At California Family Council (CFC), our mission is clear: to protect life, uphold family values, and defend liberty in California. Grounded in advancing God’s design, we now confront a deeply troubling legislative proposal—AB 54,”Access to Safe Abortion Care Act” introduced by Assemblywoman Maggy Krell.
The Essence of AB 54
AB 54 seeks to ensure access to chemical abortion by legislating the use of mifepristone and misoprostol—drugs used to end the lives of babies in the womb. Authored by Assemblywoman Maggy Krell, whose background includes serving as a lawyer for Planned Parenthood, this bill raises significant concerns. Planned Parenthood is one of the largest abortion providers in the nation, and Krell’s connection to the organization casts doubt on the bill’s intent, framing it as an ideological agenda masked as a public health measure.
California Family Council Analysis
In response to AB 54, CFC Outreach Director Sophia Lorey took to X, formerly known as Twitter, to unpack the bill’s alarming implications. “There is nothing safe about abortion,” Lorey asserted, challenging the bill’s misleading title. She detailed the chemical abortion process, explaining how mifepristone halts progesterone – the hormone necessary for pregnancy, leading to the death of the unborn child, while misoprostol induces severe contractions to expel the deceased fetus. Lorey emphasized, “This is far from the benign procedure suggested by the term ‘safe abortion care.’”
Public Health and Moral Concerns
Lorey’s critique didn’t stop at the procedure itself. She highlighted the risks to women’s health associated with these drugs, referencing an FDA study that reported over 2,200 severe complications and 14 deaths linked to their use in the U.S. alone. “Not only does every successful abortion end the life of a baby,” Lorey noted, “but it also places the mother’s health in jeopardy.”
These risks, ignored in the legislative language of AB 54, underscore the irresponsibility of expanding access to these dangerous drugs. The bill’s rhetoric of “safe care” directly contradicts the data, exposing a fundamental disregard for the well-being of both mother and child.
Ethical Considerations and Parental Rights
Beyond health concerns, AB 54 raises serious ethical and moral questions. The legislation attempts to conflate miscarriage management with intentional abortion. Sec. 2(h) states “From a medical perspective, there is no difference between the case of using mifepristone and misoprostol to terminate a nonviable pregnancy, using those drugs to treat a miscarriage, or using them to terminate a viable pregnancy. In all cases, the same drugs are administered, and the same biological processes ensue.”
Lorey called out this false equivalence as “beyond disgusting,” explaining that it trivializes the moral and medical distinctions between a natural loss of life and a deliberate termination of a baby in the womb.
“This is equivalent to stating that taking ibuprofen to help with a headache vs intentionally overdosing on it with the attempt to kill yourself is the same thing,” Lorey stated.
Call to Action
The introduction of AB 54 by Assemblywoman Maggy Krell, with her clear connections to Planned Parenthood, is more than just a legislative proposal—it’s a direct challenge to the values that define us.
The California Family Council is committed to opposing AB 54 and any legislation that disregards the sanctity of life. We encourage our supporters to stay informed and take action by visiting our bill watch list.
Together, we can stand firm in the defense of life and liberty.
