A Texas father is suing an out-of-state abortionist for contributing to the death of his preborn children.
The federal class action suit, filed on behalf of “all current and future fathers of unborn children in the United States,” could stop abortionists from mailing mifepristone, the chemical abortion drug, into pro-life states.
The Case
Jerry Rodriguez alleges Remy Coeytaux, a California abortionist, illegally shipped chemical abortion pills into Texas, which caused the death of his two children.
Coeytaux represents a network of medical providers that prescribe and facilitate the shipment of chemical abortion pills into pro-life states. His sister, long-time abortion activist Francine Coeytaux, co-founded Plan C Pills — a website that connects women with online abortion providers.
Read the Daily Citizen’s story on black market abortion pills.
Rodriguez filed the suit on July 20 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas Galveston Division. He’s represented by former Texas Solicitor General Jonathan Mitchell, who helped write some of the nation’s most stringent pro-life laws.
Shield Laws
Abortionists are circumventing pro-life laws by prescribing chemical abortion kits online and sending them through the mail.
Several operate out of pro-abortion states with shield laws — laws promising not to investigate mail-order abortionists or cooperate with investigations from pro-life states.
Eight states — California, Colorado, Maine, Massachusetts, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington — have passed laws explicitly protecting abortionists who prescribe chemical abortions to out-of-state patients.
Fifteen others offer at least some protection against out-of-state investigations and lawsuits.
Shield laws make it nearly impossible for states to prosecute out-of-state abortionists that break pro-life laws. State-level judgements can’t be enforced without the resident state’s cooperation.
That’s a major problem, because more people are requesting mail-order abortion pills than ever. Of the 95,710 abortions prescribed or performed in December nationwide, an estimated one-in-seven were prescribed to women in pro-life states by abortionists in shield law states, according to a Kaiser Family Foundation analysis of data collected by the Society of Family Planning.
Kendal’s second chemical abortion was even riskier because her baby was three months old. The FDA only approves chemical abortions through ten weeks of pregnancy.
The Allegations
In his case, Rodriguez claims his girlfriend, Kendal Garza, underwent two chemical abortions via pills prescribed by Coeytaux.
The first abortion allegedly occurred late last year. Shortly after Kendal and Rodriguez announced their pregnancy, Kendal’s estranged husband, Adam Garza, purchased a chemical abortion cocktail from Coeytaux through an online telemedicine appointment.
Garza and Kendal’s mother reportedly pressured Kendal into taking the illicit pills.
The second abortion occurred in 2025. Kendal carried her and Rodriguez’ baby boy for three months before she, again, allegedly consumed chemical abortion pills prescribed by Coeytaux and purchased her estranged husband.
Requested Judgement
Rodriguez requests the court hold Coeytaux legally liable for the wrongful death of his preborn children. He asks the judge to award him monetary damages and permanently bar Coeytaux from sending chemical abortion pills across state lines.
Texas law defines “wrongful death” as death caused by another person’s “wrongful act, neglect, carelessness, unskillfulness or default.” State law also classifies a preborn baby as a person.
The filing argues Coeytaux committed “wrongful acts” by defying state and federal laws regulating abortions.
Texas requires chemical abortions be:
- Prescribed to a woman less than six weeks pregnant.
- Prescribed by a licensed Texas physician.
- Performed in a licensed abortion facility.
- Performed after a mandatory ultrasound (a safety precaution to identify ectopic pregnancies, which can be fatal if left untreated.)
According to the suit, Coeytaux’s failure to meet these requirements make him guilty of felony murder — intentionally and knowingly causing a person’s death — and aiding an illegal, self-managed abortion.
The filings reads:
Assisting a self-managed abortion in Texas is an act of murder. Although Kendal Garza cannot be charged with murder for her role in killing her unborn child, her immunity does not shield Coeytaux from liability for aiding or abetting or directly participating in the murder.
The Comstock Act
Rodriguez’ suit also alleges Coeytaux’s conduct violates the Comstock Act, a federal law prohibiting the physical or digital transportation of “abortion-related items or information” across state lines.
The act, which became law in 1873, regulates the interstate trade of “obscene literature and articles of immoral use,” including materials aiding and abetting abortion. It was last amended in 1996.
Rodriguez made his case a federal one by tying Coeytaux’s wrongdoing to Comstock. Though modern courts rarely enforce it, it is still a federal law.
Why It Matters
Rodriguez’ case is the first to challenge abortion shield laws in federal court. This is vital, because state-level shield laws cannot protect abortionists from an interstate judgement.
A favorable ruling in Rodriguez would establish a new precedent for enforcing Comstock against mail-order abortionists. That precedent, in turn, would allow states to obtain enforceable federal injunctions against out-of-state abortion providers.
Rodriguez’ story also offers an important counterpoint to the narrative that mail-order abortions protect women’s freedom. The alleged relationship between Kendal, her mother and her estranged husband demonstrate the ways third parties can — and do — use unregulated abortion pills to coerce or manipulate women into chemical abortions.
The Daily Citizen will continue covering Rodriguez v. Coeytaux.
To speak with a family help specialist or request resources, please call Focus on the Family at 1-800-A-FAMILY (232-6459).
If you are experiencing an unexpected pregnancy and want to learn more about your options, visit My Choice Network.
Some women, after taking the first abortion pill (mifepristone), come to regret their decision. Thankfully, there is a way to reverse the pill’s effects if prompt action is taken. To learn more about the abortion pill reversal protocol, visit abortionpillreversal.com or call 1-877-558-0333 to be connected with a medical professional who can guide callers through the process of reversing the pill’s effects.
To learn more about pro-life legislation in your state, contact your state Family Policy Council.
To learn more about the consequences of a chemical abortion, visit the links below.
Additional Articles and Resources
Shield Laws Enable Chemical Abortion in Pro-Life States
Shield Law Abortion Providers Advertised Alongside Black Market Abortion Pills
Texas Sues New York Doctor for Prescribing Abortion Meds
New Abortion Pill Study Confirms Danger to Mothers
Woman Nearly Dies from Abortion Pill, Story Reflects Disturbing EPPC Data
Focus on the Family Broadcast: Abortion Pill Reversal
#AbortionChangesYou: A Case Study to Understand the Communicative Tensions in Women’s Medication Abortion Narratives (Health Communication)
The Abortion Pill Harms Women: Insurance Data Reveals One in Ten Patients Experiences a Serious Adverse Event (Ethics and Public Policy Center)
