Will California AB2223 Allow Legalized Infanticide
Written by Peter Boykin on April 24, 2022
Shared By Peter Boykin – American Political Commentator / Citizen Journalist
From What I am Reading, let me know if I misunderstand
AB2223 Law passed in California. Way to go…. now you can legally kill ur baby up to 28 days AFTER birth!
Now You Decide what this could end up leading to?!
California Assembly Bill 2021-2022 Regular Session
FactCheck says this: https://www.factcheck.org/2022/04/california-not-poised-to-legalize-infanticide/
California Not Poised to ‘Legalize Infanticide’ I hope for this time they are correct but FYI they are VERY LEFT
Here is another take on it:
Fact Check: Do California lawmakers want to decriminalize infanticide? Here’s what we found
One More take on it:
Now, a California Bill to Permit Infant Death by Neglect
A California bill would do away with mandatory investigations of stillbirths. Opponents misleadingly claim it would “legalize infanticide.” The bill would prevent prosecution in cases of “perinatal death due to a pregnancy-related cause.” But authorities would investigate if there were evidence of foul play leading to an infant’s death.
Here is the Bill
(1) Existing law requires a county coroner to hold inquests to inquire into and determine the circumstances, manner, and cause of violent, sudden, or unusual deaths, including deaths related to or following known or suspected self-induced or criminal abortion. Existing law requires a coroner to register a fetal death after 20 weeks of gestation unless it is the result of legal abortion. If a physician was not in attendance at the delivery of the fetus, existing law requires the fetal death to be handled as death without medical attendance. Existing law requires the coroner to state on the certificate of fetal death the time of fetal death, the direct causes of the fetal death, and the conditions, if any, that gave rise to these causes.
This bill would delete the requirement that a coroner hold inquests for deaths related to or following known or suspected self-induced or criminal abortion and would delete the requirement that an unattended fetal death is handled as death without medical attendance. The bill would prohibit using the coroner’s statements on the certificate of fetal death to establish, bring, or support a criminal prosecution or civil cause of damages against any person.
(2) Existing law, the Reproductive Privacy Act, provides that every individual possesses a fundamental right of privacy with respect to their personal reproductive decisions. Existing law prohibits the state from interfering with a pregnant person’s right to choose or obtain an abortion before the fetus is viable or when it is necessary to protect the life and health of the pregnant person. Under existing law, abortion is unauthorized if either the person performing the abortion is not a health care provider that is authorized to perform an abortion or the fetus is viable.
Existing law, the Tom Bane Civil Rights Act, authorizes an individual whose exercise or enjoyment of rights secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or of rights secured by the Constitution or laws of this state, has been interfered with, or attempted to be interfered with, to institute or prosecute in their own name and on their own behalf an action for damages, as prescribed.
This bill would prohibit a person from being subject to civil or criminal liability, or otherwise deprived of their rights, based on their actions or omissions with respect to their pregnancy or actual, potential, or alleged pregnancy outcome or based solely on their actions to aid or assist a pregnant person who is exercising their reproductive rights. The bill would clarify that abortion is unauthorized if performed by a person other than the pregnant person and either the person performing the abortion is not a health care provider that is authorized to perform an abortion or the fetus is viable. The bill would authorize a party aggrieved by a violation of the Reproductive Privacy Act to bring a civil action against an offending state actor, as specified, and would require a court, upon a motion, to award reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs to a prevailing plaintiff. The bill would also authorize a person aggrieved by a violation of the Reproductive Privacy Act to bring a civil action pursuant to the Tom Bane Civil Rights Act. The bill would provide for the indemnification of employees or former employees of public agencies who were acting within the scope of their employment.
#GoRight with Peter R Boykin
Peter Boykin For United States Congress
Join Peter Boykin on Telegram
Join Peter Boykin on Facebook
Join Peter Boykin on GAB
Support The Podcast and Website
To Donate to the Podcast (NOT THE CAMPAIGN)