Republicans in South Carolina have introduce legislation which would make it a felony to “intentionally aid, abet, or conspire with another person” to get an abortion, Insider reports.
S. 1373, currently in the Medical Affairs committee of the South Carolina State Senate, makes it a felony to “provide information to a pregnant woman, or someone seeking information on behalf of a pregnant woman, by telephone, internet, or any other mode of communication regarding self-administered abortions or the means to obtain an abortion.”
The bill also makes it a felony to host or maintain “an internet website, providing access to an internet website, or providing an internet service purposefully directed to a pregnant woman who is a resident of this State that provides information on how to obtain an abortion.”
The crime is punishable by up to 5 years in prison and/or a fine of $5,000.
The bill is modeled after a blueprint created by the prominent anti-abortion group, the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC) and is designed to be replicated by lawmakers across the country, according to the Washington Post.
Democratic State Sen. Mia McLeod who serves on the Medical Affairs Committee said the bill would likely pass in the state.
“As a woman and sexual assault survivor, I am deeply concerned about its impact, as well as its far-reaching implications. There is nothing Biblical, Scriptural, or Constitutional about what these religious zealots are doing,” McLeod wrote in a statement.
Alexandra Givens, the president of the center for democracy and technology, told Insider that the bill as written is “plainly unconstitutional”
The bill “could bring in speech by journalists or politicians or public interest groups who are trying to help people understand their rights and the resources available to them,” Givens added.
First Amendment attorney, Robert Corn-Revere told the outlet that if the bill becomes law it is “highly unlikely” to succeed in court when challenged and cited Bigelow v. Virginia as precedent. The Supreme Court ruling in that case made it legal to share information that could help women get abortions.
Still, advocates say even if courts eventually strike down the bill, it may take months and could affect the health of many women seeking abortions. Furthermore, a bill like S.1373 could have other effects like scaring people to remain silent or turning women away from seeking abortions.
“In the First Amendment domain, we talk a lot about chilling effects, and statutes like this — even if they are unconstitutional — have a chilling effect on people’s willingness and courage to post information to the people that need it,” Givens said. “And that’s one of my biggest concerns that even discussion of laws like this might have.”
