Logic and critical thinking are the foundation of intelligence. Together they create the ability to make wise decisions throughout one's growth and development.
HB1333
House · 2026 sessionRepublicanKilled in HouseMurder charge for forced abortion drugs
AIAllows a first-degree murder charge against a person who administers pregnancy-terminating medication to a pregnant woman without her knowledge or consent, and moves the point at which a fetus can be a homicide victim from 20 weeks gestation to conception or implantation.
relative to nonconsensual provision of medication intended to terminate a pregnancy and the homicide of a fetus.
Status
Killed in the House — Inexpedient to Legislate · February 5, 2026- ✓Introduced
- ✕House
- Senate
- Governor
- Law
Division of testimony
1,661 submissionsHatched = form letter · 15 of 1,661 written submissions (1%) came from organized campaigns
Argument digest · AI-generated
from 413 of 427 written submissionsHB1333 would make nonconsensual provision of medication to end a pregnancy a crime and would move the point at which a fetus can be a homicide victim from 20 weeks back to conception (or implantation in IVF). A minority of supporters frame it as protecting unborn life and preventing coerced or secret abortions, while the large majority of submitters oppose it, arguing it amounts to fetal "personhood" that would criminalize and surveil pregnant people, is scientifically inaccurate, threatens IVF and miscarriage care, and undermines reproductive autonomy.
- Human life and personhood begin at conceptionSupport3 of 413 reviewed
Supporters argue that a fetus is a human person from conception regardless of developmental stage, and that the law should recognize and protect that life.
“It is a foundational moral truth that we are not to kill innocent human beings, but rather love and protect them. The direct intention to kill an innocent person is always forbidden as a basic, universal moral norm.”
— Vincent Armstrong, Lancaster · #535762 — read full submission →
“Neither of these developmental milestones has the power to change the nature of the fetus: namely, that he or she is a human person, a fellow member of the human race.”
— Lila Gillon, Hanover · #533747 — read full submission →
- Bill protects against coerced or nonconsensual abortionSupport5 of 413 reviewed
Supporters argue the bill is needed to address real cases of pregnant people being given abortion-inducing medication without their knowledge or consent, describing this as a form of violence that should be penalized.
“There have been an alarming number of incidences of abortion pills being put in pregnant women's drinks, without their consent or knowledge.”
— Donna Peterson, Loudon · #537855 — read full submission →
“The administration of medication without the consent of the patient should be heavily penalized, regardless of pregnancy. The fact that a woman is pregnant should elevate the severity of the penalty.”
— Matthew Kim, Hanover · #534051 — read full submission →
- Killing a fetus should be prosecuted as homicideSupport3 of 413 reviewed
Supporters argue that ending a pregnancy through violence or without consent should be treated the same as killing any other person, consistent with existing fetal-homicide protections for victims of violent crime.
“I am generally pro-choice, but this should stand to reason. No different than a pregnant woman being murdered/killed and it is double homicide/manslaughter.”
— Stephanie Olson, Bristol · #523198 — read full submission →
“Since the fetus is alive from the time of conception, and since a fetus is clearly human in nature, the destruction of a fetus should be characterized as homicide, the killing of a human.”
— Matthew Kim, Hanover · #534051 — read full submission →
- "Personhood" measures create legal confusion and enable surveillance/criminalization of pregnant peopleOppose70 of 413 reviewed · 15 via form letter
Submitters argue that defining a fetus as a homicide victim from conception creates legal chaos and risks investigation or prosecution of pregnant people, especially those who experience miscarriage or stillbirth.
- Redefining "fetus"/personhood at conception is scientifically inaccurateOppose60 of 413 reviewed
Submitters, including physicians and nurses, argue the bill's definitions do not reflect mainstream medicine or embryology, conflating a fertilized egg or embryo with a fetus and misrepresenting when personhood or viability occurs.
“HB 1333 does not reflect mainstream science and medicine, and would lead to confusing language and uncertain interpretation.”
— Julia Mead, Concord · #536286 — read full submission →
“At conception, a fetus is simply a fertilized cell. It does not have the features identified with "personhood" until much later in development. It does not even have a heartbeat until six weeks.”
— Ashleigh Shenton, Lebanon · #533265 — read full submission →
- Undermines bodily autonomy; decisions belong to patient and doctor, not governmentOppose75 of 413 reviewed
Submitters argue that granting fetuses legal rights subordinates the rights of the pregnant person to those of the embryo/fetus, and that pregnancy-related medical decisions should be made privately between a patient and their physician, not dictated by the state.
“Pregnant women and their providers must continue to be allowed to make evidence based decisions focusing on the best outcome for the mother first, the embryo or fetus second.”
— Carol McIntyre, Nashua · #523970 — read full submission →
“This bill unfortunately continues a trend of anti-abortion legislation in New Hampshire meant to strip pregnant people and families of their autonomy.”
