Judge orders LSU to reinstate law professor sidelined for political comments

A state judge has ordered LSU to allow its law professor Ken Levy to return to teaching duties. The university had removed Levy from the classroom pending an investigation into alleged criticism of Gov. Jeff Landry.

Levy, a tenured professor of constitutional and criminal law, sued the university earlier this week, saying it violated his First Amendment rights and its own policies regarding tenured faculty.

Judge Don Johnson of the 19th Judicial District granted Levy’s request for a temporary restraining order that would allow him to return to the classroom for at least the next week. Johnson set a hearing for an injunction on Feb. 10. Read the judge’s order below.

“Professor Levy is looking very much forward to his day in court,” Jill Craft, Levy’s attorney, said in an interview. “The rights that are at stake are critical to the foundation of this country.”

Levy alleged in his lawsuit that political comments made on the first day of his Administration of Criminal Justice course were reported to the governor, which he believes led to calls to the university administration about his comments.

In an affidavit to the court, Levy says that he brought up Landry’s reaction to comments of fellow law professor Nick Bryner during class. Levy asked his students not to record his lectures because he didn’t want to be targeted by Landry.

In November, Landry publicly asked LSU to discipline Bryner last year for his comments about President Trump the day after the presidential election. A video of Bryner’s comments were sent to the governor, who then circulated the video on social media.

“If Governor Landry were to retaliate against me, then f*** the governor and f*** that. — all of which was a joke and clearly said in a joking manner to highlight my no recording policy in class and the First Amendment,” Levy wrote in the affidavit.

Levy argues in the affidavit that the actions taken against him stifle not only his right to free speech and academic freedom but that of other faculty members. His lawsuit focuses not just on the First Amendment but on LSU’s own policies regarding tenured faculty.

Tenure provides an indefinite academic appointment to qualifying faculty members who have demonstrated excellence in their field. Academics with tenure can only be terminated for cause, but it typically only happens in extreme circumstances. College faculty view tenure as a key part of academic freedom at universities and a shield against political, corporate and religious intervention.

Levy attached a letter in his suit from LSU Director of Employee Relations Lindsay Madatic that informs Levy of his removal from the classroom “pending an investigation into student complaints of inappropriate statements.” Madatic writes his compensation will remain unchanged and that he is permitted on campus.

Jill Craft, Levy’s attorney, argues Madatic does not have the authority to discipline him.

In her request for a temporary restraining order, Craft said that LSU does not have a policy that allows for relieving a tenured professor of his or her duties.

LSU’s top attorney is leaving his position

LSU has several policy statements and permanent memoranda that address disciplining a tenured faculty member. These policies call for several layers of review, all of which require peer faculty input. None of this happened before Levy was removed from his classes, which Levy and Craft contend is a form of discipline.

“No matter how characterized by LSU, its actions in unilaterally relieving [Levy] of his teaching duties violate his substantive and procedural rights,” Craft wrote.

LSU Faculty Senate President Dan Tirone said the only time he was familiar with a professor being removed from the classroom pending an investigation involved Title IX allegations or other types of abuse. In those cases, the professor would also be prevented from accessing campus for safety reasons.

The removal of Levy from the classroom led to significant backlash from the public and from LSU law students, who staged a protest Tuesday in his defense. The students delivered a petition to university general counsel Winston DeCuir calling for Levy to be reinstated, apologized to and for complete transparency into the disciplinary process.

DeCuir has since tendered his resignation.

Major blow for Biden as judge scraps protections for LGBTQ students

A federal district court judge in Kentucky has struck down President Joe Biden’s effort to protect transgender students and make other changes to Title IX, ruling the U.S. Department of Education violated teachers’ rights by requiring them to use transgender students’ names and pronouns.

The ruling issued Thursday, which applies nationwide, came as a major blow to the Biden administration in its final days and to LGBTQ+ advocates. It comes less than two weeks before President-elect Donald Trump takes office, when the rule was likely to face more scrutiny from a candidate who took aim at transgender people in a culture-war focused campaign.

