--- title: "“Making mothers subject to prosecution (up to capital murder) is unjust, cruel, and counterproductive; mothers are second victims of the abortion industry and should receive blanket immunity, with the law targeting abortionists.”" description: "Equal protection means the law's protection against homicide extends to the preborn without a class-wide exemption for the mother. Abolitionists argue that a statute which pre-declares every mother immune is not case-by-case mercy but codified partiality (Prov. 17:15; Deut. 16:19). This does not…" type: "argument" id: "def-prosecute-women" category: "Legal & political" mode: "Both" source_url: "https://www.abhortion.org/arguments/def-prosecute-women.html" --- # “Making mothers subject to prosecution (up to capital murder) is unjust, cruel, and counterproductive; mothers are second victims of the abortion industry and should receive blanket immunity, with the law targeting abortionists.” **Category:** Legal & political · **Mode:** Both · positive case & response ## The objection **The claim:** > "Making mothers subject to prosecution (up to capital murder) is unjust, cruel, and counterproductive; mothers are second victims of the abortion industry and should receive blanket immunity, with the law targeting abortionists." _A pro-life incrementalist argument._ ### The strongest version of this argument Historically, U.S. abortion laws targeted providers and treated mothers as victims; maternal immunity helps secure testimony against abortionists (who kill far more), and threatening mothers with prosecution could deter them from pregnancy help centers and drive abortions underground — plausibly increasing deaths. Prudence and mercy both favor immunity. ## The positive case Equal protection means the law's protection against homicide extends to the preborn without a class-wide exemption for the mother. Abolitionists argue that a statute which pre-declares every mother immune is not case-by-case mercy but codified partiality (Prov. 17:15; Deut. 16:19). This does not entail that every woman is executed — charging, conviction, affirmative defenses (coercion, deception, duress), and sentencing discretion all apply as in any homicide case. ## Supporting points - No homicide statute automatically executes anyone; discretion, defenses, and sentencing all intervene. - The objection to blanket immunity is that it writes a class exemption into the law, not that mercy is wrong. - Genuinely coerced or deceived mothers can be treated mercifully through ordinary legal mechanisms, not a statutory carve-out. ## The response Abolitionists respond that equal protection is about the law's standard, not its sentencing: a statute that categorically pre-acquits all mothers 'justifies the wicked,' which Scripture calls an abomination (Prov. 17:15), and legislates the partiality God forbids (Deut. 16:19; Lev. 19:15). Mercy toward a specific coerced or deceived mother is fully compatible with equal protection — through prosecutorial discretion, affirmative defenses, and sentencing — but a blanket immunity for the entire class is not mercy; it is a declaration that this class of killing is not really treated as killing. The 'targeting abortionists is more effective' claim is a prudential argument that, on the abolitionist view, cannot license writing an unjust standard into law (cf. arg-obedience-pragmatic). Both sides should represent each other honestly: abolitionists are not calling for mass executions of women, and pro-life advocates are not indifferent to the unborn. ## Discussion questions 1. Is there a difference between a statute that pre-acquits an entire class and a judge showing mercy in a specific case? 2. How can the law treat a coerced or deceived mother mercifully without declaring the whole class of abortions non-punishable? 3. Does 'targeting abortionists is more effective' justify writing a class exemption into a homicide statute? ## Source transcript Drawn from Does the Pro-Life Movement Hate Justice? (T. Russell Hunter, 'Justice Alone') — The 'nothing shall authorize prosecution of any woman' clause debate.. ## References - [The Abolitionists Are Wrong: Equal Protection Does Not Mean a Mother... Has Committed a Capital Crime (pro-life case for maternal immunity)](https://www.texasallianceforlife.org/the-abolitionists-are-wrong-by-chris-maska/) _(opposing view / steelman)_ Chris Maska, Texas Alliance for Life · Texas Alliance for Life **Supports:** fullest pro-life statement of the maternal-immunity / target-abortionists case (steelman) - [H.R.722 — Life at Conception Act (119th Congress): 'Nothing in this bill shall be construed to authorize the prosecution of any woman for the death of her unborn child.'](https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/722) _(primary/legislation)_ U.S. Congress · Congress.gov **Supports:** the statutory non-prosecution clause abolitionists critique - [Can the Fourteenth Amendment Be Used to Protect Human Life Before Birth?](https://www.heritage.org/life/report/can-the-fourteenth-amendment-be-used-protect-human-life-birth) _(legal analysis)_ Heritage Foundation · Heritage **Supports:** equal-protection scholarship abolitionists rely on ## Related **Related scriptures:** - [Proverbs 17:15](../scripture/proverbs-17-15.md) - [Deuteronomy 16:19](../scripture/deuteronomy-16-19.md) - [Leviticus 19:15](../scripture/leviticus-19-15.md) - [Psalm 33:5](../scripture/psalm-33-5.md) **Related arguments:** - [“Equal protection does not require prosecuting mothers; targeting abortionists (and…”](arg-equal-protection-14th.md) - [God commands 'justice, and only justice' — not partial or deferred justice](arg-justice-only.md) - [“Bills that ban abortion at a heartbeat, at pain-capability, or after an ultrasound…”](def-milestone-bills.md)