Texas ‘Bounty Hunter’ Abortion Law Challenged as Unconstitutional by US Doctor

A California doctor has asked a federal judge to rule that a Texas law allowing private citizens to sue abortion providers on behalf of the state is unconstitutional, and to dismiss the first lawsuit filed under it.

The doctor, Remy Coeytaux, said in a filing submitted late on Thursday in a federal court in Galveston, Texas, that the law — known as HB 7 — violates the US Constitution by interfering with interstate commerce, and the Texas Constitution by allowing unaccountable citizens to exercise enforcement powers reserved for government officials.

Coeytaux has moved to dismiss a lawsuit brought by a Texas man, Jerry Rodriguez, who alleges that the doctor prescribed abortion drugs to his partner against his wishes, leading to the death of the foetus.

“The basic concept of democratic rule is undermined when public powers are exercised by those who are neither elected by the people, appointed by a public official or entity, nor employed by the government,” Coeytaux’s lawyers wrote in the filing.

Coeytaux is the first provider to face a private lawsuit under HB 7, which took effect in December, and is now also the first to challenge the law’s so-called “bounty hunter” provision.

The case marks another front in a nationwide legal battle over the abortion drug mifepristone, and efforts by Republican-led states and anti-abortion groups to restrict access, including through the mail.

Mifepristone is used in around 60 per cent of abortions in the United States. In states that allow telehealth access, it is overwhelmingly dispensed via mail order.

Coeytaux’s motion raises several additional arguments, including that Rodriguez lacks legal standing to sue under HB 7 because he was convicted of assault against a family member in 2006. The law bars lawsuits by individuals convicted of a “family violence” offence.

Jonathan Mitchell, a former Texas solicitor general who represents Rodriguez, did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Friday. Rodriguez initially sued Coeytaux last year for wrongful death and amended the complaint after HB 7 came into force in December.

Mitchell is reported to have drafted Texas’s 2021 law, known as SB 8, which prohibits aiding or abetting abortion and introduced a novel mechanism allowing private citizens to sue for violations. HB 7 builds on that model, but allows for penalties of up to ten times higher.

HB 7 prohibits the prescribing, transporting, mailing and delivery of abortion-inducing drugs, and permits state residents to bring civil claims for alleged violations.

Wrongful death cases against healthcare providers are typically complex and difficult to prove, requiring evidence of negligence or deviation from accepted medical standards, and that the provider directly caused a death. By contrast, HB 7 requires only proof that a defendant engaged in conduct prohibited by the law.

However, Coeytaux argues that the Texas Constitution vests exclusive authority to enforce penal laws in designated officials, including the attorney general and district attorneys. Providers found in violation of HB 7 can face fines of up to $100,000 per offence.

The filing also contends that HB 7 discriminates against out-of-state providers in breach of the US Constitution, as it does not permit private lawsuits against providers based in Texas.

The case is Rodriguez v. Coeytaux, US District Court for the Southern District of Texas, No. 3:25-cv-00225.

 

For any enquiries or information, contact ask@tlr.ae or call us on +971 52 644 3004. Follow The Law Reporters on WhatsApp Channels.