The Biden administration rule was released last April and aimed to protect LGBTQ+ students in K-12 schools, colleges and universities. The rule also conferred protections for pregnant students. The update to Title IX, the federal law that forbids sex-based discrimination in education, was expanded to include gender identity and sexual orientation.

In his opinion, Chief Judge Danny Reeves of the Eastern District of Kentucky wrote in his opinion that the education department could not expand Title IX to prohibit discrimination based on gender identity. Reeves was nominated to the bench by President George W. Bush.

Gender identity refers to the gender that an individual identifies as, regardless of their sex assigned at birth.

“The entire point of Title IX is to prevent discrimination based on sex — throwing gender identity into the mix eviscerates the statute and renders it largely meaningless,” Reeves wrote.

Louisiana was among the states that sued the Biden administration over the rule. Its case was pending in the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals at the time of the ruling in Kentucky, which came in the case Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti brought.

“Louisiana is honored to have litigated this issue alongside Tennessee and our sister States,” Attorney General Liz Murrill said in a statement to the Illuminator. “This is a great day for America!”

Gov. Jeff Landry also praised the decision in a post on X, the platform formerly known as Twitter.

“Biden’s attempt to rewrite Title IX is dead!,” Landry posted from his personal account. “It’s a shame this even had to go to court, but pleased to see this win for women and girls across our Nation.”

Prior to Thursday’s decision, the rule had been temporarily blocked in nearly half of U.S. states, including Louisiana and Tennessee, as litigation played out.

While Reeves’ opinion references a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision that limits the regulatory authority of federal agencies, it also notably rejects the rule on First Amendment grounds.

“The First Amendment does not permit the government to chill speech or compel affirmance of a belief with which the speaker disagrees in this manner,” Reeves said, referring to sections of the law that could be interpreted as defining deadnaming and misgendering of students as harassment.

Deadnaming is when someone uses a transgender or nonbinary person’s birth name or “dead name” against their wishes. Misgendering occurs when someone refers to an individual by a gender they do not identify as.

Louisiana Illuminator is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Louisiana Illuminator maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Greg LaRose for questions: info@lailluminator.com.

Louisiana state senator takes aim at gun-free zones around UL Lafayette

State Sen. Blake Miguez, R-New Iberia, is picking a fight with the University of Louisiana Lafayette over its new off-campus gun-free zones. He believes the designated areas could lead to a lawsuit that he foresees ending firearm restrictions entirely at all schools.

Miguez is a competitive marksman who has made a name for himself in the Legislature by carrying bills to loosen gun restrictions. He’s taken issue with the university for declaring gun-free zones at a museum it operates in downtown Lafayette and at two hotels where it is housing students because its on-campus dorms are at capacity.

The gun-free zone’s radius around the museum would make it a crime to carry a firearm in most of downtown.

Miguez has asked Attorney General Liz Murrill to issue an opinion regarding the university’s position that the three sites be kept gun-free.

In an interview Friday with conservative radio talk show host Moon Griffon, Miguez said ULL’s stance could spur gun rights advocates to file a lawsuit, which he speculated could result in Louisiana’s law prohibiting guns on or near school property being struck down as unconstitutional.

The university’s announcement last week that its campus police would patrol and enforce a 1,000-foot gun-free school zone around the UL Lafayette Science Museum became a source of contention with the Acadiana senator, who believes it would be a violation of state law.

“[Lafayette Consolidated Government and the University of Louisiana Lafayette] together are making a decision to violate citizens [sic] civil rights through resuming enforcement of their position that the Lafaytte [sic] Science Museum is ‘school property’ in order to accomplish their goal of making downtown Lafayette a gun free zone,” Miguez posted Friday on X, the platform previously known as Twitter.

“To add insult to injury, ULL is now also declaring contracted private hotels used for student housing as ‘school property’ to trigger more gun free zones across Lafayette Parish,” Miguez added.

Miguez did not respond to a request for comment for this report.

Louisiana’s law prohibiting firearms in school zones defines a school as “any public or private elementary, secondary, high school, or vocational-technical school, college or university.” It defines a campus as all facilities and property within the boundary of the school property.