— Charlotte Hastings, Lebanon · #535066 — read full submission →
- Fear of prosecution will cause doctors to delay or deny emergency pregnancy careOppose49 of 413 reviewed
Submitters, many identifying as physicians or nurses, argue that criminal exposure for pregnancy outcomes will make providers hesitant to treat miscarriage, ectopic pregnancy, and other medical emergencies, endangering patients.
“In 1992 I had an ectopic pregnancy and needed emergency surgery before my fallopian tube ruptured and I bled out internally. If I had not had immediate access to surgery I could have died.”
— ALICIA Geilen, NEWTON · #531933 — read full submission →
“HB 1333 would criminalize pregnant women and their MDs, creating a dangerous environment for pregnancy. OB/GYNs would leave the state of New Hampshire”
— Sarah-Elizabeth Anderson, Concord · #529730 — read full submission →
- Bill is part of a broader anti-abortion strategy and breaks promises not to change abortion lawOppose29 of 413 reviewed
Submitters characterize the bill as one step in a nationwide strategy to erode abortion access, and note it conflicts with prior legislative rejection of fetal personhood and the Governor's pledge not to further restrict abortion.
“This bill is nothing more than yet another attempt by the GOP to restrict abortion by "nibbling at the edges". Time and again, NH voters have shown their intention to keep abortion safe and legal.”
— Jason Knights, Londonderry · #536878 — read full submission →
“this redefinition creates a legal foundation that could be used in future court cases or prosecutorial decisions to undermine access to lawful abortion care.”
— Melissa Hansen, Portsmouth · #524719 — read full submission →
- Bill goes against the will of the NH majority on abortionOppose39 of 413 reviewed
Submitters argue most Granite Staters support current abortion law and do not want it changed, framing the bill as out of step with public opinion.
- Deciding when life begins is a religious question that should not be legislatedOppose27 of 413 reviewed
Submitters argue that fixing personhood at conception reflects a particular religious viewpoint rather than science, and that the state should not impose one faith's belief through law.
“The definition of when a fetus becomes a "person" is a religious belief, not a medical or scientific decision. The state should not be legislating religious beliefs.”
— Jerry Knirk, Freedom · #529349 — read full submission →
“Science does not support this bill. Keep religion out of politics. I am a practicing Catholic and I feel strongly that this is not what Jesus would want.”
— Kristyn Anderson, Derry · #523928 — read full submission →
- Bill would jeopardize IVF and fertility careOppose15 of 413 reviewed
Submitters, including a fertility clinic director, warn that granting embryos legal rights would disrupt IVF services and embryo transport, pointing to Alabama's experience as a cautionary example.
- Legislature should focus on other priorities insteadOppose15 of 413 reviewed
Submitters argue lawmakers should spend time on issues like housing, poverty, childcare, and education rather than this bill.
- Bill reflects a broader effort to control womenOppose17 of 413 reviewed
Submitters frame the bill as part of a pattern of legislation aimed at controlling women's bodies and lives rather than genuinely protecting anyone.
Generated by claude-sonnet-5 (claude code agent) on Jul 20, 2026. Quotes are verbatim excerpts, verified against the cited submission before publication. Summaries are AI interpretation of the record, not part of it.
Form-letter campaigns
15 of 427 written submissions (4%)15 submissions match a shared template; 412 are individually written.
- Opposition to Personhood LegislationOppose15 submissions on this bill
The legislation is argued to create legal confusion, potentially criminalize pregnancy outcomes, and contradict established science and medical consensus.
The letter · submitted 15 times So-called “personhood” measures like this one create confusion and chaos in our legal system, and often result in the surveillance of and criminalization of pregnant people, including those that experience negative pregnancy outcomes like miscarriage and stillbirth. HB 1333 is out of line with mainstream science and medicine -- and out of touch with the will of the majority of Granite Staters.
Detected by text-similarity clustering; campaign names are AI-generated.
Any bill that would give a fetus or cluster of cells legal personhood is an ill-disguised attempt to remove the legal personhood of actual people: women. In this case, women who might be forced to carry that cluster of cells in her body against her will or against the advice of her medical doctor, or both. Protect actual women, not theoretical future people.
Dear members of the House Judiciary Committee, As a NH citizen in Loudon, I want to strongly urge you to vote OTP on HB1333, the bill protecting unborn children from fetal homicide. There have been an alarming number of incidences of abortion pills being put in pregnant women's drinks, without their consent or knowledge. The purchase of these abortion pills is poorly regulated with purchase permitted by persons other than the pregnant mothers and without their consent. The unborn children of women who have not chosen to abort them, should be protected!Thank you for voting OTP on HB 1333! Sincerely, Donna Peterson
I oppose this bill. Personhood does not include unborn fetuses.
This bill is an attempt to undermine abortion rights,abortion rights are a part of our state constitution, if the nh committee approves this bill, it directly contradicts our state constitution, which nh has repeatedly voted against changing that particular section for a reason. Stop trying to tell women what they are allowed to do with their bodies, cause if you remove bodily autonomy from one of us, you remove bodily autonomy from all of us. Make the correct decision and shut down this targeted attack against women as if its a reasonable legal position
The governor campaigned and promised no changes to NH abortion laws. That should include back door attempts to restrict women’s rights.
