New Federal Crime Proposed: Up to 25 Years for Administering Abortion Drugs Without Consent

The “Forced Abortion Prevention and Accountability Act” aims to create a serious federal deterrent against administering abortion-inducing drugs—like mifepristone or misoprostol—to a pregnant woman without her informed consent. The core of the bill establishes a new federal crime for this act, carrying a potential prison sentence of up to 25 years. If the non-consensual drug administration causes serious bodily injury or death to the woman, the offender could face an additional 25 years in prison. In short, this bill makes the non-consensual use of these drugs a highly penalized federal offense.

The New Federal Crime: High Stakes and Heavy Penalties

This legislation doesn't just create a new crime; it attaches massive penalties to it. The 25-year maximum sentence for knowingly and intentionally giving a pregnant woman an abortion-inducing drug without her consent is a severe punishment, comparable to serious felonies. This applies not only to the completed act but also to attempts or conspiracies to commit it. The bill is clearly designed to send a strong message that forcing an abortion is a crime that will be prosecuted at the highest level.

Civil Lawsuits: Triple Damages and Attorney Fees

Beyond the criminal side, the bill creates a powerful civil pathway for victims. A woman who is given one of these drugs without her consent can sue the perpetrator for full recovery of all physical and psychological injuries. Crucially, the bill allows for statutory damages equal to three times the cost of all injuries and punitive damages on top of that. If the victim wins, the defendant also has to pay her attorney’s fees. This means the financial risk for anyone involved in non-consensual administration is astronomical—it’s designed to be a crippling financial judgment. Conversely, if a defendant wins and proves the lawsuit was frivolous, they can recover their own attorney's fees, which is a rare provision designed to discourage bad-faith claims.

Who Pays the Cost of Vague Definitions?

While the goal of protecting women from forced abortions is clearly positive, the bill introduces some definitions that could cause real-world headaches for regular people trying to follow the law. Specifically, the definition of “conspires to commit an offense” includes selling, shipping, mailing, or giving an abortion-inducing drug without taking “reasonable measures to confirm the recipient is a pregnant woman seeking an abortion.” What exactly constitutes a “reasonable measure”? The bill doesn't say. For a pharmacist, a telehealth provider, or even a mail-order pharmacy, this lack of clarity creates massive legal risk. If they ship the drug and fail to meet an unknown legal standard of “reasonableness,” they could be charged with a federal crime carrying a 25-year sentence.

This vagueness, combined with the severe criminal penalties and massive civil liability, could create a significant chilling effect. Doctors and pharmacists may become extremely hesitant to prescribe or dispense these drugs even in consensual, medically necessary situations, simply to avoid the legal risk. For women who rely on these medications, especially in areas with limited access, this could mean increased difficulty and delay in obtaining legitimate care. The bill aims to protect women from coercion, but its broad language and extreme penalties might inadvertently make it harder for women to access consensual care.