@LCGTweets and @ULLafayette together are making a decision to violate citizens civil rights through resuming enforcement of their position that the Lafaytte Science Museum is “school property” in order to accomplish their goal of making downtown Lafayette a gun free zone.
To… https://t.co/1u8s9BRUMV
— Blake Miguez (@BlakeMiguezLA) August 23, 2024

The two hotels ULL is using for overflow student housing are exclusively rented to the university, meaning no other guests are staying on the property. One of the hotels is within the gun-free zone of the Episcopal School of Acadiana, university spokesman Eric Maron said.

Murrill has previously posted online that she does not believe the museum to qualify as a gun-free zone, but she has not weighed in regarding the two hotels.

The university has not yet responded to questions about their legal reasoning for defining the hotels as gun-free zones.

In his letter to Murrill requesting an opinion, Miguez raised concerns that the university’s stance could lead to a slippery slope.

“Situations could arise where a school might assert that its ‘campus’ is anywhere where school business takes place,” Miguez wrote. “This could be a privately owned field where LSU conducts an anthropological dig, a convention center rented by Tulane to host a scientific conference, or a golf course where the university president regularly plays with potential donors.”

Louisiana law allows public officials to request opinions from the attorney general, who usually responds within 30 days. In July, Murrill issued 12 opinions, which are position statements that do not have the force of law but can influence government decision making.

Louisiana Illuminator is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Louisiana Illuminator maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Greg LaRose for questions: info@lailluminator.com. Follow Louisiana Illuminator on Facebook and X.

Republican AGs seek to use Louisiana redistricting case to weaken Voting Rights Act

Fourteen Republican attorneys general argue that a federal judge’s interpretation of the Voting Rights Act in a ruling that overturned Louisiana’s legislative maps was unconstitutional.

The attorneys general, led by Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall, stated their case in an amicus brief filed Wednesday in the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans for the case Nairne v. Ardoin.

“States deserve fair notice regarding how to draft redistricting laws that comply with federal law,” the brief reads. “Yet under the District Court’s free-wheeling approach, members of the Louisiana Legislature could never guess ahead of time what facts might — in a court’s view — trigger a (Voting Rights Act) violation and thus might justify presumptively unconstitutional race-based districting.”

Jared Evans, an attorney with the NAACP Legal Defense Fund that represents Black Louisianians in redistricting lawsuits, said the attorneys general, several of whom are defending their own states from Voting Rights Act lawsuits, are trying to turn Louisiana’s legislative redistricting lawsuit into test case to weaken the landmark civil rights legislation.

Their case focuses on Section 2 of the act, which prohibits voting laws or procedures that purposefully discriminate on the basis of race, color or membership in a language minority group.

“They know that if Section 2 is upheld, there are a lot of states that need to have additional minority Black districts in their house maps, but also in the congressional map, in the state school board maps and all of the other political boundaries,” Evans said in an interview. “Every case that is going to get under Section 2 going forward with the Supreme Court is a test case to see if they can further poke holes in Section 2 jurisprudence.”

In February, U.S. District Judge Shelly Dick of the Middle District of Louisiana ruled in Nairne v. Ardoin that maps Louisiana lawmakers drew two years ago to update the boundaries of their own districts do not give Black voters a fair opportunity to elect their own representatives. Plaintiffs in the case are Black voters who challenged then-Secretary of State Kyle Ardoin, Louisiana’s top elections official.

In her ruling, Dick, a federal court appointee of former President Barack Obama, gave the state a “reasonable period of time” to approve new legislative districts that do not violate Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.

Dick did not specify in her ruling what a reasonable period of time is or the number of majority Black districts necessary to comply with the Voting Rights Act. Plaintiffs have said the state should add six in the Louisiana House and three in its Senate. Currently, 28 out of 105 House seats are majority Black, as are 11 of 39 Senate seats.

In the months since the ruling, Republicans have ramped up their efforts to weaken key parts of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

Building off a 2023 ruling in the U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals based in St. Louis that only the federal government can seek an enforcement ruling under the Voting Rights Act, Republican attorneys general and voting officials have sought to intervene in lawsuits brought by voters, such as Nairne v. Ardoin.

