Add news
March 2010 April 2010 May 2010 June 2010 July 2010
August 2010
September 2010 October 2010 November 2010 December 2010 January 2011 February 2011 March 2011 April 2011 May 2011 June 2011 July 2011 August 2011 September 2011 October 2011 November 2011 December 2011 January 2012 February 2012 March 2012 April 2012 May 2012 June 2012 July 2012 August 2012 September 2012 October 2012 November 2012 December 2012 January 2013 February 2013 March 2013 April 2013 May 2013 June 2013 July 2013 August 2013 September 2013 October 2013 November 2013 December 2013 January 2014 February 2014 March 2014 April 2014 May 2014 June 2014 July 2014 August 2014 September 2014 October 2014 November 2014 December 2014 January 2015 February 2015 March 2015 April 2015 May 2015 June 2015 July 2015 August 2015 September 2015 October 2015 November 2015 December 2015 January 2016 February 2016 March 2016 April 2016 May 2016 June 2016 July 2016 August 2016 September 2016 October 2016 November 2016 December 2016 January 2017 February 2017 March 2017 April 2017 May 2017 June 2017 July 2017 August 2017 September 2017 October 2017 November 2017 December 2017 January 2018 February 2018 March 2018 April 2018 May 2018 June 2018 July 2018 August 2018 September 2018 October 2018 November 2018 December 2018 January 2019 February 2019 March 2019 April 2019 May 2019 June 2019 July 2019 August 2019 September 2019 October 2019 November 2019 December 2019 January 2020 February 2020 March 2020 April 2020 May 2020 June 2020 July 2020 August 2020 September 2020 October 2020 November 2020 December 2020 January 2021 February 2021 March 2021 April 2021 May 2021 June 2021 July 2021 August 2021 September 2021 October 2021 November 2021 December 2021 January 2022 February 2022 March 2022 April 2022 May 2022 June 2022 July 2022 August 2022 September 2022 October 2022 November 2022 December 2022 January 2023 February 2023 March 2023 April 2023 May 2023 June 2023 July 2023 August 2023 September 2023 October 2023 November 2023 December 2023 January 2024 February 2024 March 2024 April 2024 May 2024 June 2024 July 2024 August 2024 September 2024 October 2024 November 2024 December 2024 January 2025 February 2025 March 2025 April 2025 May 2025 June 2025 July 2025 August 2025 September 2025 October 2025 November 2025 December 2025
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
News Every Day |

Residents of Albany, Texas Urge Leaders to Make Their City a “Sanctuary for the Unborn”

The residents of Albany, Texas (pop. 2,043) are not giving up in their effort to see their city pass an ordinance to further outlaw abortion and become a “sanctuary for the unborn.”

Although the ordinance was not on the city council’s agenda, on Monday, July 14, Albany residents packed out the city council chambers to ask their city council to place the ordinance on their next city council agenda. This was the third time the city council has heard such a request to pass a Sanctuary City for the Unborn (SCFTU) ordinance further

outlawing abortion. Their first request was on Monday, May 12 and drew strong opposition from the city’s Mayor. A total of 75 cities and 10 counties, of which 58 cities and 8 counties are in Texas, have passed Sanctuary for the Unborn ordinances.

Get the latest pro-life news and information on X (Twitter).

During public comments, after many area residents spoke in favor of the ordinance, Shackelford County Republican Party Chair Rodney Casey presented a letter to the Albany City Council from Attorney Jerad Najvar out of Houston, Texas. The letter addressed procedural issues relating to the Mayor’s objection to placing the SCFTU Ordinance on the city council agenda. Casey also presented those in attendance with an informational guidesheet relating to where the majority of Shackelford County’s most-devoted Republican voters stood on the abortion issue in their county, where 90.57% voted Republican in the 2024 Presidential Election.

After hearing from the residents, one council member asked several questions regarding the proposed ordinance. The remainder of this article is a response to each of those questions.

How would the Albany SCFTU Ordinance be enforced?

