To Create The Arkansas Human Heartbeat And Human Life Civil Justice Act; To Save The Lives Of Unborn Children And Protect The Health Of Women Through Civil Liability; And To Declare An Emergency.
If enacted, HB1118 would create a legal framework that allows for the civil prosecution of those who perform or assist abortions, establishing stringent penalties and damages, including statutory damages of no less than $10,000 per unlawful abortion. This would effectively deter healthcare providers from offering abortion services in the state, as fear of lawsuits could lead to a significant reduction in accessibility. The bill also maintains that existing abortion laws remain in place, but emphasizes the intention to abolish abortion altogether. By limiting jurisdiction over abortion-related legal challenges, the act aims to restrict legal avenues for those opposing the law, intensifying the state's grip on reproductive rights.
House Bill 1118, known as the Arkansas Human Heartbeat and Human Life Civil Justice Act, aims to significantly restrict abortion access in Arkansas by imposing civil liability on individuals and entities that perform or induce abortions, allowing private citizens to sue for violations. The bill asserts that life begins at conception and is framed as a response to Supreme Court decisions that have historically guaranteed the right to abortion, seeking to leverage changes in jurisprudence to redefine personhood and legal protections for unborn children. The act declares an emergency, emphasizing the need to immediately protect unborn children and the health of women, positioning it as a necessary legal measure amid a perceived crisis in the healthcare system related to abortion services.
The bill faces opposition for its potential to undermine women's reproductive rights and health decisions. Critics argue that the enforcement mechanisms proposed could lead to harassment of healthcare providers and individuals attempting to access abortion services. Additionally, concerns are raised around the implications of a civil justice approach to what has traditionally been a medical issue, including the risk of creating a hostile environment for women's health services. Opponents highlight that by positioning the state to challenge individual rights through civil suits, the legislation may infringe upon personal freedoms protected under the constitution.