In April, Louisiana filed a brief in the case asking the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals to hear an appeal on the basis that there is no private right of action under the Voting Rights Act. That means that voters would not have the legal standing to sue over their rights being violated.

The court denied the state a hearing before the full court, but litigation is still ongoing before a three-judge panel in the 5th Circuit.

The 8th Circuit’s ruling is not legally sound, Evans argued.

“Section 2 has been upheld and private groups have been allowed to bring cases since the Voting Rights Act was reauthorized 1984, and so this is another attempt to weaken the Voting Rights Act,” Evans said .

Much of the 14 attorney general’s brief relies on a footnote in Dick’s ruling.

On the 84th page of the 91-page document, Dick writes the following in a footnote: “Dr. Washington pointed out the subliminal message of the Sheriff’s Office being housed on the same floor as her Registrar of Voter’s Office.”

The footnote references a government building in an unnamed parish where the sheriff and the registrar are headquartered on the same floor, which Alice Washington, a Black voter in Louisiana, cited as evidence of voter suppression.

The 14 attorneys general mocked this idea at several points in their brief:

“The Voting Rights Act is concerned with the right to register, vote, and participate in politics — win or lose — not on whispers from parish buildings.”

“Perhaps if those walls could literally talk, the District Court’s interpretation would not be ‘hopelessly indeterminate,’” the brief continues

“… But bad vibes cannot be the test for vote dilution,” the attorneys general also wrote.

Evans pushed back on their arguments.

“Given the history that minorities have with law enforcement and over-policing and police brutality, having to register at the same place where law enforcement is housed is a form of voter suppression and intimidation,” Evans said.

“I’m not sure what they’re trying to brag about or what they’re trying to imply,” he added.

Marshall, Alabama’s attorney general, was joined in the brief by his counterparts in Arkansas, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Carolina, Texas, Utah and West Virginia.

Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill, who is a defendant in Nairne v. Aucoin and did not join the brief, declined to provide a comment for this report.

At a status report in June, legislative leaders told Dick they did not have immediate plans to draw new state House and Senate maps.

Louisiana Illuminator is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Louisiana Illuminator maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Greg LaRose for questions: info@lailluminator.com. Follow Louisiana Illuminator on Facebook and X.

Revealed: Kristi Noem just met with Louisiana governor's cabinet

South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem, who’s in the midst of a controversy over admitting to killing her dog, was in Baton Rouge to meet with Gov. Jeff Landry’s cabinet Thursday at the Capitol, multiple attendees at the meeting confirmed to the Illuminator.

Noem is reportedly still in consideration to be former President Donald Trump’s running mate in this fall’s election despite her recent revelation that she killed her dog Cricket with a shotgun. She spoke to Landry’s cabinet about lessons she has learned during her time as governor, according to sources inside the meeting.

Cricket’s untimely end, which Noem details in her new book, did not come up in the meeting, attendees said.

Landry was not in attendance at the meeting, which was just the second cabinet meeting held this term. Kate Kelly, a spokesperson for Landry, did not respond to requests for comment for this story.

Noem is a close personal friend of Landry’s. She has been among the participants in his annual alligator hunt fundraiser, an event that has also drawn Donald Trump Jr. and other national conservative figures.

Landry and Noem share other political connections as well.

Landry spent thousands to receive political advice from Corey Lewandowski for his governor’s campaign. Lewandowski and Noem are close and reportedly had an affair, although a spokesperson for Noem has denied the allegations.

Landry’s secretary for the Department of Wildlife and Fisheries, Madison Sheahan, also worked “directly and indirectly” for Noem and was executive director of the Republican Party in South Dakota.

Noem is slated to make an appearance this week at a Palm Beach event with Trump Sr. and other potential vice presidential picks, Politico reports.

This is a developing story.

Louisiana Illuminator is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Louisiana Illuminator maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Greg LaRose for questions: info@lailluminator.com. Follow Louisiana Illuminator on Facebook and Twitter.

