Texas woman charged with murder for 'self-induced abortion;' pro-choice activists hold protest demanding her 'immediate release'



A Texas woman has been charged with murder after law enforcement said she carried out a "self-induced abortion." Pro-choice activists have rallied around the woman and demanded her immediate release from jail.

Lizelle Herrera, 26, was arrested on Thursday by the Starr County Sheriff’s Office and charged with murder.

A Starr County Sheriff's Office spokesperson told KVEO-TV Herrera was arrested after authorities learned she "intentionally and knowingly caused the death of an individual by self-induced abortion."

It was not clear how far along Herrera was in her pregnancy.

Herrera remains in the custody of the Starr County Sheriff’s Office with a bond set at $500,000.

“I really can’t imagine what they are going through right now,” family friend Romeo Gonzalez told the New York Post.

A handful of pro-choice activists gathered at the jail near the Texas-Mexico border to protest Herrera's arrest.

Texas Public Radio reporter Pablo De La Rosa wrote on Twitter, "Protesters mobilized by Frontera Fund and South Texas for Reproductive Justice at Starr County Jail after Lizelle Herrera's arrest."

The Frontera Fund is a self-described "abortion fund for the Rio Grande Valley."

“This arrest is inhumane. We are demanding the immediate release of Lizelle Herrera," declared Rockie Gonzalez – founder of the Frontera Fund. “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.”

Protesters mobilized by @LaFronteraFund and South Texas for Reproductive Justice at Starr County Jail after Lizelle Herrera's arrest. Follow @Wzrd_of_Lnlynss who is there this morning for updates. Full audio of my interview with Frontera's Chairwoman here: https://soundcloud.com/pblodlr/interview-with-la-frontera-funds-rockie-gonzalez-on-lizelle-herreras-arrest-in-starr-county\u00a0\u2026pic.twitter.com/g5JnL68bZy
— Pablo De La Rosa (@Pablo De La Rosa) 1649515683

Melissa Arjona – cofounder of South Texans for Reproductive Justice – was also at the protest for Lizelle Herrera.

"I mean, they criminalized pregnancy, basically, and abortion access," Arjona said, referencing the Texas Heartbeat Act. "And so we knew something like this was bound to happen eventually."

Last May, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott signed into law the pro-life Texas Heartbeat Act that prohibits physicians from "knowingly perform[ing] or induce[ing] an abortion on a pregnant woman if the physician detected a fetal heartbeat for the unborn child ... or failed to perform a test to detect a fetal heartbeat."

A report from February found that abortions fell by nearly 60% after the Texas Heartbeat Act went into effect.

However, a study that was published in March said that abortions only fell by 10% because many female Texans went to other states to get abortions. According to a study, an average of 1,391 women traveled to one of seven states for an abortion per month between September 2021 and the end of the year.

Texas Supreme Court shuts down remaining challenge to heartbeat abortion ban, effectively ending abortion providers' federal lawsuit



The Texas Supreme Court this week delivered a critical blow to abortion providers that sought to block the state's controversial six-week abortion ban, known as the "Heartbeat Act," that prohibits abortion procedures after fetal cardiac activity is detected.

In a unanimous ruling issued Friday, the top state court determined that abortion providers cannot sue state licensing officials in order to challenge the law since those officials do not have the ability to enforce the law, Axios reported. Under the legislation, private civil action is the only enforcement mechanism.

The question over whether state officials could take action against violators of the law had been tossed around the federal court system as part of the abortion providers' federal lawsuit against state licensing officials. After the U.S. Supreme Court transferred the issue to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, the 5th Circuit asked the Texas Supreme Court to weigh in.

"We conclude that Texas law does not grant the state-agency executives named as defendants in this case any authority to enforce the Act’s requirements, either directly or indirectly," Justice Jeffrey Boyd wrote delivering the court's opinion.

The ruling effectively ends the abortion providers' months-long federal lawsuit against the pro-life law, leaving it in place.

The bold new law — which infuriated progressive lawmakers and abortion advocates in the state and across the country when it was approved last year — takes a unique approach to defend the lives of unborn babies. It leaves enforcement of the law up to private citizens who are empowered to sue anyone who performs an abortion after roughly six weeks gestation or "aids and abets" it.

