Arguing over a pregnant woman in a Texas HOV lane isn’t constructive; it’s petty politics

As the Supreme Court has turned Roe back over to the states, a fallout has ensued: Some states have banned abortion; others have said they’ll welcome pregnant women who want abortions. The debate over when life begins and how best to help women with unplanned pregnancies has continued, as well it should. These are important issues with which to grapple and worthy of our attention, energy, and laws.

Only in Texas, then, would we find ourselves entertaining a news story about a pregnant woman from Plano who was given a citation for driving in the HOV lane. She argued with the officer that her unborn child should count as a passenger. The story has gone viral.

“I kind of was in shock,” Brandy Bottone said in a television interview, “and I was like, ‘Well, in light of everything that’s happened, and I’m not trying to make a huge political stance here, but do you understand that this is a baby?’ And he kind of just brushed me off.”

You don’t have to be a biologist or a policy guru to understand the subtle debate at issue here: Is the unborn baby its own separate person? If so, can a pregnant mother technically drive in the HOV lane — which requires more than one passenger — without penalty? The Supreme Court never weighed in on personhood, only viability, but this issue is one of the core issues over abortion restrictions.

The Texas Transportation code describes High Occupancy Vehicle lane usage as for “a bus or other motorized passenger vehicle occupied by a specified minimum number of passengers.” One could argue over the definition of “passenger” which is, de facto, a person occupying a separate, physical seat. Bottone seems to be suggesting that she’s carrying a separate passenger in her belly and thus, she’s abiding by the law de jure.

Texas state Rep. Brian Harrison, a Republican, vowed to introduce legislation that would specifically recognize fetuses as people.

It’s intellectually consistent for pro-lifers to support Bottone’s claim: To them, an unborn baby is a person without a shadow of a doubt. In fact, legally, much of the United States recognizes this. Murdering a pregnant woman is considered double homicide in Texas, and in many other states. In fact, 38 states have fetal homicide laws, including more liberal states like California and Minnesota.

But while traveling in the HOV lane could be perceived as a perk for a pregnant woman, it should be the least of the state’s concerns. There are far more important issues law enforcement could be handling.

If the transportation code is clear that occupancy means taking up a seat, then Bottone’s argument is just for show and is in no way valid.

The real issue here is that Bottone seems to be trolling via unborn baby. It’s probably infuriating to abortion rights advocates and it doesn’t land much better with the pro-life sect either. It’s neither cute, nor effective — it’s a red herring.

If the United States is to survive and thrive in the aftermath of Roe, each state must focus on what it values, how it can help women and babies, and in what ways both will come to fruition in terms of policy and practical means. Politics by trolling, especially in the abortion debate and particularly in this moment in time, is unwelcome and unnecessary. If a consensus is the goal, provided it’s even possible, these aren’t the conversations that will move us any closer toward that.

This story was originally published July 11, 2022 at 4:32 PM.