LA governor backs out of chicken ownership — and sends hens packing

Gov. John Bel Edwards will get to keep his beloved chickens after leaving office after all.

A source close to Edwards told the Illuminator that then Gov.-Elect Jeff Landry has changed his mind and decided not to keep the chickens, despite his initial request to keep them at the Governor’s Mansion.

A member of the Edwards family was dispatched to Baton Rouge to pick up the hens and bring them to the Edwards’ family home in Amite. The chickens are reportedly back with the outgoing governor, although sources have been unable to confirm what will happen to the coop at the Governor’s Mansion.

The chickens and their coop are relatively recent additions to the mansion grounds. Edwards added them in 2016 shortly after he took office, paying for the coop and the hens out of his own pocket, according to The Advocate. The hens provide eggs for the first family. Sources close to the governor said Edwards was known to visit and feed the chickens during particularly stressful days on the job.

A spokesperson for Landry has not yet responded to a request for comment.

The chickens, tired from their travels, were unavailable for comment. They will reunite with a growing family. Gov. Edwards and First Lady Donna Edwards welcomed their first grandchild Thursday.

Louisiana Illuminator is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Louisiana Illuminator maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Greg LaRose for questions: info@lailluminator.com. Follow Louisiana Illuminator on Facebook and Twitter.

Louisiana Republicans rally for Trump on Capitol steps amid arrest rumors

A small group of Louisiana Republicans rallied Tuesday outside the State Capitol in support of former President Donald Trump amid rumors that he will be arrested in New York City.

The rally, one of several held across the country, was spurred by a social media post in which Trump claimed that he would be indicted. Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg is investigating Trump in connection with an alleged hush-money payment made to former pornography actress Stormy Daniels.

As of the time of publication, Trump has not been arrested and there has been no indication from anybody other than Trump that an arrest is imminent.

Approximately 50 Trump supporters showed up to the demonstration, sponsored by the Republican Party of East Baton Rouge Parish, many of them toting Trump flags and wearing “Make America Great Again” ball caps.

Before the rally began, several activists waved signs bearing messages such as “Arrest Biden, not Trump.”

Supporters of former President Donald Trump pose for a photo Tuesday, March 21, 2023, on the Louisiana State Capitol steps during a rally against Trump’s arrest. (Photo by Matthew Perschall)

Several speakers decried what they view to be the politicization of the justice system.

“America is in a crisis today as we struggle with the politicalization [sic] of our legal system for partisan purposes,” former state Rep. Woody Jenkins said.

Jenkins’ remarks were followed by a string of conservative activists, including controversial Central pastor Tony Spell.

Jenkins compared Trump’s treatment at the hands of Bragg to Spell’s legal battle to keep his church open during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic. Spell was arrested in 2020 for violating a stay-at-home order Gov. John Bel Edwards issued.

“When you see that your laws do not protect you against them, but protect them against you, then you may know that your society is doomed,” Spell said.

Several speakers claimed the allegations against Trump were unfounded and that he was being persecuted for fictitious crimes.

“I forgot who it was that said, ‘You show me the man, and I’ll show you the crime,’ and we just cannot let that happen,” Rep. Valarie Hodges, R-Denham Springs, said. “This is America. This is not Nazi Germany.”

“The men that stormed the beaches of Normandy, those that died in Vietnam, Korea, in all the world wars, did not die so that our president and commander-in-chief could go behind bars for erroneous crimes, for fictitious crime,” Spell added.

Some predicted Louisiana would also face a dark future if a Republican governor and ultra conservative lawmakers are not elected. Several conservative candidates for the state legislature also appeared at the rally to appeal to voters.


Louisiana Illuminator is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Louisiana Illuminator maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Greg LaRose for questions: info@lailluminator.com. Follow Louisiana Illuminator on Facebook and Twitter.

Voters in Louisiana rerouted to new polling place after bomb threat

After bomb threat at a Jefferson Parish polling place Tuesday morning, voters are being rerouted to a new precinct, parish official say.

According to the Kenner Police Department, Kenner Discovery School, one of the area’s polling locations, received a bomb threat Tuesday morning. No children were at the school due to Election Day.

