Texas woman, 26, charged with murder over ‘self-induced abortion’

A 26-year-old woman has been charged with murder in Texas after authorities said she caused “the death of an individual by self-induced abortion”, in a state that has the most restrictive abortion laws in the US.

It was unclear whether Lizelle Herrera was accused of having an abortion or whether she helped someone else get an abortion.

Herrera was arrested on Thursday and remained jailed on Saturday on a $500,000 bond in the Starr county jail in Rio Grande City, on the US-Mexico border, sheriff’s major Carlos Delgado said.

Source

And so it begins. When Texas passed its Nazi Germany-esque law that encouraged civilians to tattle on one another for money, it was predicted we would see an uptick in self-induced abortions.

The interesting thing about this case though, is the fact that Texas doesn't actually have a law against self-induced abortion. So how why was this woman arrested and why was her bail at at half-a-million dollars?

To end this post, I just want to point out the fact that current estimates say 25% of women will have an abortion in their lifetime. If you support what is happening to this woman, do you also believe that 1/4 of all women should be charged with murder?

A 2021 state law that bans abortions in Texas for women who are as early as six weeks pregnant has sharply curtailed the number of abortions in the state. The law leaves enforcement to private citizens who can sue doctors or anyone who helps a woman get an abortion. The woman receiving the abortion is exempted from the law.

If a private citizen is suing another private citizen, that's a civil claim and not a punishable offense unless a judge decrees a crime has taken place.

This does seem outrageous and scary. The only problem right now is that we don't have any detail or context. Was it 30 weeks and would have been viable outside the womb? That's different than 6-10 weeks with no possible viability.

This whole attack on womens rights and removal of protections for rape and in some cases medical reasons is scary. I certainly don't want to live in some sort of evangelical taliban type country.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

Wow, did not abortion is protected by the constitution?

In Roe v. Wade,1 the Court established a right of personal privacy protected by the Due Process Clause that includes the right of a woman to determine whether or not to bear a child. In doing so, the Court dramatically increased judicial oversight of legislation under the privacy line of cases, striking down aspects of abortion-related laws in practically all the states, the District of Columbia, and the territories. To reach this result, the Court first undertook a lengthy historical review of medical and legal views regarding abortion, finding that modern prohibitions on abortion were of relatively recent vintage and thus lacked the historical foundation which might have preserved them from constitutional review.2 Then, the Court established that the word “person” as used in the Due Process Clause and in other provisions of the Constitution did not include the unborn, and therefore the unborn lacked federal constitutional protection.3

Me think this lady rights have been violated by the state.

www.law.cornell.edu...

Is soo interesting to see how states can have their own laws, but the truth is that when it comes to constitutional rights states can make laws in reference and try to find loopholes, but can not over step the constitution.

I will love to see where this is heading.

a reply to: TzarChasm

And the thing is, it's not stopping them, women are going out of state daily or in the cases of those who can't, they will just start doing it the way it's been done for a thousand years, by themselves. That will lead to deaths, infections, etc.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

Hospital staff reported her.

"What is alleged is that she was in the hospital and had a miscarriage and divulged some information to hospital staff, who then reported her to the police."

www.salon.com...

It's hard to understand how this happened, especially given HIPAA laws, unless the fetus was viable and therefore she was not under the protection of Roe V Wade.

I'll need to wait until I have more information before I can have an opinion on this one.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

I must say that I am concerned that some believe women have the right to murder. I can only guess to how 1/4 th of men would use such a right, but I suspect a majority of those murders would be used in the defense of the defenseless

originally posted by: frogs453
a reply to: TzarChasm

And the thing is, it's not stopping them, women are going out of state daily or in the cases of those who can't, they will just start doing it the way it's been done for a thousand years, by themselves. That will lead to deaths, infections, etc.

That's a result the Texas authorities have made peace with. Evidently in their minds it's the lesser evil.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

It was unclear whether Lizelle Herrera was accused of having an abortion or whether she helped someone else get an abortion.

If this person assisted , yes .
Especially after the 6th week .
You have to understand US laws .
Each State has sole governance over health in their respective State.

And , next time read the entire article with comprehension .

originally posted by: Gothmog
a reply to: Xcalibur254

It was unclear whether Lizelle Herrera was accused of having an abortion or whether she helped someone else get an abortion.

If this person assisted , yes .
Especially after the 6th week .
You have to understand US laws .
Each State has sole governance over health in their respective State.

