Macon DA Says He Won't Prosecute Women, Doctors Under Abortion Law
“I will exercise my discretion not to prosecute women and doctors for exercising their constitutional rights,” Macon DA David Cooke said. “It's unfortunate that this law may turn a miscarriage into a crime scene and I will not allow that to happen on my watch.”
May 21, 2019 at 04:29 PM
4 minute read
The district attorney in Macon said Tuesday he will not prosecute women or their doctors for abortion services despite the ban signed into law this month that imposes criminal liability for abortions performed after six weeks of pregnancy.
Macon Judicial Circuit District Attorney David Cooke sent a statement to media Tuesday.
“Our office has received multiple requests for comment about Georgia's new Heartbeat law,” Amy Leigh Womack, community engagement officer for the DA's office, said when she emailed Cooke's answer.
“As district attorney, I swore an oath to uphold the Constitution and I intend to honor my oath,” Cooke said. “My office will continue its long-standing practice of supporting and protecting women who are in crisis, rather than prosecuting them.”
“I will exercise my discretion not to prosecute women and doctors for exercising their constitutional rights,” Cooke said. “It's unfortunate that this law may turn a miscarriage into a crime scene and I will not allow that to happen on my watch.”
Some other metro Atlanta prosecutors have said they wouldn't prosecute women under the law. Cooke is the first to take a stand specifically for women's doctors.
The General Assembly passed the bill this year, and Gov. Brian Kemp signed it into law this month. It bans abortion in Georgia as soon as an embryonic pulse can be heard with an ultrasound. That point comes at about six weeks of pregnancy, or two weeks after conception, when the embryo is the size of a pea. Supporters call the sound a heartbeat. Opponents say the sound is not really a heartbeat because the heart hasn't formed.
The law's effect on women has been a source of debate and uncertainty, with sponsors of the bill saying women wouldn't be prosecuted but adding an “affirmative defense” to allow them to argue in court that they had the abortion to save themselves—similar to a self-defense argument in a murder case.
The law clearly makes doctors and medical professionals and other clinic staff subject to criminal prosecution for performing or assisting in abortion services. The law also allows for investigations of women who lose a pregnancy to miscarriage—as 1 in 3 do.
The Medical Association of Georgia lobbied against House Bill 481 because of its reach into medicine. In a letter to the state Senate sponsor of the bill, Sen. Renee Unterman, MAG President Dr. Rutledge Forney said the group “opposes the bill because it would criminalize physicians practicing within their standard of care, creates a new civil cause of action against physicians, could undermine efforts to recruit and retain OB-GYN in Georgia, and could further restrict access to health care in rural Georgia.”
As Cooke's office was sending his statement to news outlets across the state, protesters were gathered in front of the Georgia Capitol demonstrating in unison with activists across the country in a national call to action tagged #StoptheBans on social media.
Georgia was the seventh state to pass a near-total abortion ban. Two more have followed since. Others are being considered.
The so-called heartbeat bill was created by Janet Porter, an Ohio activist and former pro-life lobbyist who started a network of organizations to promote bans, Faith2Action. The group's website includes a model heartbeat bill with the state name blank. It also includes resource groups that offer legal assistance for opposing abortion, same-sex marriage and gun control.
Porter said the bill was “carefully crafted to be the arrow in the heart of Roe v. Wade—a bill born to go to court.”
Also Tuesday, Mississippi's heartbeat law was being challenged in federal court. Advocacy groups are working on challenges to the bans in Georgia and other states.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllJustice Department Says Fulton County Jail Conditions Violate Detainee Rights
6 minute readSupreme Court Rejects Push to Move Georgia Case Against Ex-Trump Chief of Staff Mark Meadows
3 minute read3 GOP States Join Paid Sick Leave Movement, Passing Ballot Measures by Wide Margins
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1How to Support Law Firm Profitability: Train Partners Up
- 2Elon Musk Names Microsoft, Calif. AG to Amended OpenAI Suit
- 3Trump’s Plan to Purge Democracy
- 4Baltimore City Govt., After Winning Opioid Jury Trial, Preparing to Demand an Additional $11B for Abatement Costs
- 5X Joins Legal Attack on California's New Deepfakes Law
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250