‼️ Kenner Discovery School received a bomb threat earlier this morning. Kenner Police are on scene investigating and trying to determine if this will be related to a bomb threat the school received on Thursday, November 3, 2022. ‼️ pic.twitter.com/A1q9ZxzbAS
— Kenner PD (@KennerPolice) November 8, 2022

In a statement, Secretary of State Kyle Ardoin said that after a quick investigation, Kenner Chief of Police Keith Conley and Jefferson Parish Sheriff Joe Lopinto determined that the incident was not intended to target voters or election workers.

Jefferson Parish officials said in a statement on Twitter that voters assigned to the Kenner Discovery precinct will now vote at Audubon Elementary, less than two miles away at 200 W. Loyola Drive in Kenner.

Voters with questions about their polling place are advised to contact the Secretary of State’s election hotline at 800-883-2805.

This story will be updated as more information becomes available

Want more election coverage?

Visit NewsFromTheStates.com to monitor national trends and read the latest from across the States Newsroom network.


Louisiana Illuminator is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Louisiana Illuminator maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Greg LaRose for questions: info@lailluminator.com. Follow Louisiana Illuminator on Facebook and Twitter.

'Abort Offshore' claims to have performed 242 abortions on 73-foot fishing boat in the Gulf of Mexico: report

Michael Kimbro wants his “conservative friends” to know he is white and that, while he was raised in Texas, he now lives in Manhattan with his “third, much younger, wife.” These are details Kimbro shared in a now-deleted blog post to convince others they should embrace the pro-abortion rights cause – or risk being “tricked into the lawlessness that took over New York City.”

Kimbro is president of Abort Offshore, a for-profit company that claims to offer abortions aboard a fishing boat off the Gulf Coast. Operating in federal waters, he believes the company is immune from state laws in Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama that prohibit most abortions. In an “open letter to journalists” posted on the Abort Offshore website, Kimbro claimed 242 “legal abortions” had been performed by his company as of last Sunday. An Aug. 13 tweet from Abort Offshore listed the number of abortions at 188.

Abortion rights proponents question the veracity of Kimbro’s claims and whether the purported offshore abortions are performed under widely accepted medical or safety standards.

The Louisiana Illuminator has been unable to independently verify any of Kimbro’s claims about the clinic, including whether it exists. Kimbro initially offered a tour of the boat but walked back the offer in a public blog post. He also declined to provide the names of the physicians he worked with, even on background, so their licenses could be verified.

Kimbro posted his appeal to conservative friends Aug. 17 on the Abort Offshore website then abruptly deleted it by that evening. Evidence of the post still exists in the Internet Archive.

“I am neither pro-choice nor pro-life. I am pro-referendum,” Kimbro wrote.

Kimbro argued that Republicans’ grip on Texas is nearly broken. In order to save the state from New York City’s fate – one of a city subjected to decriminalization of non-violent crime and bail reform – southern states need to hold voter referendums on abortion, much like the one Kansas held this month.

“I ask all the Texans out there reading this, do you want to end up like New York City? And to the GOP leaders down there, do you expect conservative women to give up their reproductive rights? Are you willing to risk turning the state blue?” Kimbro pleaded in the post.

Stephen Handwerk, a Louisiana-based consultant who works with the Association of Democratic Governors, questions the effectiveness of Kimbro’s strategy.

“I am not surprised to see conservatives twisting in the wind to try to pretzel logic themselves into protecting their candidates,” Handwerk said. “I don’t see it working for them.”

In an interview after the blog post was deleted, Kimbro conceded that his strategy was doomed.

“I didn’t know enough about politics or any of it going into it,” Kimbro said. “You can’t even have a referendum in Texas, I realized well after the fact, without the legislature approving it.”

Abortion, and the politics surrounding it, is new to Kimbro. Until just a few weeks ago, he said had never been involved with the abortion industry. When contacted for comment by the Illuminator, established figures in the reproductive justice movement in Louisiana had heard little to nothing about Kimbro or Abort Offshore.