Scholars say the unusual provision is what makes the law difficult to challenge. It was designed to circumvent legal precedent surrounding abortion.

Nevertheless, the law has faced significant legal opposition. The abortion providers' challenge over enforcement of the law made it all the way up to the U.S. Supreme Court in December. But justices on the nation's top court dismissed most of the complaints brought by the providers, leaving only a narrow portion of the suit intact that challenged state medical licensing officials.

With the Texas Supreme Court's ruling Friday, even that narrow challenge was stamped out.

"The U.S. Supreme Court left a shred of a case and today the Texas Supreme Court threw out even the crumbs of the case that was left," Julia Kaye, staff attorney with the ACLU Reproductive Freedom Project, lamented, according to the Washington Post.

Kaye went on to acknowledge that with the ruling, the Texas abortion ban "is going to remain in effect for the foreseeable future."

Pro-life advocates, on the other hand, celebrated the ruling.

"This is a big victory for the TX Heartbeat Act," Kimberlyn Schwartz, media director for Texas Right to Life, said in a statement. "We have said from the beginning that abortionists’ lawsuit should be dismissed, and we’re grateful that the law will continue saving thousands of lives."

The abortion ban, one of the strictest in the nation, will now remain in effect as the U.S. Supreme Court weighs the future of abortion in the country, in general. This summer, the court is expected to issue a ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, a case involving a 15-week abortion ban in Mississippi that has set the court on a collision course with its 1973 landmark decision in Roe v. Wade.

Many onlookers expect that the current conservative majority Supreme Court will either overturn or roll back abortion rights enshrined in Roe. Either would likely trigger a large-scale return of the abortion issue to individual states.

In anticipation of such an outcome, many Republican-controlled states have begun proposing and passing bills similar to the one implemented in Texas.

Texas abortion rates plummet 60% in first month following new state law



Abortions in Texas fell by nearly 60% in the first four weeks following the implementation of the state's new heartbeat law, AP News reported on Thursday.

The state enacted a law banning the majority of abortive procedures once a health care provider can detect a fetal heartbeat — usually around six weeks' gestation.

What are the details?

The new law, widely believed to be the most restrictive abortion law in the country in decades, is said to be responsible for reducing abortions in the state by approximately 60%.

The outlet reported that there had been more than 5,400 abortions carried out across the state in August, while just 2,200 over the course of September. According to the state's department of health, abortions in the state peaked in March at more than 5,600 when the law was first introduced.

The new law went into effect on Sept. 1 after the U.S. Supreme Court failed to take up an injunction request by abortion providers. It authorizes citizens to file private lawsuits against abortion providers and their aides after the six-week cutoff mark.

No lawsuits have been filed at the time of this reporting.

Anything else?

The outlet reported that many women are likely traveling to other states in order to obtain abortions after the six-week mark.

The Dallas Morning News also reported that such women seeking abortions have traveled to surrounding states including Arkansas, Colorado, Kansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, and Oklahoma.

The Women's March on Wednesday tweeted about the plummeting rates and called for the law to be abolished.

"The first month after #SB8 took effect, abortions in Texas dropped almost 60% — not because people stopped needing care. Instead, Texans started traveling 300+ miles to out-of-state clinics, which struggle to keep up with demand. AbolishSB8."

The first month after #SB8 took effect, abortions in Texas dropped almost 60% \u2013 not because people stopped needing care.\n\nInstead, Texans started traveling 300+ miles to out-of-state clinics, which struggle to keep up with demand.\n\nAbolish SB8.https://www.dallasnews.com/news/politics/2022/02/07/abortions-in-texas-dropped-almost-60-in-the-first-month-after-new-sb-8-restrictions-were-imposed\u00a0\u2026
— Women's March (@Women's March) 1644444661

Earlier in February, pro-life advocacy group Texas Right to Life issued a statement on the news, which said that “the success of the Texas Heartbeat Act is embodied by every child saved.”

"For over 150 days, our work has saved an estimated 100 babies per day," sadi Texas Right to Life director of media and communication Kimberlyn Schwartz. "Our impact is only just beginning, as more states seek to replicate our success and as we look to the Mississippi case that could overturn Roe this summer."

