Abortion or the day Roe died

[omaniphil]

I don’t see why Texas could not pass laws making it illegal for residents to get abortions. Which would neatly bypass the territorial jurisdiction as it would not matter where the abortion occurred. Yes, enforcement can only happen in the State of Texas but the implication would have a chilling effect for traveling out of State for abortion.

Texas could pass that law, but there is 0% chance of it not being struck down by every court that it is adjudicated in.

I think (or, at least I hope) you are correct but only in the narrow sense that the courts will not let Texas prosecute a person who has an abortion in NM, *for the act of the abortion.*

But even if the abortion happens in NM, it's conceivable that TX could try to criminalize the prerequisite steps that happen *in Texas*. For example, to get from TX to NM you have to travel through at least some part of TX, and cross its border twice. It is conceivable that TX could pass a law restricting travelling within and across its borders for the purposes of abortions, even when the underlying abortion is done out of state. Or you criminalize operating a vehicle on a Texas highway with intent to secure an abortion, or to transport a person within the state for the purposes of getting them an abortion. Also they could ban financial institutions which do business in the state from facilitating payments for abortions. And they could make it a crime to withdraw cash from said institutions for the purposes of evading that regulation. Lots of ways to skin that cat, at least some of which are not obviously doomed to fail in the courts.

Yeah, this is where I would focus concern on, as the constitutional case against these types of laws is not as much of a slam dunk.

[cgeorg]

When Nevada was the only state with legal gambling and is still (I think) the only state with legal prostitution (in some areas), did any other state (even the most religiously inclined states) ever try to pass a law prohibiting gambling or procuring the services of a prostitute in Nevada?

https://missouriindependent.com/2022/03 ... abortions/

An attempt to criminalize travel out of state for abortion blocked by a procedural maneuver.

[Hardartery]

@dw residency does not work the way you describe. It is a permanent status. When you move to another State, you have to meet certain requirements (like having an address for an extended period of time) and then apply for residency. Visiting a State does not change one’s residency status.

I don’t see why Texas could not pass laws making it illegal for residents to get abortions. Which would neatly bypass the territorial jurisdiction as it would not matter where the abortion occurred. Yes, enforcement can only happen in the State of Texas but the implication would have a chilling effect for traveling out of State for abortion.

We will know a lot based on how SCOTUS rules on the Texas Bounty law. Essentially SCOTUS has thrown out thre rule of law. Things that were obvious a week ago are anyone’s guess moving forward. At least 2 SCOTUS justices buy into the independent state legislature theory which essentially states a State legislature can override the State’s election and vote how eager they want. We are in now in the worst timeline.

I’ve lived in multiple states and have never heard of applying for residency. As I understand it, residency generally is a facts and circumstances determination.

That said, +1 on everything else in your post.

I am going to avoid the rest of this discussion, but can say that residency is very theoretical in the US. I have been a "resident" of a State without physically seetting foot in it, it has nothing to do with where I actually live. I am current;y a resident of SC. I go there as infrequently as possible and have no bills or obligations there, I don't even have a SC driver's license and will not until my current one expires next year. If then. I might establish my residency in NC just to avoid the shame of being identifiable as a SC resident when I need to produce my license for something.

[aurelius]

I think criminalizing state border crossings violates federal jurisdiction under the commerce clause.

As @mikeylikey describes, a State can criminalize intrastate travel for the purposes of abortion.

Also consider at least 2 if not 3 jurists have openly discussed limiting the reach of the commerce clause. Thomas hates it. Essentially every conservative jurist is a States’ rights proponent.

I think analyzing any of this based on previous precedent and judicial restraint is simply wrong (also known as rule of law). The far-right majority has already proven they care little for the rule of law. That is what is so shocking about the decisions coming from this court. Not the decisions but the lack of legal basis of the decisions. The Dobbs decision ignores the 9th amendment and cherry picks historical data while throwing out Stare decisis with “egregiously wrong”. “Egregiously wrong” is an assertion that Alito failed to provide a legal basis for. Roberts points that out in his concurrence with the judgement. The Kennedy decision Gorsuch lies about the basic facts of the case to reach his preferred solution!