Kimbro claimed Abort Offshore began offering abortions in mid-July, just weeks after he decided to start what he thought would be a profitable venture.

Here’s how Kimbro explained the operation: Patients fill out an online form and pay $1,500 before they can secure an appointment time. They stay at a hotel, the cost of which is included in the $1,500, near an embarkation point on the coast. Kimbro said Abort Offshore has left from multiple points along the coast, including Galveston, Texas, and Dog River in Alabama, outside Mobile.

At the hotel, Kimbro said the patient will see a travel nurse who provides them with a sedative before they are taken to a rented house with a private dock, where the patients board a 73-foot fishing boat.

The fishing vessel takes the patient out to federal waters, where it is met by a smaller boat. Two abortion doctors and two physician assistants, who Kimbro said are licensed in Texas, board the fishing vessel to perform the abortion, which happens in a stateroom below deck on portable gynecological tables.

There are no regulations to follow for a clinic operating in federal waters, according to Martin Davies, a maritime law professor at Tulane University. While there are still medical negligence laws that apply, there is no oversight to ensure standards of cleanliness or care, he said.

According to a report Jezebel published Aug.15, Abort Offshore doesn’t use preventive antibiotics, doesn’t have access to emergency medications and its plan for emergency complications is to contact the Coast Guard.

In a follow-up interview with the Illuminator following the release of Jezebel’s story, Kimbro said patients take antibiotics provided by their own physicians. He added that he had to be careful what he said about the drugs provided on the vessel or else risk running afoul of the Drug Enforcement Administration.

The online form Abort Offshore patients have to complete does not comply with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, a 1995 federal law intended to protect patients’ sensitive medical information. Generic web forms, like the one Abort Offshore utilizes, are not HIPAA compliant, as they do not provide the level of encryption and security that the law requires.

Information from the Abort Online website for its patient registration form.

Unprompted, Kimbro offered contact information for four women he claimed were patients of Abort Offshore. The Illuminator was able to get in contact with two of them but could not verify their identities or whether they had been patients.

The timeline Kimbro detailed to explain how he started his service differs from a comparable publicized endeavor. Dr. Meg Autry, a San Francisco OB-GYN, said it will take over a year and $20 million for her group, Prrowess, outfit an approximately 150 feet long vessel to perform abortions in federal waters.

Kimbro said he was able to start so quickly because he uses a smaller boat and hired doctors who provided their own equipment.

Following the release of Jezebel’s story, Kimbro went on the offensive, attacking Autry’s operation in a blog post and a series of tweets, claiming that Prrowess’ tax-exempt status has been revoked. In a series of screenshots posted to the Abort Offshore blog, a representative with Prrowess told Kimbro that it was a filing error that has since been corrected.

Then there’s the matter of Kimbro’s professional background. While he has never been involved with the abortion industry, Kimbro is linked to a string of businesses that have faced a litany of complaints.

Kimbro admitted to Jezebel that he had been arrested and sued for fraud “many, many times.” In an interview with the Illuminator, Kimbro defended himself, arguing that being sued is a normal part of doing business. He later wrote in a blog post that he has never been convicted of anything.

Abort Offshore’s social media presence also makes it an outlier among providers. Very few abortion clinics use social media, prefering to keep a low profile to avoid the ire of anti-abortion protestors.

Abort Offshore’s Twitter page has accrued more than 1,400 followers in the month since it was created, but the vast majority of which are likely bots according to an analysis of the company’s followers. The analysis shows that most of the account’s followers have never tweeted, have no stated gender or preferred language and are located in Thailand.

Abort Offshore also sent a series of tweets calling out Jezebel’s reporting, all of which say the same thing: “I wonder if you genuinely can’t stand me or if we’re becoming frenemies. Are you upset that my pre-prepared ‘spin’ to your story was that abortion rights deserve a referendum? Do you even care that abortion is illegal? I do – that’s why AbortOffshore provides them.”

The legitimacy of the abortion pill, a commonly used form of abortion and that is considered safe, was also called into question on the Abort Offshore Twitter feed.