'Good luck with that': Texas abortion ban author claims California Gov. Newsom's copycat gun law will ultimately fail



The author of Texas' six-week abortion ban shot back at California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) this week after he announced plans to use his legislation as a framework to restrict Second Amendment rights in the Golden State, saying the copycat plan would ultimately fail.

What are the details?

Over the weekend, Newsom instructed state lawmakers to craft a bill modeled after the abortion ban that would empower private citizens to file civil lawsuits against anyone "who manufactures, distributes, or sells an assault weapon or ghost gun kit or parts in the State of California."

But Texas state Sen. Bryan Hughes (R) dismissed the liberal governor's efforts on Monday, telling the Houston Chronicle he didn't think his enforcement mechanism would be “effective against firmly established constitutional rights.”

“I would tell Gov. Newsom good luck with that,” Hughes told the outlet.

“If California takes that route, they’ll find that California gun owners will violate the law knowing that they’ll be sued and knowing that the Supreme Court has their back because the right to keep and bear arms is clearly in the Constitution, and the courts have clearly and consistently upheld it," he added.

In Hughes' view, the right to an abortion, though enshrined in by the landmark Supreme Court case Roe v. Wade, is a much less settled constitutional issue than is the right to keep and bear arms.

What's the background?

The Texas abortion law, which prohibits the termination of a pregnancy after fetal cardiac activity is detected, uniquely relies on civil — rather than criminal — enforcement in order to circumvent legal challenges. The Supreme Court declined to block the law on Friday, though it allowed lawsuits against the law to proceed.

Newsom acknowledged that the Supreme Court's ruling was a major motivating factor in his decision to try exploiting the new law for gun restriction purposes.

"I am outraged by yesterday’s U.S. Supreme Court decision allowing Texas’s ban on most abortion services to remain in place, and largely endorsing Texas’s scheme to insulate its law from the fundamental protections of Roe v. Wade," the governor said. "But if states can now shield their laws from review by the federal courts that compare assault weapons to Swiss Army knives, then California will use that authority to protect people’s lives, where Texas used it to put women in harm’s way."

SCOTUS is letting private citizens in Texas sue to stop abortion?!\n\nIf that's the precedent then we'll let Californians sue those who put ghost guns and assault weapons on our streets.\n\nIf TX can ban abortion and endanger lives, CA can ban deadly weapons of war and save lives.https://twitter.com/CAgovernor/status/1469865007517089798\u00a0\u2026
— Gavin Newsom (@Gavin Newsom) 1639278143

What else?

In recent weeks, some on the right, including the California-based Firearms Policy Coalition, expressed concerns that the Texas abortion ban set a dangerous precedent that would soon be used to limit other constitutional rights, and specifically gun rights.

Texas' own solicitor general, Judd Stone II, even seemed to express that view when answering a question from Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh during oral arguments last month.

“Say everyone who sells an AR-15 is liable for a million dollars to any citizen ... Would that kind of law be exempt from pre-enforcement review in federal court?” Kavanaugh asked.

The Chronicle reported that "Stone answered it would unless Congress modified federal courts’ jurisdiction to do so."

Anything else?

But Hughes' explanation may also hold water.

During oral arguments on another state abortion law earlier this month, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas seemed to indicate that certain constitutional rights, such as the right to bear arms, are stronger than others, such as abortion, since they are clearly and definitively outlined in the Constitution.

"If we were talking about the Second Amendment, I know what we're talking about ... Because it's written, it's there. What specifically is the right here [to abortion] that we're talking about?" he asked U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar.

Prelogar struggled to come up with a concrete answer.

Will the Real Right Please Stand Up? | Guest: Blake Masters | Ep 494

Will the Real Right Please Stand Up? | Guest: Blake Masters | Ep 494

My Response to Brene Brown’s Toxic Post | Ep 489

My Response to Brene Brown’s Toxic Post | Ep 489

Pastor Voddie Baucham: 'An attack on masculinity is an attack on the God who created us'



On the latest episode of "Fearless," BlazeTV host Jason Whitlock welcomed pastor and best-selling author Voddie Baucham for a lively discussion of critical race theory, Marxism, abortion, transgenderism, and more.

Addressing the confusion of genders in modern America, Voddie explained why he believes our society needs to embrace and celebrate the differences between men and women and how attacking masculinity is "actually cutting off our noses to spite our face."

