After going viral, one NC Republican backtracks on ‘deadly force’ abortion bill | Opinion
After a bill sponsored by two North Carolina Republican lawmakers went viral on social media for its extreme stance on abortion, one lawmaker has opted to remove his name from the bill altogether.
The bill proposes a constitutional amendment that would establish a fetus as “an individual person … from the moment of fertilization until the moment of natural death,” thus classifying abortion as first-degree murder. Some fear it could also jeopardize in vitro fertilization and even birth control methods like intrauterine devices (IUDs) and emergency contraception.
But there’s one line that has been getting the bulk of the attention: “Any person has the right to defend his or her own life or the life of another person, even by the use of deadly force if necessary, from willful destruction by another person.”
One of the bill’s original sponsors, Rep. Ben Moss, announced on social media Tuesday that he had removed himself as a sponsor of the bill “in its current form.”
“I remain firmly pro-life and strongly believe in protecting innocent human life. That conviction has not changed,” Moss wrote in a statement posted to his X account. “However, I also believe legislation must be written with absolute clarity so that its intent cannot be misunderstood or broadly misinterpreted in ways that create fear and confusion.”
“The purpose behind this legislation was to affirm the value and dignity of human life — not to suggest that women should face capital punishment or to create uncertainty surrounding difficult medical situations,” the statement continued. “Unfortunately, portions of the bill’s current language have led to significant misunderstandings that distract from the core pro-life message and intent.”
Of course, it’s difficult to see how anyone “misunderstood” or “misinterpreted” a bill that was pretty straightforward. Mentioning “deadly force” in the context of someone seeking an abortion? How else was that meant to be interpreted? The public reaction was completely expected, even if the bill never had a chance of progressing through the legislature in the first place.
Republican leaders have said previously that they have no plans of revisiting the state’s abortion laws after passing a 12-week abortion ban in 2023. Past proposals to completely ban abortion in the state have not gotten any traction, and this bill is no different. It now has only one sponsor, Rep. Keith Kidwell, who introduces strict anti-abortion legislation every year like clockwork. Last year, Kidwell proposed a near-complete ban on abortion after conception, with harsh penalties for patients and doctors. Moss was also a sponsor of that bill.
Plus, the latest bill is a constitutional amendment, which would require more than just a simple majority to pass. It would require three-fifths support in the legislature to even make it on the ballot, and would only become official if voters approve it. That won’t happen any time in the foreseeable future.
Still, it’s understandable why people would be alarmed. There’s an inherent level of concern — and danger — that comes from any elected official proposing such a thing in the first place. As much as a relief it is to know it won’t progress, it’s also disturbing to know that someone in a position of power would want it to.
It’s also disturbing that legislation introduced by the staunchest abortion opponents grows more extreme every year. In Kidwell’s first term, he filed a 13-week abortion ban. In his second term, it was a so-called heartbeat bill. Last year’s proposal would have classified abortion as a Class B1 felony, on the same level as rape and kidnapping, with a maximum punishment of life in prison. This year’s proposal classifies abortion as first-degree murder, which is punishable by either the death penalty or mandatory life imprisonment without the possibility of parole.
GOP leaders may say they don’t have the appetite to pass new abortion legislation right now, and they don’t have the votes, either. But not everyone is willing to take their word for it, especially since they’ve never ruled it out completely. We know that anti-abortion advocates, and even some lawmakers, want to see the state go further. Bills like these are a startling reminder of that.
On the bright side, though, it is reassuring to see that public pressure can still have an impact. It made at least one lawmaker rethink his support for a particularly draconian bill, and so far, no other lawmakers have been willing to sign on to it. That kind of responsiveness feels like a novelty these days, so let’s consider it a positive sign for democracy.
Deputy Opinion Editor Paige Masten is covering politics and the 2026 elections for The Charlotte Observer and The News & Observer.
