PUBLISHER'S NOTE: In recent years, I have taken on the theme of 'criminalizing reproduction' - a natural theme for a Blog concerned with flawed science in its myriad forms - as I am utterly appalled by the current movement in the United States (and some other countries) emboldened by the overturning of Roe V Wade, towards imprisoning and conducting surveillance on women and their physicians and others who help them secure a safe abortion, on the basis of sham science (or any other basis). I can’t remember the source, but agree totally with the sentiment that control over their reproductive lives is far too important to women in America - or anywhere else - so they can participate equally in the economic and social life of their nations without fear for loss their freedom at the hands of political opportunists and fanatics. (Far too many of those those around these days.) '
Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog.
——————————————-
PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "The case is the latest escalation in the battle between states that has arisen since the U.S. Supreme Court eliminated the national right to abortion in 2022. About a third of states, including Louisiana, currently have near-total bans on abortion. About 20 others have some type of abortion shield law, including at least eight states — California among them — that explicitly refuse to cooperate with prosecutions, lawsuits or investigations against providers who supply abortion medication to states with bans."
—————————————————————
PASSAGE TWO OF THE DAY: "Legal experts expect the battle over whether states need to honor one another’s abortion laws to eventually lead to a constitutional showdown that could reach the Supreme Court."
------------------------------------------------
STORY: "Newsom Says California Will Not Extradite Abortion Provider to Louisiana," by Reporters Emily Cochrane and Pam Bullock, published by The New York Times, on January 14, 2026. (Emily Cochrane contributed reporting. Pam Belluck is a health and science reporter for The Times, covering a range of subjects, including reproductive health, long Covid, brain science, neurological disorders, mental health and genetics.)
SUB-HEADING: "The case, escalating the interstate battle over abortion, is the second time Louisiana has criminally charged out-of-state doctors with sending abortion pills to Louisiana residents. After the Supreme Court eliminated the national right to abortion in 2022, Gov. Gavin Newsom signed an executive order saying that the state would not extradite health providers accused of providing reproductive health services in other states."
GIST: "Gov. Gavin Newsom of California said on Wednesday that his state would refuse to extradite a doctor who has been charged in Louisiana with providing abortion pills to a resident of that state.
“Louisiana’s request is denied,” Mr. Newsom, a Democrat, said in a statement. “We will not allow extremist politicians from other states to reach into California and try to punish doctors based on allegations that they provided reproductive health care services. Not today. Not ever.”
On Tuesday, Louisiana’s attorney general, Liz Murrill, a Republican, released an indictment accusing a California abortion provider, Dr. Rémy Coeytaux, of prescribing and mailing abortion pills to a woman who had found the telemedicine abortion service the doctor worked for in October 2023, shortly after discovering she was pregnant.
Gov. Jeff Landry of Louisiana, also a Republican, said hours later that he would sign an extradition order for the doctor.
Louisiana authorities learned about the case in March 2024 and issued an arrest warrant for Dr. Coeytaux in May 2024, according to affidavits from investigators and other documents that Louisiana released, which do not say who reported the abortion to state investigators.
The case is the latest escalation in the battle between states that has arisen since the U.S. Supreme Court eliminated the national right to abortion in 2022.
About a third of states, including Louisiana, currently have near-total bans on abortion.
About 20 others have some type of abortion shield law, including at least eight states — California among them — that explicitly refuse to cooperate with prosecutions, lawsuits or investigations against providers who supply abortion medication to states with bans.
California’s telemedicine abortion shield law was passed in September 2023 and took effect in January 2024.
But almost immediately after the 2022 Supreme Court decision, Governor Newsom signed an executive order “protecting state-held data and information from being used by out-of-state anti-abortion entities to target providers and patients, and declining requests received from other states to extradite health care providers for providing reproductive health care services,” the governor’s office said in a statement on Wednesday.
Legal experts expect the battle over whether states need to honor one another’s abortion laws to eventually lead to a constitutional showdown that could reach the Supreme Court.
On Wednesday, in testimony about medication abortion before a Senate committee in Washington, Ms. Murrill said she was committed to prosecuting people who violate Louisiana’s abortion laws. “Shield laws in some states protect providers from liability, and effectively nullify laws in our states,” she said. “Their purpose is to make it more difficult to sue or prosecute individuals in those states where abortion drugs are prohibited.”
Dr. Coeytaux, who is charged with criminal abortion by means of abortion-inducing drugs, did not respond to a request for comment.
The documents released by Louisiana say that the woman, who is not named, received abortion pills in the mail after supplying the telemedicine service with her personal information on a form and paying $150.
She took the medication and terminated her pregnancy soon after, the documents said.
From the package’s postal tracking number, the investigators determined that the medication had been sent from a business in Dr. Coeytaux’s name.
The case is the second time that Louisiana officials have sought criminal prosecution and extradition of an out-of-state doctor over the prescription of abortion pills.
Last year, Louisiana sought to extradite a New York-based abortion provider, Dr. Margaret Carpenter, whom the state indicted on similar charges.
Gov. Kathy Hochul of New York, a Democrat, has refused to agree to her extradition, citing the state’s abortion shield law.
So far, Louisiana has not taken further action to try to extradite Dr. Carpenter."
The entire story can be read at:
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/14/us/california-louisiana-extradite-abortion-doctor.html
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue/resource. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com. Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog.
SEE BREAKDOWN OF SOME OF THE ON-GOING INTERNATIONAL CASES (OUTSIDE OF THE CONTINENTAL USA) THAT I AM FOLLOWING ON THIS BLOG, AT THE LINK BELOW: HL:
https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/120008354894645705/4704913685758792985
———————————————————————————————
FINAL WORD: (Applicable to all of our wrongful conviction cases): "Whenever there is a wrongful conviction, it exposes errors in our criminal legal system, and we hope that this case — and lessons from it — can prevent future injustices."
Lawyer Radha Natarajan:
Executive Director: New England Innocence Project;
—————————————————————————————————
FINAL, FINAL WORD: "Since its inception, the Innocence Project has pushed the criminal legal system to confront and correct the laws and policies that cause and contribute to wrongful convictions. They never shied away from the hard cases — the ones involving eyewitness identifications, confessions, and bite marks. Instead, in the course of presenting scientific evidence of innocence, they've exposed the unreliability of evidence that was, for centuries, deemed untouchable." So true!
Christina Swarns: Executive Director: The Innocence Project;
-------------------------------------------------------------------