This is a radical Court with an agenda to remake America into a far-right, religious minority rule republic. We already have States that elect democrats to statewide and national offices but whose legislatures are controlled by Republicans. This is what the Republican Party is after. To blunt democracy. And they have 5 justices that share the same vision. Watch as the court further strips voting rights and allows state legislatures to decide election outcomes.

[JonA]

The sky is already falling people.

You know that phrase is about people panicking into hysteria over a non event, right? And they all get eaten because of it?

It's not really a phrase to rally people to your cause.

[aurelius]

You know that phrase is about people panicking into hysteria over a non event, right? And they all get eaten because of it?

It's not really a phrase to rally people to your cause.

I would not describe the decisions by this radical court in support of its agenda, the far-rights continued push to force their worldview on everyone else, and the Republican conspiracy to systemically blunt Democratic rule and replace it with minority rule a non-event.

I can only imagine the resulting violence in 2024 when Republican counties refuse to validate results they don’t like and Republican State legislatures overturn the popular vote. And this court will open the door to this with the “independent state legislature doctrine” next term.

I’m not trying to rally people to a cause. Only voice my concern that a very real threat to our way of life is materializing before us.

[Hardartery]

You know that phrase is about people panicking into hysteria over a non event, right? And they all get eaten because of it?

It's not really a phrase to rally people to your cause.

I would not describe the decisions by this radical court in support of its agenda, the far-rights continued push to force their worldview on everyone else, and the Republican conspiracy to systemically blunt Democratic rule and replace it with minority rule a non-event.

I can only imagine the resulting violence in 2024 when Republican counties refuse to validate results they don’t like and Republican State legislatures overturn the popular vote. And this court will open the door to this with the “independent state legislature doctrine” next term.

I’m not trying to rally people to a cause. Only voice my concern that a very real threat to our way of life is materializing before us.

The general public reaction is indicative of a backlash. I have a feeling that the reaction is going to bring a hard swing the other way and achieve exactly the opposite of the far-right goals here. It's one thing to declare something to not be a constitutional right, it's another thing to them try and enforce your personal beliefs on everyone else.

[JonA]

You know that phrase is about people panicking into hysteria over a non event, right? And they all get eaten because of it?

It's not really a phrase to rally people to your cause.

I would not describe the decisions by this radical court in support of its agenda, the far-rights continued push to force their worldview on everyone else, and the Republican conspiracy to systemically blunt Democratic rule and replace it with minority rule a non-event.

But that's exactly what that phrase means. If you wouldn't describe the those things as a non-event (Eg, the acorn falling from the tree), then you shouldn't say "the sky is falling".

Just like you wouldn't say "I'm crying wolf here!" when you want people to believe you.

https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/the+sky+is+falling

sky is falling, the
An absurd belief that disaster is imminent. The term comes from a fable about a chicken who believes the sky is falling when an acorn falls on its head. In various versions, the chicken is called “chicken little” or “henny penny.” Many novels, films, and songs with the title “The Sky Is Falling” have been issued, as well as versions of the story. Among them is a 1943 Walt Disney film, Chicken Little, and a book, The Remarkable Story of Chicken Little, published in 1865. The phrase, now a cliché, remains current.
See also: sky

[aurelius]

But that's exactly what that phrase means. If you wouldn't describe the those things as a non-event (Eg, the acorn falling from the tree), then you shouldn't say "the sky is falling".

Just like you wouldn't say "I'm crying wolf here!" when you want people to believe you.

https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/the+sky+is+falling

sky is falling, the
An absurd belief that disaster is imminent. The term comes from a fable about a chicken who believes the sky is falling when an acorn falls on its head. In various versions, the chicken is called “chicken little” or “henny penny.” Many novels, films, and songs with the title “The Sky Is Falling” have been issued, as well as versions of the story. Among them is a 1943 Walt Disney film, Chicken Little, and a book, The Remarkable Story of Chicken Little, published in 1865. The phrase, now a cliché, remains current.
See also: sky

the plain meaning of “the sky is already falling” plays on the false alarm cliche “the sky is falling”. Plain meaning: this is not a false alarm.

