In March, a Texas man sued three women he accused of helping his ex-wife terminate a pregnancy, the first of its kind since the state effectively banned most abortions and the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the constitutional right to abortion care.
Marcus Silva’s wrongful-death lawsuit in Galveston alleges his ex-wife’s friends helped her secure abortion drugs and “conceal the pregnancy and murder of her unborn child.”
On May 1, two of those women, Jackie Noiola and Amy Carpenter, filed their own lawsuit, alleging that Mr. Silva found the abortion pills and text messages in which they discussed plans to help his ex-wife before she had an abortion.
Mr. Silva, described in the counterclaim as a “serial emotional abuser” who “spent years verbally assaulting” his then-wife while “seeking to manipulate and control” her, did not plead in the interest of “protection of life.” against women.
He did it, they insist, to control him.
Notably, Mr. Silva did not sue the women under the state abortion law’s “aiding and abetting” provision, which allows any private citizen to sue anyone who “aids or abets” the termination of a pregnancy after about six weeks. .
Instead, he filed a $1 million lawsuit under separate wrongful-death statutes, alleging that his ex-wife’s abortion was murder.
The legal team supporting her case even includes Jonathan Mitchell, the former Texas attorney general and architect of the state’s anti-abortion laws, and anti-abortion Republican state lawmaker Briscoe Cain, who has said one of his legislative priorities is prosecuting all abortion crimes. .
Silva is also backed by attorneys from the Thomas More Society, an influential national right-wing law firm that supports anti-abortion, anti-same-sex marriage and attempts to overturn the 2020 presidential election.
The Independent has sought comment from Mr. Silva’s representatives.
The counterclaim contains a screenshot of a police report Mr. Silva allegedly filed with the League City Police Department on July 17, 2022, several months after his ex-wife filed for divorce. The police report says that about a week ago, he found a pill marked “MF” in his ex-wife’s purse.
He identified the pill as mifepristone, a widely used drug used for medical abortion, the most common form of abortion care in the United States.
He threatened to use the screenshots and evidence against her if she didn’t “give him my ‘mind body and soul’ before the divorce is finalized, which he is going to drag out,” his ex-wife allegedly wrote in text messages. two women, according to court documents. The divorce was finalized earlier this year.
“Instead of talking back [his ex-wife] about what he found or disposed of the pill, Silva photographed the texts and secretly put the pill back,” according to the women’s complaint.
“He was not interested in preventing her from terminating a potential pregnancy. “Instead, he wanted to obtain evidence that he could use against her if she refused to remain under his control, which is exactly what he tried to do,” the counterclaim alleges.
Texas law does not allow criminal or civil charges against abortion patients. Mr Silva’s ex-wife is not a party to the proceedings.
Ms. Noiola and Ms. Carpenter accuse Silva of violating their right to privacy and the Texas Malicious Access to Computer Act, which makes it a crime to access a computer without the owner’s consent.
“The hypocrisy of Silva in seeking over a million dollars in damages is as shocking as it is shameful,” the lawsuit said. “It is an abuse and misuse of the legal system to facilitate his continued harassment and abuse of his ex-wife.”
The court session is scheduled for June 8.
Within one year of the High Court’s reversal order Roe v. Wade, More than a dozen states have effectively banned abortion care for most pregnancies, and more than a dozen other countries have placed restrictions on abortion drugs.
In April, a Texas federal judge’s ruling overturned the federal government’s approval of mifepristone, which was first approved by the US Food and Drug Administration more than 20 years ago.
The Supreme Court, however, overturned the decision and kept the drug available, while a legal challenge by a group of anti-abortion activists continues in a federal appeals court. That case will be heard before a three-judge panel on May 17.