"An attack on masculinity is an attack on the God who created us. He created us male and female. We are not the same, and there is beauty in the differences between male and female," Voddie asserted. "The problem is, when you attack masculinity, you are actually attacking a preserving force. If you don't have strong men in a culture, then what you have is young men who are not kept in check and what they do is they wreak havoc. And when those young men wreak havoc, you start looking around and ... immediately want someone or something strong enough to bring that into order again. So, we're creating a problem ... and the way that that problem is solved, is by the very thing that you attacked in the first place. ... We're actually cutting off our noses to spite our face."

Jason added that today's men have responded to attacks on masculinity by "shunning responsibilities," particularly when it comes to the issue of abortion.

"This leftist, liberal, feminist point of view that it's [the woman's] decision ... that it's just all on her ... that's just an irresponsible point of view to have," Jason said. "Here in America, if you go look at the percentage of how many black babies are being destroyed in the womb, you're actually co-signing your genocide and death."

Voddie agreed, citing Texas health data, which shows that black patients accounted for about 30% of abortions in 2020, though only 12% of the state's population is black.

Watch the video clip below to catch more of the conversation, or find the full episode of "Fearless with Jason Whitlock" here:



Want more from Jason Whitlock?

To enjoy more fearless conversations at the crossroads of culture, faith, sports, and comedy with Jason Whitlock and Uncle Jimmy, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

DOJ pledges law enforcement support to abortion clinics in Texas as it 'urgently explores all options' to challenge new pro-life law



The Justice Department this week vowed federal law enforcement support to abortion clinics and to women seeking abortions in Texas following the passage of the state's new pro-life law.

What are the details?

Texas's new law, which bars abortions after fetal cardiac activity is detected — something that typically occurs at six weeks' gestation — went into effect last Wednesday after the Supreme Court refused an emergency request to block it.

After its implementation, Democrats across the state and country immediately decried the law as unconstitutional and demanded that the federal government intervene.

In a statement issued Monday, Attorney General Merrick Garland appeared to answer the call, announcing that the Justice Department will step up efforts to "protect" abortion seekers via the FACE Act while continuing to seek additional ways to confront the state legislation.

"While the Justice Department urgently explores all options to challenge Texas SB8 in order to protect the constitutional rights of women and other persons, including access to an abortion, we will continue to protect those seeking to obtain or provide reproductive health services pursuant to our criminal and civil enforcement of the FACE Act," the attorney general said.

The FACE Act of 1994 "prohibits the use or threat of force and physical obstruction that injures, intimidates, or interferes with a person seeking to obtain or provide reproductive health services."

What else?

The department's mention of the act is in direct reference to the Texas law's mechanism for enforcement.

According to the legislation, the ban will not be enforced by the state. Rather, private citizens are empowered to enforce it by filing civil lawsuits against doctors who perform an abortion after six weeks or against anyone who "aids or abets" the procedure.

In the statement, Garland warned that "the department will provide support from federal law enforcement when an abortion clinic or reproductive health center is under attack."

The attorney general added that his department has already "reached out to U.S. Attorneys' Offices and FBI field offices in Texas and across the country to discuss our enforcement authorities."

"We will not tolerate violence against those seeking to obtain or provide reproductive health services," he noted.

It remains to be seen how exactly the Justice Department will enforce the FACE Act or what other avenues it pursues in an effort to thwart the legislation. Certainly, the Texas abortion ban does not condone or promote violence against abortion clinics or abortion seekers, though Democrats have expressed fear that such violence will be enacted.

Pro-abortion churches in Texas vow to fight the state's new pro-life law, 'take God back' from the religious right



A growing number of pro-abortion churches in Texas are vowing to fight a new state law that prohibits performing abortion procedures after a fetal heartbeat is detected, which typically occurs at around six weeks' gestation.

The churches, known as "Reproductive Freedom Congregations," are united in their public support for a woman's right to an abortion and are determined to "take God back" from the religious right.

What are the details?

The initiative was spearheaded last week by the religious group "Just Texas: Faith Voices for Reproductive Justice" with the aim of training pastors on how to preach on reproductive health issues from the pulpit, the Religious News Service reported.

It was officially organized in anticipation of Texas's new pro-life law, which allows private citizens to file a civil lawsuit against doctors who perform abortions after six weeks or anyone who "aids and abets" the procedure.

