The Biden administration is arguing that the constitution protects this heinous act

Photo by Joshua Sukoff from Unsplash

Now that more and more states are cracking down on abortions, abortion trafficking and travel have become issues. 

And the Biden administration wants to claim these actions are protected by the Constitution. 

In a startling move, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has thrown its weight behind what it deems a constitutional right: abortion travel. 

This contentious stance has ignited a legal battle with pro-life states, particularly Alabama, where Attorney General Steve Marshall has raised concerns about those facilitating cross-state travel for abortion.

The DOJ, under the leadership of Attorney General Merrick Garland, expressed its support for two lawsuits challenging Alabama’s attempt to prosecute those aiding women in seeking abortions outside the state’s restrictive laws. 

Marshall warned that individuals assisting women in traveling for abortions, which would be prohibited in Alabama, could face charges of conspiracy.

Garland’s justification, however, is anchored in what he calls “bedrock constitutional principles,” asserting that women in states with restrictive abortion laws should be free to seek reproductive care in states where it is legal. 

This clash between the DOJ and pro-life states exemplifies the ongoing struggle over the interpretation of constitutional rights in the context of abortion.

In a statement of interest, the DOJ argued that prosecuting individuals for aiding abortion travel would be unconstitutional. 

This move aligns with the broader push to challenge pro-life laws that aim to protect the unborn. 

Two lawsuits, one filed by The Legal Voice and the other by the Yellowhammer Fund, challenge Alabama’s pro-life legislation, deeming it draconian and seeking protection against conspiracy charges for those assisting women in out-of-state abortions.

The Legal Voice’s lawsuit underscores the complexities faced by minors seeking abortions, stating, “Although many minors faced with an unintended pregnancy choose to involve their parents, many do not.” 

The legal action contends that some minors lack access to their parents, fear parental disappointment or anger, or even face the threat of violence at home.

Notably, the DOJ’s recent prosecution of pro-life activists, citing “conspiracy against rights” and FACE Act violations, adds another layer to the controversy. 

This indicates a consistent stance by the DOJ against those opposing abortion, framing their actions as conspiracies against the supposed right to abortion travel.

A recent case in Idaho further underscores the urgency of addressing abortion trafficking laws. 

An 18-year-old and his mother were arrested for kidnapping charges after taking a 15-year-old from Idaho to Oregon for an abortion without parental knowledge. 

The man faces additional charges of rape and producing child sexually exploitative material. 

However, a U.S. judge blocked Idaho from enforcing its law criminalizing assistance to minors crossing state lines for abortions without parental consent.

The broader concern here is not only about constitutional interpretations but also about the potential exploitation and abuse that could arise from unregulated abortion travel. 

Human trafficking affects millions globally, and predators often exploit victims by taking them across state lines for abortions, leaving them vulnerable to further abuse.

As pro-life Americans grapple with these legal battles, the clash over abortion travel highlights the deep divides in perspectives on constitutional rights, the role of parental consent, and the broader implications for the sanctity of life. 

The battlefield is not only in courtrooms but also in the hearts and minds of a nation torn between preserving life and championing what some consider a newfound constitutional right.

Pro-Life Press will keep you up-to-date on this developing story.