How Anti-Abortion Lawsuits Rely on Dubious Plaintiffs to Push Legal Agendas

In a lawsuit filed in Galveston, Texas, in summer 2023, Jerry Rodriguez presented himself as a deeply wronged man. He claimed his girlfriend’s domineering ex-partner had orchestrated a scheme to "murder" not one but two of his "unborn children." Rodriguez portrayed himself as a devoted partner who accompanied his girlfriend to ultrasound appointments and begged her not to terminate pregnancies forced upon her by her ex.

Instead of targeting the girlfriend’s estranged husband, Rodriguez accused a California-based provider, Dr. Rémy Coeytaux, of "wrongful death" for allegedly supplying the abortion pills used in the terminations. The lawsuit demanded justice on Rodriguez’s behalf and sought an injunction to prevent Coeytaux—and all other medical providers—from sending abortion pills to Texas, where abortion is banned.

Leading the legal charge was Jonathan F. Mitchell, a former Texas solicitor general and anti-abortion strategist. Mitchell has helped craft some of the most restrictive abortion laws in the U.S., including Senate Bill 8 (a six-week ban enacted in 2021) and House Bill 7 (HB 7), which allows private individuals to sue abortion-pill providers for at least $100,000 per violation. Mitchell’s broader legal strategy aims to revive the Comstock Act, a 19th-century law that could outlaw the mailing of abortion pills nationwide, effectively imposing a federal ban.

Four years after the overturning of Roe v. Wade, abortion pills have become widely accessible, with medication now accounting for 63% of all abortions in the U.S. Mitchell’s legal maneuvers seek to reverse this trend by targeting the supply chain of abortion pills.

Sympathetic plaintiffs like Rodriguez are central to Mitchell’s strategy, but their credibility is often questionable. In Rodriguez’s case, his story collapsed just months after filing the lawsuit, exposing the weaknesses in Mitchell’s approach. An investigation by the San Francisco Chronicle revealed that Rodriguez was evading a felony arrest warrant for allegedly assaulting his girlfriend—the same woman whose abortions he claimed to mourn.

According to the Chronicle’s report, Rodriguez was involved in a violent altercation with his girlfriend at a motel in October 2024, months before filing the lawsuit. He allegedly grabbed her neck with such force that she believed she was going to die. She told police this was the eighth assault by Rodriguez in five months. The altercation escalated when he slammed her to the floor, climbed on top of her, and punched and slapped her until she escaped.

Rodriguez’s alleged history of violence raises serious questions about the legitimacy of his lawsuit and the broader strategy employed by Mitchell and his allies. Despite their efforts, these legal challenges have yet to achieve the sweeping anti-abortion goals they seek.