Anti-Abortion Plaintiffs Keep Being Exposed as Abusers
7.2.26
Click to skip ahead: Anti-Abortion Plaintiffs Keep Being Exposed as Abusers; Democrats Call for An End of Pregnancy-Related Arrests; The Anti-Abortion Laws Taking Effect This Month; Planned Parenthood Defunding Set to Expire; In the States: Arkansas, Texas; Trump Administration Sued over Title X Guidelines
Anti-Abortion Plaintiffs Keep Being Exposed as Abusers
Once hailed as a mastermind of the anti-abortion movement, attorney Jonathan Mitchell can’t stop embarrassing himself.
For the last year now, Mitchell has represented a Texas man named Jerry Rodriguez, who is suing California abortion provider, Remy Coeytaux. Rodriguez accuses Coeytaux of mailing abortion pills that his girlfriend was later ‘coerced’ into taking. Rodriguez invokes Texas’ HB 7 in his suit, which prohibits the shipment of abortion pills and fines those in violation at least $100,000.
Except: Rodriguez’s story just keeps falling apart. As we reported earlier this year, Rodriguez has an extensive record of egregious domestic violence and has been convicted of abusing at least one woman. HB 7 has a clause barring convicted abusers from suing under it.
Earlier this week, without specifying a reason, Rodriguez dropped his case—then refiled a nearly identical suit the same day with his daughter, Isabella Irene Rodriguez. In this new suit, Rodriguez is still suing Coeytaux for wrongful death, but his daughter is the sole plaintiff suing under HB 7.
Coeytaux’s attorney, Jenna Hudson at the Center for Reproductive Rights, says there’s one reason for this reshuffling: “Jerry Rodriguez is ineligible to sue as a domestic abuser.”
“This case, like the first one, is a shameless attempt to harass health care providers and scare women away from accessing abortion. … It’s hardly surprising that someone willing to sue over a partner’s abortion also turned out to be abusive.”
Mitchell has represented at least two other men who have sued ex-partners over their abortions, including one who was allegedly abusive throughout his marriage—and who tried to use his suit to blackmail his ex into having sex with him.
Mitchell’s strategy of colluding with vengeful men has directly inspired groups like Texas Right to Life to actively recruit abusers, all while the National Domestic Violence Hotline reported a spike in women saying their partners threatened legal action if they had abortions.
All of this is, obviously, a circus—and there are even more layers. Remember how HB7 has a clause against convicted abusers using it? Rodriguez’s daughter Isabella recently faced domestic assault charges in Hidalgo County—including a count of endangering a child, though the charges were ultimately dropped.
In any case, HB 7’s clause barring abusers isn’t just useless, it’s insulting to victims: banning abortion, itself, is reproductive coercion. Despite the anti-abortion movement’s best efforts to weaponize ‘coercion,’ bans have only contributed to surging domestic violence and further alienated and endangered victims:
We’ll continue to update you as this case moves forward—or, hopefully, doesn’t.
Democrats Call for An End of Pregnancy-Related Arrests
To mark the fourth anniversary of Dobbs last week, seven members of Congress wrote a letter to HHS Secretary RFK Jr. and acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, demanding an end to pregnancy-related arrests.
In the letter, Reps. Veronica Escobar, Jasmine Crockett, Marc A. Veasey, Terri A. Sewell, Steve Cohen, Morgan McGarvey, and Nikema Williams, “express deep concern about the growing criminalization of miscarriage across the United States.”
The lawmakers cite key data from Pregnancy Justice, which tracked at least 400 cases of pregnancy-related arrests within the first two years of Dobbs.
“These cases are not isolated. They show a national pattern where miscarriage is treated as intentional, and individuals are subjected to criminal investigation and prosecution for events that are unavoidable and naturally occurring… No one should be afraid to go to jail during what could be one of the most devastating moments of their life. No family should face police interrogation while experiencing a health crisis.”
The letter also includes cases we’ve reported here at Abortion, Every Day, including Patience Rousseau in Nevada and a Georgia woman arrested last year for how she disposed of miscarriage remains.
We’re glad to see members of Congress bring attention to this long-simmering public health crisis—and how the end of Roe has exacerbated it. We certainly hope more than seven members sign the next letter, and that letters like this soon translate to legislative action.
The Anti-Abortion Laws Taking Effect This Month
It is, somehow, July, and not only are heatwaves plaguing the nation, but so are a rash of anti-abortion laws that are finally taking effect this month—all of which we’ve covered at AED:
Mississippi added mifepristone and misoprostol to the state’s anti-drug trafficking law, making distributing the life-saving medications punishable with 10 years in prison.
Kansas and Wyoming now shield anti-abortion crisis pregnancy centers from basic regulation under the CARE Act. Crafted by Alliance Defending Freedom, these laws—which aim to make CPCs immune from any kind of accountability—are appearing in legislatures across the country. (Read Jessica’s explainer and follow up for more.)
