§ 1 Key language
“This is not a piece of legislation that we would ever support... a woman must not be charged”
Arkansas Right to Life, January 2023
§ 2 Scorecard
Composite 7 of 12 — explicit opposition to a tenet. Each dimension is scored 0 (none), 1 (implied) or 2 (explicit); the rationale column is the editor's one-line reason for every non-zero score.
| Dimension | Score | Meaning at this score | Rationale |
|---|---|---|---|
| D1 Exceptions | 0 | None | — |
| D2 Immunity for the mother fault line | 2 | Explicitly opposes prosecuting or criminalizing women | ARTL writes immunity for women into its own bills. |
| D3 Incrementalism | 1 | By implication — a funding, drug, research, Hyde or Title X letter that takes no abolition position | Implied. |
| D4 Opposition to abolition or equal-protection bills fault line | 2 | Explicitly opposes or lobbies against one | Opposes abolition bill. |
| D5 Framing | 0 | None | — |
| D6 Secular framing | 2 | Wholly secular, legal, fiscal, medical or political argument | Political framing. |
§ 3 Spokesperson
1 signature row · Single organization. A single-organization record; the spokesperson row is illustrative, not a signature block.
| # | Name as printed | Title as printed | Organization as printed |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Rose Mimms | Executive Director | Arkansas Right to Life |
§ 4 Organizations on this letter
1 distinct organization and 1 named individual, after normalizing renamed and affiliated entities.
§ 5 Sources
Only press coverage located.
familycouncil.org/2023/01/20/bill-wou…https://familycouncil.org/2023/01/20/bill-would-make-it-possible-to-sue-prosecute-women-in-arkansas-who-have-abortions/
Secondary coverage only
§ 6 Notes
Quoted in press; ARTL primary statement not located.
Editorial note
The rubric records distance from the standard published by Abolitionists Rising, not a moral verdict; every organization scored here regards itself as pro-life. This record is verified from secondary coverage only: the primary text has not yet been located, and its scores rest on language quoted in press coverage. Scores are judgment calls applied consistently by the published rubric; a disagreement is a disagreement with the rubric's conventions, not with an individual cell.