---
title: "Arkansas Right to Life (Rose Mimms) statement opposing HB 1174"
description: "Single-organization statement from Arkansas Right to Life, January 2023, to Press. Composite 7/12 — explicit opposition to a tenet. “This is not a piece of legislation that we would ever support... a woman must not be charged”"
type: "letter"
letter_id: "PL-2023-006"
date: "2023-01"
letter_type: "Single-organization statement"
lead_org: "Arkansas Right to Life"
recipient: "Press"
topic: "State equal-protection bill"
shortfall_type: "explicit_opposition_to_tenet"
composite: 7
verification: "secondary"
signature_rows: 1
primary_url: "https://familycouncil.org/2023/01/20/bill-would-make-it-possible-to-sue-prosecute-women-in-arkansas-who-have-abortions/"
source_url: "https://www.abhortion.org/letters/pl-2023-006.html"
---

# Arkansas Right to Life (Rose Mimms) statement opposing HB 1174

**Single-organization statement** · January 2023 · Explicit opposition to a tenet · composite 7 / 12 · Secondary coverage only

| Field | Value |
| --- | --- |
| Letter ID | PL-2023-006 |
| Date | January 2023 |
| Lead organization | [Arkansas Right to Life](../letters/orgs/o166.md) |
| Recipient | Press |
| Topic | State equal-protection bill |
| Type | Single-organization statement |
| Verification | Secondary coverage only |
| Signature rows | 1 |
| Completeness | Single organization |

## 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

## Scorecard

Composite **7 of 12** — explicit opposition to a tenet. Each dimension is scored 0 (none), 1 (implied) or 2 (explicit); the rationale is the editor's one-line reason for every non-zero score. D2 and D4 are the fault line the abolitionist critique cares most about.

| 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. |

## 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](../letters/people/i0482.md) | Executive Director | [Arkansas Right to Life](../letters/orgs/o166.md) |

## Organizations on this letter

1 distinct organization and 1 named individual, after normalizing renamed and affiliated entities.

- [Arkansas Right to Life](../letters/orgs/o166.md) — Right-to-life group, AR

## Sources

- [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 (https://familycouncil.org/2023/01/20/bill-would-make-it-possible-to-sue-prosecute-women-in-arkansas-who-have-abortions/)

## 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.