And , next time read the entire article with comprehension .

You forgot to say "please"

a reply to: Sookiechacha

unless the fetus was viable

If it was past 6 weeks in Texas, yes .
That is their laws .

originally posted by: TzarChasm

originally posted by: Gothmog
a reply to: Xcalibur254

It was unclear whether Lizelle Herrera was accused of having an abortion or whether she helped someone else get an abortion.

If this person assisted , yes .
Especially after the 6th week .
You have to understand US laws .
Each State has sole governance over health in their respective State.

And , next time read the entire article with comprehension .

You forgot to say "please"

I never say "please" .
Not in my vocabulary .

The coathanger abortions is making a comeback, it was a time before abortion was legal in the US that women often found ways to end their pregnancies and most of the time with very bad results to the woman's health.

originally posted by: Xcalibur254

A 26-year-old woman has been charged with murder in Texas after authorities said she caused “the death of an individual by self-induced abortion”, in a state that has the most restrictive abortion laws in the US.

It was unclear whether Lizelle Herrera was accused of having an abortion or whether she helped someone else get an abortion.

Herrera was arrested on Thursday and remained jailed on Saturday on a $500,000 bond in the Starr county jail in Rio Grande City, on the US-Mexico border, sheriff’s major Carlos Delgado said.

Source

And so it begins. When Texas passed its Nazi Germany-esque law that encouraged civilians to tattle on one another for money, it was predicted we would see an uptick in self-induced abortions.

The interesting thing about this case though, is the fact that Texas doesn't actually have a law against self-induced abortion. So how why was this woman arrested and why was her bail at at half-a-million dollars?

To end this post, I just want to point out the fact that current estimates say 25% of women will have an abortion in their lifetime. If you support what is happening to this woman, do you also believe that 1/4 of all women should be charged with murder?

Another fake Campaign story roflmao 😁

from OP zource....

It was unclear whether Lizelle Herrera was accused of having an abortion or whether she helped someone else get an abortion.

originally posted by: Gothmog
a reply to: Sookiechacha

unless the fetus was viable

If it was past 6 weeks in Texas, yes .
That is their laws .

No, it isn't. This woman was arrested for criminal murder. This isn't about her, or anyone that assisted her, getting civilly sued.

And, Roe V Wade is still the law of the land until SCOTUS says it isn't, not Texas.

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: TzarChasm

originally posted by: Gothmog
a reply to: Xcalibur254

It was unclear whether Lizelle Herrera was accused of having an abortion or whether she helped someone else get an abortion.

If this person assisted , yes .
Especially after the 6th week .
You have to understand US laws .
Each State has sole governance over health in their respective State.

And , next time read the entire article with comprehension .

You forgot to say "please"

I never say "please" .
Not in my vocabulary .

I would blame the economy, but manners are free so I can't even give you that.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

I'll need to wait until I have more information before I can have an opinion on this one.

Im so proud of you right now.

If it was a nurse who reported her, man, thats F'ed.

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: Sookiechacha

I'll need to wait until I have more information before I can have an opinion on this one.

Im so proud of you right now.

If it was a nurse who reported her, man, thats F'ed.

Hospitals get a kickback for that kind of thing, dontchaknow.

a reply to: TzarChasm

I did not.

originally posted by: marg6043
a reply to: Xcalibur254

Wow, did not abortion is protected by the constitution?

In Roe v. Wade,1 the Court established a right of personal privacy protected by the Due Process Clause that includes the right of a woman to determine whether or not to bear a child. In doing so, the Court dramatically increased judicial oversight of legislation under the privacy line of cases, striking down aspects of abortion-related laws in practically all the states, the District of Columbia, and the territories. To reach this result, the Court first undertook a lengthy historical review of medical and legal views regarding abortion, finding that modern prohibitions on abortion were of relatively recent vintage and thus lacked the historical foundation which might have preserved them from constitutional review.2 Then, the Court established that the word “person” as used in the Due Process Clause and in other provisions of the Constitution did not include the unborn, and therefore the unborn lacked federal constitutional protection.3

Me think this lady rights have been violated by the state.

www.law.cornell.edu...

Is soo interesting to see how states can have their own laws, but the truth is that when it comes to constitutional rights states can make laws in reference and try to find loopholes, but can not over step the constitution.

I will love to see where this is heading.

The State itself has sole responsibility over their State .
Not the US Federal government .