Herrell’s abortion row

NEW MEXICO – On September 24 the United States House of Representatives sent the Women’s Health Protection Act, a bill seen by many as a response to Texas’ newest abortion law, to the US Senate on mostly partisan lines – with one Democrat, Henry Cuellar, R-Texas, voting against the act. New Mexico’s Congressional Delegation to the House of Representatives voted mostly in favor of the bill, with the Second Congressional District’s Representative Yvette Herrell voting against the act. Rep. Herrell’s vote drew condemnation, in an email to supporters she defended her vote.

What is WHPA?

The Women’s Health Protection Act seeks to accomplish one effort: Legalization of abortions. If the act passes the US Senate, which will require every single Democrat and at least 10 Republicans to vote yes on, the US Supreme Court decision of Roe v. Wade, which certified a woman’s right to terminate an active pregnancy if she chooses, will become law.

WHPA certifies that women who opt in favor of an abortion cannot be sued, reversing a Texas state law which allows women who receive an abortion, and everyone who assists them – including drivers, to be sued for their part in aiding the abortion. This protection from lawsuits would extend to all who aided the woman in her efforts to receive an abortion.

Section 8(B)(1) of the bill reads, “Any individual or entity, including any health care provider or patient, adversely affected by an alleged violation of this Act, may commence a civil action against any State that violates, or against any government official (including a person described in section 7(c)) that implements or enforces a limitation or requirement that violates, section 4. The court shall hold unlawful and set aside the limitation or requirement if it is in violation of this Act.” This section allows any woman who has been denied the service of an abortion or has been sued because they received an abortion to sue the state and/or party who denied them the protected right of abortion.

Going further, and to ensure that Texas’ law is not infallible, the law reads, “Neither a State that enforces or maintains, nor a government official (including a person described in section 7(c)) who is permitted to implement or enforce any limitation or requirement that violates section 4 shall be immune under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, the Eleventh Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, or any other source of law, from an action in a Federal or State court of competent jurisdiction challenging that limitation or requirement.” To ensure that this act supersedes previously established state law, the act declares the Tenth Amendment, a section of the Bill of Rights which secures the right of individual states to establish their own laws separate from the federal government, as being invalid for abortions. This section also declares that any doctor who aids a woman in getting an abortion cannot be sued under state law, and that citizens cannot sue their fellows of another state for following the new law.

As a takeaway, this bill primarily legalizes abortions for women, and extends the protections of Roe v. Wade into law for all Americans.

Condemnation and response

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee was quick to condemn Herrell’s vote, saying in a statement, “When it came time to stand up for the people of NM-02, Herrell once again voted to control women’s bodies and lives over protecting their freedom to make their own decisions free from political interference and vigilante bounty hunters.”

DCCC Chairman Adrian Eng-Gastelum saying, “Rep. Yvette Herrell’s vote against protecting women’s freedom to make their own health care decisions is flat-out dangerous for her constituents whose longstanding constitutional right to an abortion is under attack. If Yvette Herrell won’t stand up to even the most radical abortion bans that place bounties on the heads of doctors and anyone who assists a woman seeking care, she is too extreme for the people of NM-02.”

Herrell rejects the notion, however, explaining “Unfortunately, the deceptively named ‘Women’s Health Protection Act’ was not about protecting the health of women at all. Instead, if this legislation becomes law, it would permanently expand abortion on demand up to and including the day of birth.” Herrell continued, “This bill sought to eliminate the ability of states to place reasonable restrictions on abortion procedures, many of which exist to ensure that women have safe access to real medical care. Even many of my prochoice colleagues in congress said it went too far.”

Herrell goes on to say that the bill is politically motivated. Herrell spoke in front of the US Capitol to explain her decision, that video can be found on Representative Herrell’s Twitter account at https://twitter.com/RepHerr e l l / s t a - tus/1441476189793574913?s =20

WHPA will be making its way through the US Senate, where it is unlikely to find the floor for a vote.

New Mexico’s abortion laws

In the 2021 Regular Session of the New Mexico State Legislature, New Mexico’s lawmakers eliminated a 1969 law which criminalizes abortion, because of Roe v. Wade the law was not applicable, but sensing that the supreme court’s decision may not be upheld by a newly conservative court, the Democratic majority in the state decided to ensure that even if Roe v. Wade was overturned, abortion wouldn’t be illegal in New Mexico.

Cibola’s State Representative Eliseo Lee Alcon (D-Cibola, McKinley) who represents most of western Cibola County voted yes on this bill, while Rep. Harry Garcia (D-Cibola, McKinley, Bernalillo, Socorro, Valencia, San Juan) voted against it. State Senators Joshua Sanchez (R-Cibola, McKinley, Socorro, Valencia) and George Munoz (D-Cibola, McKinley, San Juan) both voted against the bill. Despite three quarters of Cibola’s delegation to Santa Fe voting against the bill, it did pass through the legislature and was signed by Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham on February 26 with the governor remarking, “A woman has the right to make decisions about her own body … Anyone who seeks to violate bodily integrity, or to criminalize womanhood, is in the business of dehumanization. New Mexico is not in that business – not any more.” (sic.)