In March, a Texas man sued three women he accused of helping his ex-wife terminate her pregnancy, the first lawsuit of its kind after the state effectively banned most abortions and the US Supreme Court The US will revoke the constitutional right to abortion care.
Marcus Silva’s wrongful-death lawsuit in Galveston alleges his ex-wife’s friends helped her get abortion drugs and “conceal the pregnancy and murder” of their “unborn child.”
On May 1, two of those women, Jackie Noyola and Amy Carpenter, filed their own countersuit, alleging that Mr. Silva found the abortion drugs and text messages discussing plans to help his ex-wife before getting an abortion.
Silva, described in the countersuit as a “serial emotional abuser” who “spent years verbally attacking” his then-wife while “seeking to manipulate and control her,” did not file the lawsuit in the interest of “protecting life,” according to the women
He did it, they allege, to control her.
Mr. Silva, in particular, did not sue the women under the “aid and abet” provision of the state’s anti-abortion law, which allows any private citizen to sue any person who “aides or abets” in a abortion after about six weeks of pregnancy. .
Instead, he filed the $1 million suit under a separate wrongful death statute, arguing that his ex-wife’s abortion is murder.
The legal team supporting his case even includes former Texas attorney general and state anti-abortion lawmaker Jonathan Mitchell and Briscoe Cain, an anti-abortion Republican state legislator who said one of his top legislative priorities is to prosecute all abortion-related crimes. with abortion. .
Silva is also supported by lawyers from the Thomas More Society, an influential right-wing national law firm that supports anti-abortion causes, efforts to oppose same-sex marriage and attempts to overturn the 2020 presidential election.
the independent has requested comments from Mr. Silva’s representatives.
The counterclaim contains what appears to be a screenshot of a police report Silva allegedly made to the League City Police Department on July 17, 2022, a few months after his ex-wife filed for divorce. The police report states that he found a pill labeled “MF” in his ex-wife’s purse nearly a week earlier.
He identified the pill as mifepristone, a drug widely used for medical abortion, by far the most common form of abortion care in the US.
He threatened to use the screenshots and evidence against him if he did not “give him my ‘mind, body and soul’ until the end of the divorce, which he is going to drag out,” his ex-wife allegedly wrote in text messages to the outlet. . two women, according to court documents. The divorce was finalized earlier this year.
“Instead of talking to [his ex-wife] about what he found or the disposal of the pill, Silva took photos of the texts and secretly returned the pill,” according to the woman’s complaint.
“He wasn’t interested in stopping me from terminating a possible pregnancy. Instead, he wanted evidence that he could use against her if she refused to remain under his control, which is precisely what he tried to do,” the counterclaim states.
Texas law does not allow criminal or civil charges against abortion patients; Silva’s ex-wife is not part of the lawsuit.
Ms. Noyola and Ms. Carpenter accuse Mr. Silva of violating their right to privacy and the Texas Harmful Computer Access Act, which makes it a crime to access a computer without the owner’s consent.
“Silva’s hypocrisy seeking more than a million dollars in damages is as shocking as it is shameful,” the filing reads. “It is a cowardly misuse and abuse of the judicial system to facilitate their continued harassment and abuse of his ex-wife.”
The hearing is set for June 8.
Within one year of the Supreme Court’s decision to revoke Roe vs. Wade, more than a dozen states have effectively banned abortion care for most pregnancies, and more than a dozen more have placed restrictions on abortion medications.
In April, a ruling by a federal judge in Texas struck down the federal government’s approval of mifepristone, which was first approved by the US Food and Drug Administration more than 20 years ago.
However, the Supreme Court reversed the decision and preserved access to the drug while a legal challenge filed by a group of anti-abortion activists continues in a federal appeals court. That case will be heard before a three-judge panel on May 17.