Right. We are very close to the point where anyone with a uterus, or anyone suspected of having one, could be stripped of their right to cross American borders. Unless you’re an absolute bloody fascist who buys into these scenarios, it’s a hell of a mind, and one can imagine that it will take everyone else a while to even grapple with the idea that this might actually be in our future.
The problem with the largest part of the coating and the reason Post and other outlets have to write their stories in such a twisted way that until recently both options were completely foreign from a legal perspective. It would have been absolutely farcical to suggest from a legal point of view, that the new dystopian governments are going to imprison pregnant Americans in their states to comply with childbirth. The courts would never tolerate such a thing! That would be such a wildly anti-American notion to scoff at as fantasy, and it still is, even as Republican anti-abortion zealots and lawmakers craft the newly proposed laws.
The Post could have saved many paragraphs with a simpler admission: There’s no telling what the laws will be a year from now, because there’s no framework of “law” that the current Supreme Court won’t just saw off. to get the sectarian judgments they want to see. It really doesn’t matter what current precedents might exist.
What outcome does the conservative wing of the Supreme Court want? Abortion ban. What civil rights are hindered by this ban? Does not matter. They are gone now.
The Biden administration, which has tried to sell itself as being caught flat-footed in the Alito ruling that was infamously leaked long ago, because “caught flat-footed” is still a better story than “moving without much meaning.” urgently,” promises to protect the right of residents of Republican states to receive abortion drugs by federal mail, because federal mail is federal mail under federal jurisdiction. There is much debate over whether this is viable legislation, but it is hard to see this Supreme Court does anything but laugh at such theories of federal power.
The Supreme Court has said that medical care can be denied because of the personal religious beliefs of Sam Alito et al. Republican states criminalize medical malpractice under a simple legal theory because we can. The state-sponsored restrictions on abortion that got us to this point, the rule after law that restricted medical providers of abortion procedures, that abortion was de facto banned in most states long before the current Supreme Court allowed states to formalize those bans, were all based on the state’s ability to for medical service providers, rules designed to ensure the medical “safety” of patients.
The Supreme Court is likely to uphold state criminal liability this one form of interstate commerce without a written decision. A shadow dock will suffice. Simply how to whether such bans will be enforced given that the actual search of federal post offices is unlikely to be successful remains an open question, but anyone who receives such drugs can expect to be prosecuted, and it is likely that orders for these drugs a digital record is all it takes for these prosecutions to happen, and it’s likely that the companies supplying these drugs will be targeted by state attorneys general. lot of.
Medication-based abortions will not be available in any state that prohibits abortion. You can kiss this method of resistance goodbye right now, unless you have an out-of-state friend or relative willing to smuggle it across the country’s borders at your own risk.
The right to travel internationally seems more important, emphasizing it seemsand the vision of law enforcement checkpoints at state lines is still laughed at by those who don’t understand that republicanism is, say that again, real a fascist on the move. The notion of women, children or anyone else being forcibly imprisoned in their own country on suspicion of pregnancy is absurd; for sure, for sure even a very anti-federal, pro-theocracy Supreme Court would never allow it.
Then let me ask you this. Did women have unlimited travel rights in the 17th century? They didn’t. You can expect Samuel Alito to ignore entire parts of the Constitution and all other laws derived from it in favor of a short passage explaining the circumstances under which English women could legally be imprisoned in church bell towers in the 1600s, based on the personal writings of a particularly brilliant witch hunter who For 20 years, he held a grudge against a certain woman who once responded too briefly to his advances.
The Post again mentions the unanimous VsRoe Justice Beer Kavanaugh’s opinion suggests that the right to interstate travel is likely better protected than the right to abortion, but Kavanaugh was forced to place this note in a separate concurrence because he could not get his colleagues on the court to include it in the actual decision.. Kavanaugh expresses an an exception to accept, suggesting that perhaps the Court would not indeed would imprison pregnant women in their home states until they either gave birth or died. He, of course, did not get Alito’s approval of this particular theory.
Republican states may be unlikely to force residents to take pregnancy tests at newly created border checkpoints if they want to leave the state, but that’s only because there are more effective forms of citizen policing that will make it better for connected Republicans to continue doing so many “entertainment abortions.” , as much as they want, while criminalizing taking care of everyone else. Missouri has already attempted a bill modeled after Texas’ “bail hunter” abortion law. It would not close the borders to possible pregnant women. That would be impose “civil liability” on anyone who helped a pregnant Missouri woman moves out of state to have an abortion.
That’s the most likely scenario we’ll see. No border checkpoints, but vigilant enforcement regimes in which anti-abortion zealots and for-profit allies sift through purchased smartphone tracking data sets to determine who in the state has recently traveled to another state and who was at some point. in the immediate vicinity of the abortion clinic. From there, it only takes a little effort to file a claim demanding money from anyone involved; for laws truly modeled on the Texas bounty hunter version, you don’t even necessary do a lot of leg work. There is no penalty for falsely accusing someone you want to accuse. Do you want to claim that your Republican governor has been driving buses to out-of-state abortion clinics over the holidays? Do it like that. The worst that can happen is nothing.
All this talk of legal uncertainty is mostly wheel-spinning. We can argue all we want about what the legal outcomes would have been in the days when the Supreme Court wrote precedents and the lower courts interpreted those precedents so that the body of US law remained consistent and common knowledge, but they are not. days. The Supreme Court easily overrules even its most recent precedents to reach a result that the conservative majority prefers; lower courts that try to use new or old Supreme Court precedents in their decisions are told by meaningless shadow docket orders that Actually, for unspecified reasons, apply in reverse if their results did not favor the conservative position. We live in a time of pseudo-legal drivel written by Fox News junkies who make little effort to even get the basic facts straight before Sam Alito whips out yet another church-serving set of civil rights.
It doesn’t matter what rights citizens had six months ago. That was then, this is now, and the Supreme Court justice who wrote the odious opinion declaring that the beliefs of one religious sect will now lead to the criminalization of all opposing religious beliefs is mocking his detractors to an international audience. You can be absolutely certain that the current Supreme Court will rule that states can restrict travel rights for potential pregnancies or can imprison them if they are found to have had an abortion. elsewhere. The whole premise of Dobbs was that the state had an interest in prioritizing the “life” of the fetuses over their citizens, which would override any civil rights that would normally apply.
It will happen. All the arguments are just over when.
Abortion rights, climate change, and gun safety are on the ballot this fall, and there are literally thousands of ways to get involved in engaging our voters. Join a federal, state or local campaign from our GOTV feed on Mobilize and help Democrats and progressives win in November.
Doctor who performed viral abortion on 10-year-old victim sues Indiana AG for defamation
Appeals court rules district attorneys can prosecute under Michigan’s 1931 abortion ban
Alito’s first public speech since Roe v. Wade’s cancellations make it clear that he is just getting started
If you feel like you have “fertility potential,” some prescriptions have become more difficult to fill
This is a wake-up call for the country: 195 House Republicans want to end birth control rights