Estimated Time to Read: 6 minutes
The Texas Legislature has been at the forefront of abortion policy since Roe v. Wade was overturned. With traditional abortion facilities shuttered, lawmakers are now turning their attention to abortion-inducing drugs. House Bill 7, carried by State Rep. Jeff Leach (R-Allen), creates a new chapter in the Texas Health and Safety Code that prohibits the manufacture, mailing, distribution, transportation, or prescription of abortion pills within Texas or across state lines.
Rather than relying on criminal penalties, HB 7 uses a civil enforcement system modeled after the Texas Heartbeat Act. Any private citizen may bring a lawsuit against violators, with successful plaintiffs entitled to at least $100,000 in damages per offense. The law explicitly excludes pregnant women from being sued and provides exceptions for miscarriages, ectopic pregnancies, and medical emergencies.
This approach marks a continuation of Texas’s strategy of privatized enforcement. By keeping state officials out of direct enforcement roles, lawmakers hope to limit legal challenges that have historically been brought against prosecutors or state agencies.
How the Bill Evolved Through Negotiation
HB 7 did not reach the House floor without controversy. Early drafts raised concerns about creating a “bounty hunter” system, with critics warning that the damages structure encouraged opportunistic lawsuits. In response, the House State Affairs Committee adopted a substitute version of the bill.
The substitute narrowed who could bring lawsuits, barring individuals convicted of crimes such as domestic violence, sexual assault, or coercion from participating. It also revised the financial structure: if a person is directly related to the unborn child, they may claim the full $100,000. If not, they may claim $10,000, with the remainder going to charity. This was designed to reduce concerns about profiteering.
Lawmakers also worked with stakeholders ranging from pro-life organizations like Texas Right to Life and the Texas Conference of Catholic Bishops to medical groups like the Texas Medical Association and Texas Hospital Association. The negotiations resulted in provisions shielding licensed Texas physicians and hospitals that prescribe abortion-inducing drugs for legitimate medical purposes. Women’s personal health information is also protected under the bill.
Supporters Say HB 7 Closes a Dangerous Loophole
Proponents argue HB 7 responds directly to the shift in the abortion industry. With physical clinics closed, abortion providers have increasingly turned to mail-order pills. Estimates suggest that 20,000 to 30,000 abortion pill orders are sent into Texas each year despite its illegality under existing law.
Leach has described these pills as both deadly for unborn children and dangerous for women, claiming they can cause serious complications when taken without medical supervision. Supporters say HB 7 “meets the moment” by targeting the mail pipeline that has replaced brick-and-mortar facilities.
Texas Right to Life has called the legislation the strongest tool yet to halt abortion-by-mail, while the Texas Alliance for Life praised revisions that strengthened privacy protections for women. House Speaker Dustin Burrows (R-Lubbock), who rarely votes, cast an “aye” on the bill, underscoring its status as a legislative priority.
Critics Warn of Risks to Women’s Health and Civil Rights
Opponents of HB 7 argue that the bill will make it harder for women to access lifesaving medication and could entangle innocent people in lawsuits. Democrats raised examples during the floor debate, such as a parent seeking information about abortion pills for their daughter, who might face liability even if no abortion occurred.
Concerns also focus on the bill’s potential to incentivize “sting operations” and its funneling of all appeals into the newly created Fifteenth Court of Appeals, widely seen as conservative-leaning. The American Civil Liberties Union of Texas said HB 7 would extend the abortion ban far beyond state borders, chilling providers nationwide and fueling fear among women.
The Texas Medical Association warned the bill could have a chilling effect on doctors, making them hesitant to prescribe drugs even in cases of miscarriage or sepsis. Physicians pointed to Texas’s rising maternal mortality rate as evidence that lawmakers should expand healthcare access rather than restrict it further. Personal testimony during committee hearings also highlighted the emotional toll, such as a woman who miscarried and struggled to prove she needed medication for legitimate medical reasons.
The Legal Structure of Civil Enforcement
The civil enforcement framework is central to HB 7’s design. Like SB 8, it bars state officials from direct involvement, leaving enforcement entirely in the hands of private citizens. Lawsuits can be filed against manufacturers, distributors, and delivery services, and courts are required to award damages, injunctive relief, and attorneys’ fees to successful plaintiffs.
The substitute version further expanded Texas’s reach beyond its borders. It allows lawsuits against out-of-state actors who mail or distribute abortion pills into Texas, even if those actions are legal in their own states. The bill also shields Texans from “clawback” lawsuits by other states that might seek to penalize them for enforcing Texas law.
All appeals of such cases are directed to the Fifteenth Court of Appeals, centralizing judicial review and insulating the law from more liberal-leaning jurisdictions.
Fiscal Uncertainty
The Legislative Budget Board has said the fiscal implications of HB 7 are indeterminate. Because the state itself will not enforce the law, costs do not fall on state agencies. Instead, the uncertainty lies in how many civil lawsuits may be filed and what burden that may place on county and district courts.
The Comptroller has said there will likely be no revenue gains to the state because damages flow to private parties rather than public coffers. Any increased caseload would fall on the local judiciary, though the scale of that impact is impossible to estimate.
What Comes Next
HB 7 passed the Texas House with 82 votes in favor and 48 against. It now heads to the Senate, where similar legislation has already found support. If signed by Gov. Greg Abbott (R), it would become one of the most significant post-Dobbs abortion measures in the country, specifically targeting abortion-inducing drugs and extending Texas’s enforcement reach across state lines.
The debate around HB 7 reflects the broader struggle over how states enforce abortion restrictions in a post-Roe world. Supporters view it as a compassionate and carefully crafted measure to protect both mothers and unborn children. Critics view it as an overreach that threatens women’s health and civil liberties.
No matter which side one falls on, the fight over abortion pills highlights how Texas continues to set the stage for the national conversation on abortion law.
Texas Policy Research relies on the support of generous donors across Texas.
If you found this information helpful, please consider supporting our efforts! Thank you!
