Senator John Burzichelli / New Jersey Legislature (Left), Adobe Stock (Right)
CV NEWS FEED // Pro-life leaders in New Jersey are opposing a proposed pro-abortion state travel advisory, warning it contains false information and will only confuse pregnant women.
On October 7, 2024, the Senate Health Committee heard heated testimony from two prominent pro-life organizations, New Jersey Right to Life and the New Jersey Family Policy Center. Both organizations voiced strong opposition to Senate Bill 3663, a proposal that would require New Jersey’s Department of State to publish abortion-related travel advisories for state residents regarding pro-life laws in other states.
Marie Tasy, executive director of New Jersey Right to Life, and Shawn Hyland, director of advocacy for the New Jersey Family Policy Center, testified that the bill spreads false information about access to life-saving medical care for pregnant women, creating unnecessary fear and confusion. They argued the advisory would waste taxpayer funds and provide misleading information about the legal landscape across the United States.
The proposed legislation, which Sen. John Burzichelli (D) introduced, seeks to create the “New Jersey Reproductive Health Travel Advisory.” The advisory would include three travel warning levels, two of which warn against states with pro-life laws:
- “Yellow: Exercise increased caution” – Used for states where pregnant women allegedly face civil or criminal prosecution or where abortion is restricted.
- “Red: Reconsider travel” – Issued for states with greater restrictions on abortion, allegedly potentially leading to adverse medical outcomes, prosecution, or denial of life-saving care.
The bill allegedly aims to alert pregnant women traveling to certain states about possible legal or medical risks they may encounter due to state laws on abortion.
During the hearing, Tasy criticized the bill as inaccurate and dangerous, pointing out that no state currently prosecutes women for obtaining an abortion or restricts doctors from providing emergency treatment to save a mother’s life.
Hyland echoed these concerns, stating that the advisory system outlined in the bill is based on politically driven false information. “These states do not authorize the charging or conviction of criminal offense of a woman in the death of her unborn child due to an abortion,” he said. “Therefore, the language defining each advisory level in this bill is based on dishonest and misleading political talking points.”
Both Tasy and Hyland stressed that no state law prohibits medical professionals from acting to save a woman’s life in cases of abortion complications, miscarriage management, ectopic pregnancy, or other emergencies.
Supporters of the bill, including pro-abortion Sen. Angela McKnight (D), attempted to use the death of Amber Thurman in Georgia as justification for the bill. Thurman died in August 2022 after taking abortion pills obtained out of state. However, Ben Crump, the family’s attorney, has attributed Thurman’s death to medical malpractice, not restrictive abortion laws.
“Even under Georgia law, the doctors had a duty to act to save Amber,” Crump said in an interview with NY1 News on October 1. He argued that the doctors involved failed to provide life-saving care, despite having the legal authority to do so.
This case, pro-life advocates contend, underscores the importance of accurate information about state laws. Tasy and Hyland argue that misleading travel advisories could further endanger women by causing unnecessary fear about seeking medical help.
Opponents of the bill also raised concerns about the financial impact on taxpayers. “If enacted into law, S3663 will be a frivolous waste of taxpayer money intended to satisfy the sponsors’ political supporters and will only serve to perpetuate the scare tactics and false and dangerous misinformation that continues to be spread by these groups,” Tasy said.
New Jersey Right to Life and the New Jersey Family Policy Center are urging lawmakers to vote against the bill, warning that it promotes fear and confusion while advancing a false narrative about pro-life laws.