Certain that percent of the people that read my phrase understood that. You are attempting to distract/discredit with this inane attempt at pedantry.

[mikeylikey]

But that's exactly what that phrase means. If you wouldn't describe the those things as a non-event (Eg, the acorn falling from the tree), then you shouldn't say "the sky is falling".

Just like you wouldn't say "I'm crying wolf here!" when you want people to believe you.

https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/the+sky+is+falling

sky is falling, the
An absurd belief that disaster is imminent. The term comes from a fable about a chicken who believes the sky is falling when an acorn falls on its head. In various versions, the chicken is called “chicken little” or “henny penny.” Many novels, films, and songs with the title “The Sky Is Falling” have been issued, as well as versions of the story. Among them is a 1943 Walt Disney film, Chicken Little, and a book, The Remarkable Story of Chicken Little, published in 1865. The phrase, now a cliché, remains current.
See also: sky

the plain meaning of “the sky is already falling” plays on the false alarm cliche “the sky is falling”. Plain meaning: this is not a false alarm.

Certain that percent of the people that read my phrase understood that. You are attempting to distract/discredit with this inane attempt at pedantry.

I think we're all familiar with the 1943 Walt Disney film, "Chicken Little" but only slightly less well known is the 1958 Hannah Barbara classic, "This Is Not a False Alarm" about a false alarm which was mistaken for a real alarm.

[GlasgowJock]

Kansas, a traditionally conservative state, (Republican in every presidential election since Nixon) has very recently had a referendum on abortion. Voters overwhelmingly said they did not wish to amend the state constitution to assert there is no right to abortion - present numbers suggest 62% v 38% although final counting will take a few more days.

[mikeylikey]

Kansas, a traditionally conservative state, (Republican in every presidential election since Nixon) has very recently had a referendum on abortion. Voters overwhelmingly said they did not wish to amend the state constitution to assert there is no right to abortion - present numbers suggest 62% v 38% although final counting will take a few more days.

Until last month being pro-life was a purely academic, theoretical exercise. As long as abortion enjoyed SCOTUS protection, arguing about it had as much real world import as whether Han shot first.

Post-Dobbs, abortion bans are reality or potential reality, but so are the consequences. I predict that generally The Right is not going to go as far as their rhetoric from past decades would suggest. Kansas is a good example. There will be counterexamples I am sure.

[omaniphil]

Post-Dobbs, abortion bans are reality or potential reality, but so are the consequences. I predict that generally The Right is not going to go as far as their rhetoric from past decades would suggest. Kansas is a good example. There will be counterexamples I am sure.

I agree with you in spirit, but just a minor clarification - I think the Right will try to go as far as they can, but the great mushy middle of the electorate who would be ok with making abortion illegal after 14-15 weeks, but legal before that, will probably hamper the Right's efforts.

[aurelius]

Until last month being pro-life was a purely academic, theoretical exercise. As long as abortion enjoyed SCOTUS protection, arguing about it had as much real world import as whether Han shot first.

Post-Dobbs, abortion bans are reality or potential reality, but so are the consequences. I predict that generally The Right is not going to go as far as their rhetoric from past decades would suggest. Kansas is a good example. There will be counterexamples I am sure.

We are already seeing the Right push for more extreme laws. Like ending no fault divorce, fetal personhood, same sex marriage, and so on. It varies State to State of course but several national level Republican politicians have already stated they want to push for national laws.

If Republicans managed to pass a nationwide abortion ban, I predict many States would simply ignore it like they do marijuana laws. Rule of law? We will lose one of the principals and institutions that made the US unique. This ends badly.

I think what is interesting is historically Republicans should take back the House and have a shot at the Senate. Does the combination of the end of Roe and the Right showing its CRAZY rally the moderates to vote Democrat like it did in Kansas?