[Congressional Record Volume 167, Number 177 (Thursday, October 7, 2021)]
[Senate]
[Page S6995]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                           TEXAS ABORTION BAN

  Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, last night, a Federal judge in Texas did 
what the U.S. Supreme Court should have done. He issued an injunction 
blocking Texas' clearly unconstitutional bounty hunter abortion ban 
from being enforced while challenges to the law make their way through 
the courts. The ruling by U.S. District Judge Robert Pitman came in 
response to a challenge of the Texas ban brought by the Federal 
Department of Justice.
  The Texas abortion law, known as S.B. 8, is the most restrictive 
abortion law in the Nation and the most serious challenge to Roe v. 
Wade in 50 years. It was deliberately crafted to outlaw most abortions 
while allowing State lawmakers to evade judicial review. It deputizes 
private citizens to enforce the ban by suing anyone who ``aids and 
abets'' a woman seeking an abortion. And it offers rewards of $10,000 
or more to plaintiffs who bring suits.
  In his ruling, Judge Pitman wrote that Texas politicians had 
``contrived an unprecedented and transparent statutory scheme'' that 
has ``unlawfully prevented [women in Texas] from exercising control 
over their lives in ways that are protected by the Constitution.''
  The Supreme Court order allowing the Texas law to take effect was a 
product of the Court's ``shadow docket'' of cases that are decided 
without full briefing or oral arguments--and without transparency or 
accountability.
  The 5-4 order, from the Court's conservative majority, was criticized 
by some of the Court's own members, including Chief Justice John 
Roberts, who warned that Texas lawmakers had created a ``model for 
action,'' that other States could copy to undermine constitutionally 
protected rights.
  The Chief Justice was right. Since the Court's ruling on S.B. 8, 
elected officials and political candidates in a number of States have 
vowed to introduce similar abortion bans.
  With Judge Pitman's wise ruling last night, that rush to use citizen 
bounty hunters to avoid legal accountability while denying the 
constitutional rights of women and perhaps others is on hold--at least 
for now. But the threat to constitutional rights remains. Texas has 
already filed a notice of appeal in the conservative Fifth Circuit.
  Abortion providers remain at risk of facing bounty hunter lawsuits if 
they perform abortions prohibited by the ban while the injunction is in 
place. Anti-choice organizations have vowed to be ``vigilant'' in suing 
individuals retroactively if the order is reversed.
  I hope that justice--and the Constitution--will prevail in the coming 
days as this litigation continues. The fundamental rights of millions 
of Texans are at stake.

                          ____________________