Wrongful Death Suit Filed by ‘Extremist’ Anti-Choice Lawyer Claims Man Hid Abortion Pills in Hot Chocolate

On Monday morning, Texas abortion advocates and lawmakers were preparing for a public hearing on a bill that would allow wrongful death lawsuits against anyone who manufactures, mails, prescribes, or delivers abortion pills.

At the same time, the architect of Texas’ original “vigilante” abortion ban filed a wrongful death lawsuit alleging — in an explosive, emotional, 33-page complaint — that a man had secretly dosed a woman with at least 10 abortion pills in her hot chocolate, causing the death of her fetus.

The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, was first reported by Autonomy News, a new worker-owned reproductive rights and justice publication co-founded by investigative reporters Garnet Henderson and Susan Rinkunas.

The plaintiff in the case is represented by former Texas Solicitor General Jonathan Mitchell, the architect of Senate Bill 8, which gives private citizens the right to sue anyone who aids in an abortion. Mitchell is considered by many fellow constitutional lawyers to be “an extremist, hell-bent on erasing fundamental rights,” The Washington Post previously reported.

Mitchell associate and anti-abortion advocate Mark Lee Dickson posted on social media that he learned about the case from a “local pregnancy center director” — read: crisis pregnancy center — after speaking at a May event on “Sanctuary Cities for the Unborn” and Senate Bill 2880, the version of Monday’s bill that failed to pass during the regular legislative session in the spring. Dickson claimed he connected the plaintiff to Mitchell.

Dickson and Mitchell have, per Autonomy News, worked together for years on anti-abortion efforts, including their initiative to compel local governments to pass anti-abortion ordinances.

“This great injustice had to be addressed,” Dickson wrote on X. “This wrongful death lawsuit is a step towards that end.”

Dickson also repeatedly noted online Monday that lawmakers at the Texas Capitol were hearing Senate Bill 6.

“I hope these stories drive us to see more protections pass,” Dickson wrote on Monday.

‘Don’t Mess with Texans’ Rights’

Of course, others disagreed.

“The Texas Legislature already tried — and failed — to pass a bill this year that would have violated Texans’ constitutional rights under the guise of stopping abortions,” said Sarah Corning, an attorney at the ACLU of Texas, in a statement. “Now they’re back, trying again. Let’s be clear: The state has no authority to control where or how we make personal decisions, whether we’re seeking abortion care or not. Our message to lawmakers is simple: Don’t mess with Texans’ rights.”

Anti-abortion activists have been public in their quests for cases that would fit their efforts to halt the distribution of abortion pills. Much of the focus has been on finding “wronged men” to sue women for making decisions about their own reproductive healthcare. Groups like Texas Right to Life have spoken openly about the fact that they are actively recruiting men to file such claims.

In June, the first criminal case involving a murder charge over abortion was filed in North Texas.

Within weeks, Mitchell filed a wrongful death suit on behalf of a Texas man against a California doctor who had prescribed abortion pills to the man’s girlfriend.

Meanwhile, Mitchell’s newest client is suing for compensatory and punitive damages from the father of her fetus, as well as Aid Access — an online mail-order service where he allegedly procured the medication — and its founder, physician Rebecca Gomperts. Clinicians working for services like Aid Access are currently protected under so-called “shield laws” from civil and criminal action in states with bans like Texas. This is part of what Mitchell has been working to change, per Autonomy News.

The Barbed Wire requested an interview and statement from Mitchell, as well as from Aid Access but had not heard back from any of the involved parties by press time.

The federal complaint alleges that the plaintiff became pregnant in early 2025 with a baby she expected to raise alongside her three children from a previous marriage, but she claimed it became a “daily source of contention” that the defendant “wanted the baby dead.”

On April 2, despite escalating arguments between the couple — including many text exchanges that devolved into personal attacks over the pregnancy — the plaintiff’s partner asked if the pair could hang out and catch up on the TV show “Reacher.”

“I could make us some warm relaxing tea instead of alcohol,” he wrote, “and we could go to bed at a reasonable hour. Call it a ‘trust building night’ if you have to…..”

The plaintiff, who allegedly “viewed this as a last-ditch opportunity to get on reasonable terms with the father of her daughter,” accepted the invitation.

Three days later, the defendant “brought his own hot chocolate from his apartment” and, while the plaintiff was distracted, “lac(ed) her drink with the abortion pills that he had obtained from Aid Access,” the lawsuit claims.

In the civil complaint, the plaintiff claimed she was eight weeks pregnant when she was allegedly drugged by her partner, after which she began hemorrhaging and cramping. A neighbor drove her to the hospital, where she was told her fetus did not survive, according to the complaint.

The Corpus Christi Police Department told NBC News that there were no active investigations involving the defendant on Monday.