“How dumb are you? Legitimizing overseas abortion pills? Just to show you how easy it is to invite fraud, I’m going to create a site, have the pills made at the compound pharmacy on 2nd Ave., say I’m a woman, and act like I’m overseas, You”ll promote it,” Abort Offshore tweeted in response to a Jezebel article about the abortion pill. The tweet was deleted within a few hours.

One tweet attacking the author of the Jezebel report accused the reporter of throwing a “tantrum,” including a photo of a screaming toddler. “Is it because the Abortion Boat is run by a cis man?” the post said.

Rep. Mandie Landry, D-New Orleans. (Greg LaRose/Louisiana Illuminator)

Kimbro told the Illuminator when he realized the offshore abortion operation wasn’t going to be profitable, he decided he wouldn’t run it forever but just until he gets sued. In the resulting court battle, he would seek to have abortion bans in Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama struck down.

State Rep. Mandie Landry, D-New Orleans, is an outspoken abortion rights proponent and was previously an attorney who represented abortion clinics in Louisiana. While she declined to comment on Kimbro’s strategy, she said multiple lawsuits have been filed challenging abortion laws in the South. So far, none have been successful.

Kimbro has since backed down from this strategy, saying that he instead is trying to figure out a way to offer more abortions.

Landry encouraged anyone seeking an abortion to steer clear of Abort Offshore.

“To my knowledge, this brand new entity has not been confirmed as reliable, or to even exist by any known individual or organization,” Landry said. “Please always be cautious when contacting unknown people online and in particular when it comes to health care.”

Louisiana’s ‘trigger law’ to restrict abortion goes into effect with Supreme Court ruling

After almost 50 years of Americans having a constitutional right to an abortion, the U.S. Supreme Court on Friday overruled the landmark Roe v. Wade decision Friday, allowing states to craft their own abortion laws.

Louisiana is one of 13 states with so-called trigger laws that go into effect now that the 1973 ruling has been tossed aside. Justices ruled 5-4 to overturn Roe and 6-3 to uphold Mississippi’s abortion law, which was being challenged in Dobbs v. Jackson’s Women Health Organization, the case decided Friday.

In Louisiana, abortion is now illegal in almost in all cases. Pregnant people in Louisiana will now only be able to get an abortion if the life of the mother is at risk or if two physicians certify that life outside the womb is futile.

Those who provide illegal abortions – including medication that induces abortion – could face up to 10 years in prison and a $100,000 fine.

Louisiana residents seeking an abortion will now likely have to travel as far as Illinois or New Mexico to seek an abortion, as many surrounding states also have abortion bans and restrictions. That travel distance will have the largest effect on poor pregnant people, who according to health statistics are more likely to seek an abortion.

The state’s three abortion clinics are expected to “pause” operations and consider their next move.

“When the Supreme Court rules, we will look at our options then,” Kathaleen Pittman, who manages the Hope Medical Group in Shreveport said last week. “We are certainly not going to violate the law. I mean we are not going to do that, but if there is redress, we are going to look at our options.”

The Louisiana Department of Health is tasked with enforcing the closure of the abortion clinics if a ban goes into effect.

The Dobbs decision comes after over a month of increased tension following a leaked draft of the opinion, which indicated that the court was likely to overrule abortion rights. In the weeks since the leak, Louisiana’s abortion clinics have continued to see as many patients as they can.

While pro-abortion advocates dreaded this day, the anti-abortion movement is celebrating. Today’s Supreme Court decision marks the culmination of nearly 50 years of organizing to achieve this exact goal.

“This is the beginning of a post-Roe era and post-Roe Louisiana. I’ve been waiting for this moment my entire adult life,” said Gene Mills, president of Louisiana Family Forum.

Attorney General Jeff Landry, also issued a statement celebrating the decision.

“This is the day the Lord has made; let us rejoice in it and be glad. Today, along with millions across Louisiana and America, I rejoice with my departed Mom and the unborn children with her in Heaven!” Landry said.


Louisiana Illuminator is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Louisiana Illuminator maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Jarvis DeBerry for questions: info@lailluminator.com. Follow Louisiana Illuminator on Facebook and Twitter.