Roe vs. Wade overturned

Make no mistake; this is about "state's rights" for about five minutes:

www.politico.com

Pence: 'We must not rest' until abortion is outlawed in every state

The court’s 5-4 decision overturned abortion protections that have been in place for nearly half a century, allowing states to decide if they will allow the medical procedure.
www.politico.com www.politico.com

It's almost like "state's rights" is not an actual political position. Who would've thought?
 
Here’s how extreme this ruling is. According to the majority opinion (Alito), here are “legitimate interests”of the state when it comes to regulating abortion:

Respect for and preservation of prenatal life at all stages of development … the protection of maternal health and safety; the elimination of particularly gruesome or barbaric medical procedures; the preservation of the integrity of the medical profession; the mitigation of fetal pain; and the prevention of discrimination on the basis of race, sex or disability.
Click to expand...

Some of these phrases are directly from the most extreme pro-life advocacy groups. They label abortion as a gruesome and barbaric procedure, period. And a fetus cannot feel pain until very late in pregnancy.

These aren’t legitimate at all. Putting them in this opinion decreases the legitimacy of the court. The constitution and rule of law are dead. They have appointed themselves as an unelected super-legislature.
 
TBL said:
Make no mistake; this is about "state's rights" for about five minutes:

www.politico.com

Pence: 'We must not rest' until abortion is outlawed in every state

The court’s 5-4 decision overturned abortion protections that have been in place for nearly half a century, allowing states to decide if they will allow the medical procedure.
www.politico.com www.politico.com

It's almost like "state's rights" is not an actual political position. Who would've thought?
Click to expand...
Exactly. They crapped all over states’ rights in the Maine religious school case and the NY gun rights case... but then suddenly cared about States’ rights in the abortion case. A week of whiplash…
 
In summary today’s suedo-conservatism:
States Rights when it serves my position, Federal law when it serves my position, don’t ask for a consistent logic train other than what suits and benefits me, and… btw screw you!
 
Rumor is that WV is going to call a Special Session to legalize abortions based on Rape, Incest (although technically isn't this sort of the same thing as Rape) and Life of the Mother.

I hope it passes.
 
This is one hell of a graphic.

FWHNiioXgAAOAev.jpeg
 
Herdfan said:
Rumor is that WV is going to call a Special Session to legalize abortions based on Rape, Incest (although technically isn't this sort of the same thing as Rape) and Life of the Mother.

I hope it passes.
Click to expand...

Even if it passes it won’t change the fact that freedom and rights in the USA are being eroded. One can’t just take away a fundamental right, then do half a step back to implement a bare minimum (it’s about patients lives!) and then go “oh those liberals are so unreasonable, why can’t they be mature about this”.
 
So the mayor of NYC just announced that everyone out of state is welcome to abortion clinics here. I highly doubt this city will turn down anyone.

And I don't think the ban states can do anything about it, cause that falls under constitutional privacy.

So what was accomplished here, besides making life harder for women who make a choice?
 
LIVEFRMNYC said:
So the mayor of NYC just announced that everyone out of state is welcome to abortion clinics here. I highly doubt this city will turn down anyone.

And I don't think the ban states can do anything about it, cause that falls under constitutional privacy.

So what was accomplished here, besides making life harder for women who make a choice?
Click to expand...
States would disagree with you on what they maybe able to do to those who seek out of state abortions.

www.king5.com

Will lawmakers try to ban out-of-state abortions?

Dobbs sets the stage for states to define what life is, possibly opening the door for legislators to restrict abortion even further.
www.king5.com www.king5.com
Click to expand...

Have states tried prohibiting out-of-state abortions?​

Yes. GOP legislators in Missouri have tried multiple times to attach amendments to bills that would allow for any party to sue those that either received an abortion or assisted in providing an abortion, including healthcare providers from out-of-state.

Anti-abortion activists in states like Texas have also been working with state lawmakers to enact Missouri-style proposals, according to Politico.

So far, the efforts have failed, but Rachel Rebouche, interim dean at Temple University’s Law School, said that Dobbs now clears the way for states to restrict out-of-state abortion because “any travel ban would be premised on the idea that a state can ban abortion."

However, Rebouche added that the path to pass a law that outright criminalizes out-of-state abortions is an uphill battle because such a law would likely face several legal hurdles.

“It may be currently a little premature to enact straight-out bans right away,” she said.

Any state that tries to do so would almost certainly run into federal opposition.

During remarks Friday at the White House, President Joe Biden warned states to not pass laws or restrictions that would limit a woman's access to reproductive healthcare services in other states.

Biden said his administration was prepared to help women travel out-of-state to receive such treatment, but he did not elaborate on how exactly he planned to do so.

A number of major corporations have also told employees they will cover travel costs for individuals seeking abortions. The Walt Disney Co., Netflix, Paramount, Comcast, Sony, Warner Bros and Meta are among the media companies that confirmed they will cover travel costs for abortion-seeking employees.
Click to expand...
 
JayMysteri0 said:
States would disagree with you on what they maybe able to do to those who seek out of state abortions.
Click to expand...

And let's say they succeed. What's to stop a women from saying she had a miscarriage? It's not like they can subpoena medical records without the women's permission.
 
Man, I can’t believe we’re talking about this. I was born in 1970 and the 70s feel so sane right now.
 
LIVEFRMNYC said:
And let's say they succeed. What's to stop a women from saying she had a miscarriage? It's not like they can subpoena medical records without the women's permission.
Click to expand...
How would they know she was pregnant at all? Are they going to start having a pregnancy registry? Will women be forced to take monthly pregnancy tests? Think about how far this would have to go.
 
Yoused said:
seems irrelevant, though,

www.bbc.com

US women are being jailed for having miscarriages

More and more American women are facing prison for allegedly harming their unborn baby by using drugs.
www.bbc.com
Click to expand...

That was an actual miscarriage though and she basically told police about her drug use and she didn't know if she wanted the child or not.

Although the charges and judgement in that case is pure lunacy. My argument is based on privacy protected by the constitution and hipaa laws. Women simply don't have to answer personal medical questions.
 
Back
Top