Idaho Republican Rapist Protection Act

UPDATED 3/18: News today of the discovery in Republican federal legislation to turn the IRS into abortion investigators.

The proposed law, also known as H.R. 3, extends the reach of the Hyde Amendment—which bans federal funding for abortion except in cases of rape, incest, or when the life of the mother is at stake—into many parts of the federal tax code. In some cases, the law would forbid using tax benefits—like credits or deductions—to pay for abortions or health insurance that covers abortion. If an American who used such a benefit were to be audited, Barthold said, the burden of proof would lie with the taxpayer to provide documentation, for example, that her abortion fell under the rape/incest/life-of-the-mother exception, or that the health insurance she had purchased did not cover abortions.

---------------------------------------

Randy posted this disturbing assessment by the Attorney General on Idaho Republican's latest effort to make abortion inaccessible in Idaho.

The legislation in question is Idaho Senate Bill 1148, aimed principally “to prohibit the abortion of an unborn child of twenty or more weeks postfertilization age.”

One of the provisions of the bill (section 18-508-1), not highlighted in the statement of purpose, says this: “Any woman upon whom an abortion has been performed in violation of the pain – capable unborn child protection act or the father of the unborn child who was the subject of such an abortion may maintain an action against the person who performed the abortion in an intentional or a reckless violation of the provisions of this chapter for actual damages.” (emphasis added)

Senator Dan Schmidt, D-Moscow, had a question for the attorney general’s office: Does that mean a rapist could sue an abortion provider. The reply (in an informal but researched opinion): “Section 508(1) is unambiguous on this score and, as currently drafted, provides a private right of action to the biological father without exclusion. The answer to your question is therefore in the affirmative.”

Idaho Republican legislators will interfere in the most heart wrenching personal matters involving the most vulnerable people, unless, of course, those people are actually alive and who line up to talk to them personally. In that case they will pat themselves on the back for providing due process as they send them packing.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Ridiculous on so many levels

Okay, I get that they're simply trying to eliminate the occurrence of abortions (legal medical procedures, mind you) and they'll do whatever it takes to do so. However, what I don't get is how shortsighted they're being about this and so many other pieces of legislation this session. Aren't legislators supposed to make the law? Wouldn't that mean that they should have some sort of respect for the law that came before them and the law that will come after them? Do they even care?

As to the AG's opinion on this matter, I must say I am shocked by this "private right of action" the biological father is receiving. Not only can we assume that some of these so-called "fathers" will in fact be rapists, some of these fathers are going to be a big part of the reason these women are choosing to terminate the pregnancy in the first place. Can't man up and take care of your responsibilities? Then don't expect your girlfriend to think you'll do so if the two of you bring a child into the world and don't hold her (or her doctor) at fault when the logical, responsible decision results in an abortion.

I have no patience for this shit, clearly. I'm adopted. I don't know if I was the result of rape, incest or simply poor planning. As little as I know about my birth parents, I sure as hell know that I wouldn't have wanted my biological father inserting his opinion and his "private right of action" in my life after I was born and placed up for adoption. Why give him that option before birth? It's just ridiculous.