to terminate a pregnancy results in prosecution for far far more serious charges than simple assault in pretty much any jurisdiction in the country. Don't try to put lipstick on a pig.

[Del Tachi]

It exempts pregnant women from prosecution.

Struggling to see the point of the law if pregnant women are exempted. Surely they can just order the stuff online and face no consequence then?

As a local, I'll give some added context to this story.

The bill's sponsor Thomas Pressley (R-Shreveport) has a sister in Houston who's husband tried to induce an abortion by crushing up mifepristone and putting it in her drink.  The bill creates the crime of "coerced criminal abortion by means of fraud", which would carry a prison sentence of up to 20 years. 

After being passed in the State Senate, the House amended the bill to label mifepristone and misoprostol as Schedule IV drugs.  The Senate now has to concur to the House's amendment, but state senate majority leader Cameron Henry (R-Metairie) has so far refused to commit to holding a vote.  If he doesn't schedule one before June 3rd, the bill will die. 

Drugging someone is already illegal and it's likely that such a crime could be prosecuted without a new law, especially one that isn't really focused on men drugging women to induce abortions. I don't even think that's a true concern of Republicans.

Drugging someone is going to get you prosecuted for simple assault in most jurisdictions.  The pro-life position is that assault against a pregnant woman in order induce an abortion is an especially heinous act, and should be subject to additional penalties.  In the aforementioned Texas case, the guy was able to plead down and spent only 180 days in jail.  He would be getting a minimum sentence of 5 years under the proposed Louisiana bill. 

Also, you're operating in extremely bad faith when you say this isn't the "real reason" Republicans support the bill.  This type of assault literally happened to the sponsor's sister!  And, as has been already mentioned, the bill exempts pregnant women from prosecution.   

Utter bull inks like most of your posts. Doing something like this to terminate a pregnancy results in prosecution for far far more serious charges than simple assault in pretty much any jurisdiction in the country. Don't try to put lipstick on a pig.

Tell me: under what law would such a crime currently be prosecuted in Ohio?

[Landslide Lyndon]

Tell me: under what law would such a crime currently be prosecuted in Ohio?

No lawyer here but I'd be very surprised if a man causes an abortion against the woman's will and isn't prosecuted for aggravated assault and battery.