During a press conference on Wednesday, the group said 25 congregations had already agreed to hold the designation and another 70 were going through the process.

According to Just Texas' website, to become a "Reproductive Freedom Congregation," a church must publicly affirm three principles:

  • We trust and respect women.
  • We promise that people who attend our congregation will be free from stigma, shame, or judgment for their reproductive decisions, including abortion.
  • We believe access to comprehensive and affordable reproductive health services is a moral and social good.

Just Texas also encourages member churches to go through training sessions in preparation for testifying about reproductive health care or for participating in marches and protests about reproductive freedom issues.

What are people saying?

"The church is an ideal place to love people into wholeness and what our church has been about for a long time and inviting people to speak their truths and not be silenced about reproductive issues," said Rev. Dr. Daniel Kanter of the First Unitarian Church in Dallas.

"We live in a country where a third of women have had an abortion, which means that on a Sunday morning when I'm preaching to my congregation, I can assume that a third of the women there have had an abortion," added Reverend Dr. Colin Bossen, senior minister of the First Unitarian Universalist Church of Houston, in an interview with KRIV-TV on Sunday.

"There are progressive liberal mainstream churches that are synagogues and mosques and temples that are out there and believe in reproductive freedom for women," Bossen continued. "We're going to make our voices known."

The reverend claimed that Texas's new abortion ban is "straight out of" the "fascist playbook."

What else?

But Just Texas' mission extends far beyond just reproductive health care, according to Rev. Erika Forbes, the faith and outreach manager for Just Texas.

It may have started with preaching abortion access, but the end goal is a drastic shift in how the American church views an array of social issues.

"I am on a quest, we are on a quest, to take God back from the hostage situation that the conservatives have hijacked, and I absolutely feel that the God that I believe in, the God that I serve, called by many names, and no name at all, trusts and respects women," Forbes said.

Joy Reid: Texas is basically a ‘small Soviet Republic’ now. ‘What woman or POC could possibly feel safe there?’



MSNBC anchor Joy Reid lampooned Texas this week over its promotion of conservative legislation — including a constitutional carry provision, election security reform, and a ban on abortions — comparing the state to a satellite republic of the USSR.

"Texas is basically a small Soviet Republic at this point, with neighbors spying on neighbors, hoping to collect a cash bounty, in addition to being an apartheid state for nonwhite voters," the progressive anchor claimed in a tweet, likening private American citizens to the former Soviet KGB.

"What woman or [person of color] could possibly feel safe there?" she asked. "To say nothing of the gun proliferation."

On Wednesday, a number of laws took effect in Texas, including one allowing residents to carry a handgun in public without a permit and another barring abortions after a fetal heartbeat is detected, which typically occurs at six weeks' gestation. The latter provision is to be enforced not by the state but by private citizens now empowered to file a civil lawsuit against doctors who perform an abortion or anyone who "aids and abets" the procedure.

Republicans have also over the last several weeks pushed for a new election security reform bill, which, in part, would increase protections for poll watchers.

In the tweet thread, Reid exasperatedly questioned what the "private citizen bullies" would be permitted to enforce next?

Will Texans be prompted to spy on teachers to ensure they are not teaching the true history of slavery and are only… https://t.co/YQ3qta2yq2

— Joy-Ann (Pro-Democracy) Reid 😷 (@JoyAnnReid) 1630613057.0

"They've enacted laws letting (potentially armed) thugs "watch" (Black and Latino) voters, prompted Texans to spy on women and file lawsuits for a $ bounty against anyone helping them end a pregnancy," Reid lamented.

"Will Texans be prompted to spy on teachers to ensure they are not teaching the true history of slavery and are only upholding the prim dignity of the white founding fathers? How about urging citizens to inform on and sue parents who send their children to school masked?" she asked.

The anchor then warned that similarly dangerous measures will soon be passed in Florida.

"[Florida Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis] isn't just gonna sit back and let [Texas Republican Gov. Greg Abbott] out-Viktor Orban him," she said, alluding to the Hungarian prime minister who, ironically, is famous for openly demanding that Soviet troops leave the country during a 1989 speech.

"After that, it's the floodgates in Red America. We are two countries. The United States, and Gilead," she concluded.