August 31, 2004 Letter to Senators Warner and Allen and Representative Moran
PO Box 8208
Alexandria, VA 22306-8208
August 31, 2004
The Honorable John William Warner
United States Senate
225 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510-4601
The Honorable George F. Allen
United States Senate
204 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510-4604
The Honorable James P. Moran
U.S House of Representatives
2239 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515-4608
Dear Senators Warner and Allen and Representative Moran:
As your constituent, I urge you to oppose HR 1755/S 851 the “Child Custody Protection Act,” a bill that should be called the “Teen Abandonment Act.”
As a libertarian, I oppose this overt blatant expansion of government power and oversight. Hasn’t the government done enough to destroy American families in recent years? Socialist big government nannyism laws such as this one, which seek to further place the State between family members must be opposed. No real conservative would support such an invasive, government expanding piece of legislation.
This legislation would criminalize compassion by imposing federal criminal penalties on any person other than a parent who “transports” a young woman across state lines to obtain an abortion if she has not already fulfilled her home state’s law restricting minors’ access to abortion. In short, this bill criminalizes caring, responsible behavior on the part of adults concerned with a young woman’s well-being.
This legislation would isolate the most vulnerable teens. Many teenagers who live in states that restrict minors’ access to abortion cannot satisfy their home state’s law because they cannot tell a parent (or in some states, both parents) about a pregnancy, and in some areas going to court to obtain a judicial waiver is not a real alternative. This law would essentially force these young women to travel alone across state lines to obtain an abortion and deny them support as they travel home after surgery.
This legislation would not create good family communication where it does not already exist. Family communication simply cannot be legislated. While studies have found that a majority of young women who are pregnant and seeking an abortion already choose to involve a parent in their decision, others have very valid reasons for not doing so. One third of teenagers who do not tell their parents about a pregnancy have already been the victims of family violence — physical, emotional and sexual abuse — and fear it will recur.
This legislation is unconstitutional. The bill would violate core constitutional principles — the right of each person to travel freely from state to state and the right of each state to enforce its own laws within its boundaries. It also fails to include a constitutionally required health exception.
Please protect the well-being of young women in crisis, and do not criminalize the actions of caring adults concerned with a young woman’s best interests. I urge you to oppose the “Child Custody Protection Act.”
I look forward to hearing your thoughts on this issue.
Sincerely,
James Landrith
October 6, 2004
Mr. James Landrith
PO BOX 8208
Alexandria, Virginia 22306-8208
Dear Mr. Landrith:
Thank you for contacting my office and voicing your opposition to H.R. 1755, the Child Custody Protection Act, which would make it a crime for anyone other than a woman’s parents, including a grandparent, aunt or older sibling, to take her across state lines for an abortion if doing so would violate her home state’s parental involvement requirements.
I share your concerns regarding the danger of imposing liability on family members who serve as counselors or confidants of young women faced with the difficult and health-threatening situation of an unplanned pregnancy and have voted against similar measures in previous Congresses.
Consistent with decisions from the United States Supreme Court, states are permitted to enact laws restricting access to abortion when the state has a compelling interest in doing so. Accordingly, states may limit access to abortion through laws requiring parental consent or notification. Under this same line of decisions, states may not, however, restrict access to abortion by making it more dangerous to obtain these services. The Child Custody Protection Act would do so by holding family members or friends criminally liable for accompanying a minor when she seeks an abortion. Furthermore, the legislation does nothing to prevent abortion by getting at the root of the problem, preventing unplanned pregnancy.
The Child Custody Protection Act is pending further action in the House Subcommittee on the Constitution. I will keep your concerns in mind as H.R. 1755 moves through the legislative process.
Thank you again for contacting me on this important issue. If I may ever be of assistance, please do not hesitate to contact my office. In addition, please feel free to visit my website at http://www.house gov/moran which contains information on other topics that may be of interest to you.
Yours truly,
James P. Moran
JPM/mm