Oklahoma’s new law renders it a felony to so much as possess abortion pills with the intent to distribute them, punishable with 10 years in prison and $100,000 fines.
Iowa abortion patients, who can only seek care up until 6 weeks, now must get abortion medication in person. The new law also requires a physical exam and a screening for abuse or coercion.
“I love working at Hope because it serves as a model of how the world truly could be: a place where there is time for complex conversations and big decisions, where bodily autonomy is respected, and where individuals can make their own unique decisions about pregnancy and parenting.”
- Louisa Richardson-Deppe, chief operating officer of Chicago’s Hope Clinic, in Cultured
Planned Parenthood Defunding Set to Expire
This week marks one year since Congress defunded Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers, blocking the groups from receiving Medicaid reimbursements. Tomorrow the ‘defund’ provision will expire—a huge relief, obviously, but really just a first step.
Planned Parenthood and other providers warn that Republicans’ pursuit of a permanent defund provision is continuing, and there’s no reversing the damage the past year has done.
A new Planned Parenthood report found:
Nearly 30 Planned Parenthood centers serving over 40,000 patients have shuttered;
Two-thirds (66%) of health center closures occurred in medically underserved communities;
Among centers that have remained open, far fewer patients have been able to seek services: 25% fewer birth control pill packages were dispensed, visits for long-acting reversible contraception methods like IUDs dropped by 26%, breast exam visits decreased by 20%, and STI testing declined by 10%.
Nearly two-thirds (64%) of Planned Parenthood center closures took place in states where abortion is legal.
As we first reported last year, the intention behind the ‘defund’ provision was a backdoor, national abortion ban. Planned Parenthood’s Alexis McGill-Johnson says the organization is “in a fight for survival.”
Restoration of Medicaid funds is an important step—but it doesn’t change that the care infrastructure that existed one year ago is gone, and can’t be rebuilt overnight. Health centers that have closed can’t just reopen.
Republicans will never stop trying to permanently defund abortion providers—which is just one reason this year’s 2026 midterms are so critical, and why Democrats should absolutely campaign on the devastation of the ‘defund’ provision.
In the States: Arkansas, Texas
We all need some good news right now, and all of our state news today delivers!
Let’s start with Arkansas, where a federal judge ruled against several state laws that create barriers for citizen-led ballot measures. The League of Women Voters of Arkansas sued last year to block restrictive measures, including one that would require voters to show ID before signing ballot measure petitions. The judge rightfully noted this infringes on free speech.
Especially notable: the ruling comes after Republicans stymied efforts by reproductive rights advocates to put abortion on the ballot in 2024. Despite gathering more than enough signatures, Arkansas leaders refused to put the amendment on the ballot—arguing it failed to qualify on a technicality.
Given the sweeping success of pro-choice ballot measures in states across the U.S., we’re hopeful Arkansas organizers might have the chance to advocate for abortion rights at the ballot box in the near future.
Finally, more good news—this time coming from deep-red Texas. Last month, the Comanche City Council rejected a ‘sanctuary city for the unborn’ ordinance by a 3-1 margin. These ‘abortion trafficking’ measures make it illegal to help someone leave the state for abortion care or obtain abortion pills.
At a contentious meeting, the Comanche County Attorney—who herself stated her support for “unborn children”—raised concerns about the financial toll of such an ordinance. She also questioned why anti-abortion activist Mark Lee Dickson, the architect behind the ordinances, should have influence over the city.
It’s a relief to see the measure fail, especially given the success they’ve had across Texas in recent years: The Texan reported late last year that 91 political subdivisions (including cities, counties, and townships) established anti-abortion ordinances over the last five years. Anti-abortion groups like Live Action count closer to 120.
But the Comanche City Council is right: why should outside activists like Dickson be making the rules for their city?
For a look at how one town beat back Dickson and his ‘unborn sanctuary city’ measure, read this guest column from the Amarillo Reproductive Freedom Alliance:
Trump Administration Sued over Title X Guidelines
Back in April, AED reported that the Trump administration had revised federal guidelines for Title X, the nation’s family planning program. As you’ll recall, the guidelines emphasize “natural family planning methods” and “family formation” over actual birth control, among a range of other transparently anti-abortion objectives.
Applicants that don’t align with these new values may be denied funding. It’s the administration’s way of denying funds to actual reproductive healthcare clinics—and potentially rerouting them to anti-abortion crisis pregnancy centers. That’s why we’re glad to see that the National Family Planning & Reproductive Health Association and the Family Health Council of Central Pennsylvania are suing over the guidelines.
The suit rightfully points out that Trump’s guidelines violate the intent of Title X, which is to help low-income people access family planning resources. The groups call for the guidelines to be corrected ahead of the January 2027 application deadline.
We’ll keep you updated on the case as it moves forward. In the meantime, read our explainer on Trump’s new Title X guidance here.
A letter! Better than nothing I guess but not much.