In February, Georgia's heartbeat law, which restricts abortion after a discernable heartbeat is detected (around six weeks) except in the cases of rape, incest, or the life of the mother, was once again upheld by the Georgia Supreme Court in a 6-1 decision. 

Georgia’s high court vacated a lower judge’s attempt to render the “Heartbeat Law” unconstitutional and ordered that judge to reassess whether the abortion activists who filed the suit have legal standing to do so. Georgia’s “Living Infants Fairness and Equality Act,” or LIFE Act, continues to protect unborn babies with a “detectable human heartbeat.”

But for a faction of life advocates known as "abortion abolitionists," so-called heartbeat bills do not stop abortions from happening. Their aim is to change this, making it illegal to have one. In March, State Rep. Emory Dunahoo (R-31) introduced House Bill 441 (HB 441), the "Georgia Prenatal Equal Protection Act," which would make abortion a criminal act. If made law, it would remove the six-week timeframe of the heartbeat law and the exceptions that go along with it.

HB 441 was crafted by the Foundation to Abolish Abortion (FAA), a non-profit, which, according to its X bio, seeks to "exalt and vindicate the image of God by promoting sound public policy that provides equal protection under the law to all preborn human beings."

Since the 2022 overturn of Roe v. Wade, there has been a concerted pushing of the envelope on fetal personhood. Like the Tyrannosaurus rex in Jurassic Park, who tested the electrified fence in order to find the weakness, abortion abolitionists like FAA are seeking to make fetal personhood not just a thing but established law; and the only way to do this is to keep challenging the legislative fences.

The bills, filed in Georgia, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Missouri, South Carolina and Texas, stem from the Prenatal Equal Protection Act, model legislation crafted by the Texas-based advocacy group the Foundation to Abolish Abortion. Three similar bills were introduced in Indiana, North Dakota and Oklahoma but failed to pass in committee or on the floor of the legislature. 

On Tuesday, Missouri's abolitionist bills, HB 1072 and HB 1417, will have hearings in their committees. So, the momentum continues, and the topic of fetal personhood continues to remain at the forefront of the pro-life discussion.

Constitutional law attorney and FAA president Bradley Pierce responded via email to my questions about their movement. In many legislatures, If a bill fails to make it out of committee to the floor, they have to be refiled the next legislative session. Not so in Georgia. Pierce is banking on HB 441 coming back stronger for the next legislative session.

Georgia has a two-year legislative session, meaning the bill can be reconsidered next year by the same committee without having to refile it.

Across the country, the abolitionist approach has been gaining more momentum and support, both from state lawmakers and the grassroots. We had bills in thirteen states this year and counting. The bill in Georgia had 21 co-sponsors, which is nearly one-quarter of all the Republicans in the Georgia House.

FAA, as do most abortion abolitionist groups, rejects the premise of pro-life incrementalism in favor of immediatism. They also do not consider the established pro-life cause merely inept but wholly corrupt. They view these long-established organizations and veterans of the movement as part of the problem. In testimony in support of HB 441, this was expressed by Louisiana Pastor and abolitionist Brian Gunter.

WATCH:

"The Pro-Life movement is crumbling in this nation!"—@BrianGunter1689

🎥 @EndAllAbortion pic.twitter.com/pMtP1czEL2

— Foundation to Abolish Abortion (@AbolitionistFAA) April 4, 2025

The veteran pro-life movement has also cast a side-eye on the abortion abolitionist movement and has not only refused to back their play but has taken measures to stand against it. Georgia Life Alliance (GLA), a prominent pro-life organization in the state, wrote a letter in opposition to HB 441. 

🚨 We have learned that @GALifeAlliance sent a letter to Georgia state lawmakers urging them to oppose HB 441, the Georgia Prenatal Equal Protection Act, which would abolish abortion in the state. pic.twitter.com/c4Yz5tr5WF

— Foundation to Abolish Abortion (@AbolitionistFAA) April 10, 2025

Some of the text read,

While HB 441, The Georgia Prenatal Equal Protection Act, appears well-intentioned and partially aligns with Georgia Life Alliance Committee's mission, we hold grave concerns with impact, consequences, and outcomes of the bill which conflicts with our organizational mission.

The letter outlined those conflicts and delineated the harm done to women not just through the act of abortion but its aftermath. The letter further stated,

The tragedy of abortion is not limited to the unborn child who loses her life. The mother who aborts her child is also a victim of a callous industry created to take lives while denying the reality that many American women suffer devastating physical and psychological damage following abortion. Women who abort have 2.6 times more psychiatric admissions than women giving birth in the 90 days following the event and seek first time outpatient mental health treatment at a 17% higher rate.

Criminalizing the mother would add immeasurable stress to Georgia's already-existing mental health crisis.

Martha Zoller is a founding (and current) board member of the GLA and acted as their interim executive director for a time. In an email exchange with Zoller, I asked her why GLA felt the need to write this opposition letter. Zoller responded:

Our opposition to HB 441 was because we do not believe that women who get abortions should be criminalized. We don't believe that is how to win people over to the life side. 

Zoller indicated in the email that she would be happy to discuss things further. I phoned her on Monday, and we had a brief phone conversation about GLA's pro-life priorities and why supporting legislation to make abortion illegal did not factor into them. When I asked Zoller about HB 441 and whether their organization planned to potentially seek a legislative compromise, Zoller did not see this as a priority.