This is a back door attempt to roll back abortion rights. Abortion is legal in NH and we can’t pass laws that would challenge that.
We need to stop taking away women’s rights. If we want to do that we need to be able to show that we support her after the birth and possibly an unwanted child. Think of the mental health issues a child gets from being born to a mother who does not want them. And we don’t provide adequate mental health care. Why does what other people choose to do with their life bother everyone else I thought We were live free or die?
We have to stop treating women as though they do not deserve the same rights to their bodies as men. New Hampshire should have no legislature that limits or restricts a woman’s right to choose. To put the well-being of a fetus, which to clarify: is not medically designated a person (despite religious fanatic’s best efforts) above the well-being of a woman who already has an established life with loved ones is abhorrent. The decision whether to carry a fetus to term or not, should be only up to the person carrying said fetus with advisement of her medical providers. Crusty old men who don’t even know where the clitoris is, that urine comes out of a different hole, and who are likely too embarrassed to ever buy their grand daughters tampons should not be making decisions that do not affect them.
Laws like this undermine the rights of pregnant people, limit access to sexual and reproductive health care, and control people’s abilities to build the families they want.
Part of this bill grossly distorts and misleads regarding solid science and medicine. It is not justice, This crime as described is against the person who is pregnant.
Stop it. Just stop it. The assault on women’s rights. Enough. ENOUGH. You have nothing better to do? You’ve removed public funding. You’ve reduced access. Why don’t you focus on offering services and support that might make it easier for a woman to bear and raise children. You don’t supports child care, education, school food programs. But you have time and money to spend on this.
I oppose giving fetuses legal rights. This is an attempt to outlaw abortion, and would greatly limit women’s rights to have control over their own bodies and their healthcare. Please vote against this bill.
Unacceptable.
This bill is nothing more than yet another attempt by the GOP to restrict abortion by "nibbling at the edges". Time and again, NH voters have shown their intention to keep abortion safe and legal. This is just another example of the Legislature, led by the GOP and their Free State overlords to disregard the will of the people and try to turn us into Alabama with snow. They know that outright banning it would be political suicide, so they are attempting all of these end arounds to essentially make it illegal without actually making it illegal. It's time for the voters to let them know that, see you and know what you're trying to do.
Embryos are not able to live outside the womb and therefore do not have rights as a human being
I do NOT support laws that infringe on women's rights and healthcare. These extreme bills have caused harm to families.
A fetus is not a living breathing human being and should not be treated as such when confronted with choices concerning the mother who is carrying it
Fear of legal consequences may deter providers from offering necessary treatments, even in emergencies. It will lead to confusion and dangerous inaction for cases of miscarriage and ectopic pregnancies.
I am a NH native and love this state more than most. But our moto is Live FREE or Die and by limiting a women's right to choose is not freedom. Why would I want more Government oversight into what we can and cannot do!
I oppose this bill most vehemently. Let me remind you about separation of church and state.
Abortion is legal. This bill would affect women's ability to access one. I needed one and I'm alive because I had access to one in a hospital setting. Please do more to protect women's health and less to control women's lives.
This is government over reach. Just polarizing political hooey and a waste of time. We have more important things to deal with: economy, health care and infrastructure. Get to work on something that matters!
I am testifying in opposition to HB1333 on behalf of myself. I am an ob-gyn and I am the vice-chair of New Hampshire ACOG- American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. I trained at Dartmouth and now work in Concord, New Hampshire. HB 1333 does not reflect mainstream science and medicine, and would lead to confusing language and uncertain interpretation. I had a patient last week who presented to the emergency room with bleeding and a positive pregnancy test. Her ultrasound report was suggestive of a miscarriage, but not diagnostic. How can we not know whether or not she is having a miscarriage or not? Believe it or not, this happens every day. There are weeks when women may have a positive pregnancy test but there is no way to know whether they will go on to have a miscarriage, an ectopic pregnancy or a healthy pregnancy. The decisions that they make during these times of uncertainty should be made with their doctors and their families, not by legislators. Considering an embryo or a fetus to legally be a person threatens the autonomy of pregnant people and leads to the criminalization of health care professionals attempting to provide evidence-based, essential health care to pregnant patients. Requiring physicians to assess and treat patients according to legislation based on ideology rather than science, medicine, and the individual patient in front of them, gives legislators and the courts significant power over decisions made in the exam room, rather than relying on physician experts. Measures like this one use confusing and inaccurate language to create confusion and chaos in our legal system, and often result in the surveillance of and criminalization of pregnant people, including those that experience negative pregnancy outcomes like miscarriage, ectopic pregnancy and stillbirth. HB 1333 is out of touch with the will of the majority of Granite Staters, and would threaten the ability of New Hampshire to retain Ob-Gyn physicians and Ob-Gyn subspecialty physicians in our state, such as IVF providers. I urge the committee to oppose this bill.
I oppose this bill. scientifically speaking the language of this bill is grossly inaccurate.