The Albany SCFTU Ordinance would be enforceable the same way the Texas Heartbeat Act is enforceable, through a private enforcement mechanism allowing private citizens to file civil lawsuits against anyone in violation of the law. Like the Texas Heartbeat Act, the ordinance cannot be enforced by the city or by law enforcement in any way. Here are a few examples of how the law could be enforced:

If the father of an unborn child learned that his unborn baby’s mother was being transported to an abortion provider in New Mexico in a way which would violate a provision of the Albany SCFTU Ordinance, a well-documented and recorded call could be made to the abortion provider informing them that, by committing the abortion, that provider could be sued for $10,000 for each violation of the ordinance. Alternatively, or in addition to such action, an attorney could warn the abortion provider of the consequences for violating the law by letter via fax, email, or individuals on-site. If the abortion provider does not want to risk being sued, the provider could cancel the abortion appointment.

The end-goal of this law is not to sue the abortion provider, but to see the appointment canceled and the life of the unborn child spared. However, if the abortionist attempts or does commit the abortion, ending the life of the unborn child, the provider could face the consequences for their actions in the district courts of Texas.

Likewise, with the Albany SCFTU Ordinance in place, the father of the unborn child would have the threat of legal action on his side to dissuade an abortion trafficker from aiding and abetting an abortion, which would be illegal under the laws of the City of Albany.

The same applies if a mother found out her daughter was sent abortion-inducing drugs in the mail. She could confiscate the abortion-inducing drugs from her daughter, preserve the evidence, and file a lawsuit against whoever sent the abortion-inducing drugs to her daughter. Note that the pregnant daughter herself would not face having a lawsuit filed against her as the proposed Albany SCFTU Ordinance specifically states, “Under no circumstance may the woman upon whom the abortion was performed, or the pregnant woman who seeks to abort her unborn child, be subject to prosecution or penalty.”

Has any individual brought a lawsuit under a SCFTU Ordinance?

To our knowledge, no individual has ever sued another person for violating any of the Sanctuary for the Unborn ordinances which have been enacted. Of the cities which have passed the ordinances, only one had an abortion facility actively performing abortions at the time of the passage of the ordinance. When the ordinance went into effect thirty days later, Planned Parenthood complied with the law and stopped performing elective abortions. Because of their compliance with the law there has not been any reason for anyone to file a lawsuit against Planned Parenthood.

Planned Parenthood is not the only one who chose to comply with the SCFTU laws. In a September 10, 2024 article published in The Texas Observer, Mary Tuma wrote about the abortion trafficking bans passed in places like Lubbock County.

Tuma wrote, “The chilling effect has already deterred patients. Amy Hagstrom Miller, who ran a network of abortion clinics in Texas before relocating her Whole Woman’s Health centers to New Mexico and other states after Roe was overturned, said she has already seen the impact on her patients. When news broke that Lubbock County would be considering an abortion travel ban, every patient from Dallas canceled their appointments at the Albuquerque clinic.”

The same article goes on to state, “Andrea Gallegos—who helps manage two clinics in New Mexico after she relocated from Texas last year with her father, longtime abortion provider Dr. Alan Braid—echoed the observation. The clinics, whose Texas-based patients make up 85 percent of their clientele, have experienced higher than average no-show rates because people are afraid to drive through Lubbock. . . ”

With abortion already illegal in Texas, why can’t you already sue those who are mailing abortion pills into the state?

As the Dallas Morning News reported in August 2023, “A virtual web of reproductive health groups is openly helping Texans circumvent legal and logistical barriers set in place by strict anti-abortion laws, including those that ban shipping abortion medications by mail.”

Recognizing this growing problem, the Texas Legislature attempted to close this loophole earlier this year with SB 2880. That bill, which passed the Senate, died in the House – where it had been stalled in the House State Affairs committee chaired by Representative Ken King and never allowed to make it to the floor for a vote. As reported by Texas Tribune in May 2025, “The bill would have allowed anyone who manufactured, distributed, prescribed or provided abortion pills to be sued for $100,000, expanded the wrongful death statute and empowered the attorney general to bring lawsuits on behalf of “unborn children of residents of this state.”