Well, I mean the session just ended last week, okay? So, you know, it's a little early for those kinds of discussions to be going on, and I'm sure that they will; but I'm not privy to that information. Our goal is to offer hope over fear and for us personally, this bill doesn't fit that. 

Zoller stated one priority of GLA was finding ways to remove the ability for women to access the abortion pill outside of a doctor's care. Zoller also saw the piqued interest in abortion abolition as something that is a result of media amplification and not any actual weight or influence.  

You know, I honesty think it's the way the media picked it up. I think this was a fairly fringe group of people within the pro-life movement. And because it did a narrative, they, you know, they got all the attention, which is something we got to look at as far as messaging and that kind of thing. But I don't think it represents most of the pro-life movement and I don't think it drowns us out. I mean, if it's drowning it out, it's because of the way it's been reported.

I asked again, for the record, if the statement that the Foundation to Abolish Abortion is a fringe movement and that the media amplifies their voice was indeed the viewpoint of Georgia Life Alliance.

Zoller affirmed this with a "Yes." 

If GLA's viewpoint mirrors other pro-life organizations, they may need to rethink their messaging and strategy. I am a close observer and analyst of the pro-life cause and knew of abortion abolitionists long before 2022. They are definitely not fringe, and by all indications, their voice in the pro-life movement, as well as their influence, only appears to be growing stronger. A pro-life win in Idaho is indication that hearts and minds are being changed — but not necessarily by the traditional pro-life movement. The abortion abolitionists appear to be setting the narrative, at least in terms of granting the preborn the same rights as a person outside of the womb.

Idaho has won a major pro-life victory in state court.

Judge Jason Scott of Idaho’s 4th Judicial District Court on Friday held that there was no expansive right to an abortion under the state’s constitution while acknowledging the state’s two exemptions to the general ban on the procedure.

The ruling follows a separate win last month for the state, when President Donald Trump’s Justice Department dropped a Biden-era lawsuit that was attempting to interpret federal law to prevail over Idaho’s Defense of Life Act.

But how does this support or further a culture of life? Many of these introduced bills are adversarial and seek to penalize women. FAA's Bradley Pierce does not view it that way. Pierce asserted:

These bills matter because they would abolish rather than regulate abortion. Bills from the pro-life establishment try to regulate the situations and circumstances in which abortion is allowed. Bills of equal protection would simply apply the same laws that already protect the lives of born people to protect preborn people as well.

These equal protection bills do not criminalize certain types of people. They criminalize conduct. As we already have with any other act of murder, these bills would penalize anyone willfully involved with murdering a preborn baby, if they are found guilty after due process of law.

When I posited this viewpoint to Zoller, she replied, "But who has to pay for that crime, you know?"

Zoller personally said she would like the focus to be on combatting the abortion pill contagion while defending GLA's position and reasons for submitting the opposition letter, as well as their pro-life record. 

So, I think that's more of an area I personally would like to see us spend our time next year. But again, it's just too soon after this because it kind of came out of left field, and we put the letter out, we we made our point of view known on it. I’m not going to question our pro-life bona fides. We have been in the trenches working on that and we want safety for women and babies. And we are not going to convince people by not being kind and compassionate and making it a crime for a woman to get an abortion is not the way to approach it. We never thought that was the way to approach it.

But you cannot talk about stamping out the evils of abortion and not address the evils and abuse of sex trafficking. When I asked both Pierce and Zoller about these victims, they both dodged the question. Pierce's response skated between deflection and whataboutism.

Because abortion is currently legal for women in all fifty states, in most states pressuring women into having an abortion is not a crime. But pressuring someone to commit any other type of murder is a crime. 

For example, if a man tells his girlfriend that she must murder their three-month-old born baby or else he will kick her out of the house, that would be illegal. But if he tells his girlfriend that she must murder their three-month-old preborn baby in the womb or else he will kick her out of the house, that would be legal. That is because our laws treat preborn babies as subhuman.

Zoller deflected to the two Georgia abortion pill misuse cases, which resulted in the deaths of Amber Thurman and Candi Miller, and that were used by the Democrats to claim restrictive abortion laws were preventing women from getting proper medical care. Neither response fully addressed the lack of protection given to women and children by our laws or by the institutions that should be places of safety. The same people wanting to stop abortion too often ignore the circumstances and situations that produce an atmosphere where abortion flourishes. A Federalist exclusive confirmed:

The connection between abortion and sex-trafficking cannot be denied. Both are an affront to human dignity, and both are profiting from human suffering. The survivor of six abortions incurred severe infections from the scar tissue, necessitating a hysterectomy. She could no longer bear children if she wanted. Our message to her and all the other victims of commercialized sex-exploitation is this: We see you.

Do Pierce and other abortion abolitionist groups see these women while they are crafting their laws that will disproportionately punish women? What are their plans to address the circumstances and atmosphere that expose women and children to harm? What about the traditional pro-life movement? What is being done to not just move the abortion pill back under medical auspices but to get us to a place where an abortion pill is no longer being sought? Laws do not change hearts and minds; and while you can alter and limit behavior through legislation, it does nothing to build a culture of life. However, you also cannot change hearts and minds or build a culture of life only by seeing one aspect of the issue to the exclusion of all else.