While Governor Greg Abbott has included a call for “Legislation further protecting unborn children and their mothers from the harm of abortion” to be considered during the Special Session starting July 21st, there is no guarantee that a bill closing the loophole on abortion-inducing drugs will cross the finish line during the short and jam-packed 30-day session.

No state law in Texas currently allows private citizens to sue individuals and organizations outside of Texas who are mailing abortion-inducing drugs into the State of Texas. The Texas Heartbeat Act only allows civil actions to be brought in response to post-heartbeat abortions performed by Texas-licensed physicians. Most out-of-state abortionists are not licensed to practice medicine in Texas. In addition, the Texas Heartbeat Act applies only to abortions performed in Texas, not abortions performed in other states. There is currently no way under state law for anyone to sue someone who aids or abets an out-of-state abortion unless: (1) The abortion was performed by a Texas-licensed physician; (2) The abortion occurred after a fetal heartbeat was detectable; AND (3) The abortion was a drug-induced abortion in which one or both of the abortion-inducing drugs was swallowed or ingested in Texas.

If passed, the Albany SCFTU Ordinance would extend the protections found in the Texas Heartbeat Act to the point of conception and allow lawsuits to be filed against any individual or organization outside of Texas who mails abortion-inducing drugs into the City of Albany. If individuals or organizations outside of Texas violate the Sanctuary for the Unborn laws of any cities or counties in the State of Texas, they risk being sued in cases brought before district courts of the State of Texas.

If Shackelford County has already passed the ordinance, is not every road in Albany already covered?

Adopted on April 15, 2025, Shackelford County’s ordinance only applies to the unincorporated area of the county. The ordinance states, “WHEREAS, the Shackelford County Commissioners’ Court recognizes their ordinance as only covering the unincorporated area of the county, any incorporated municipality within Shackelford County wishing to have similar protections for unborn children should make sure their cities have ordinances covering the area within their city limits – as allowed by state law.”

Since the cities of Moran (pop. 285) and Lueders (pop. 346) have followed Shackelford County (pop. 3,105) in the passage of ordinances with the exact same provisions found in the county ordinance, the only place lacking the same protections is the City of Albany. While some may argue that it is impossible for abortion trafficking to take place on the roads of Albany, since the City of Albany is surrounded by Shackelford County, and the county has an ordinance in place banning the practice, that is not entirely true. The abortion trafficking industry is now using pilots and small aircrafts in their operations. Without the protection provided by the Albany SCFTU Ordinance, the city ends up being a landing and launching site for the abortion trafficking industry.

If Albany follows Shackelford County, Moran, and Lueders in passing the SCFTU Ordinance requested by their citizens, these loopholes will be closed and the Albany will be uniform with their neighboring cities and with the unincorporated area of the county in having the strongest level of protections available for pregnant mothers and their unborn children.

The Work Continues

As cities across Texas continue to work through questions like these, people are becoming more and more educated about how the abortion industry has adapted in a post-Roe Texas and what can be done to help deter abortions. Those interested in knowing more information about the SCFTU Initiative can visit www.sanctuarycitiesfortheunborn.com.

The post Residents of Albany, Texas Urge Leaders to Make Their City a “Sanctuary for the Unborn” appeared first on LifeNews.com.

Ria.city






Read also

Rocket Weekly: Lack of Discipline Proves Costly

Stephen Miller's bizarre 'be kind' demand to Vanity Fair photographer gets sharp retort

What To Make Of White Sox New Coaching Staff

News, articles, comments, with a minute-by-minute update, now on Today24.pro

Today24.pro — latest news 24/7. You can add your news instantly now — here




Sports today


Новости тенниса


Спорт в России и мире


All sports news today





Sports in Russia today


Новости России


Russian.city



Губернаторы России









Путин в России и мире







Персональные новости
Russian.city





Friends of Today24

Музыкальные новости

Персональные новости