[RD] Abortion, once again

[Birdjaguar]

maybe. though i'm a bit more friendly to the idea of controlling who crosses our border a lot more carefully than i am using fully arbitrary designations for personhood that screw people over for no reason.

i would prefer if it did not take awful crimes or tragedy to get policy going, and if policy proposals actually tracked to expected consequences in a measurable way.

We cannot even spot potential rapists among US citizens until after the fact. How would we go about spotting them among those who cross the border?

 

[TheMeInTeam]

We cannot even spot potential rapists among US citizens until after the fact. How would we go about spotting them among those who cross the border?

we wouldn't/couldn't screen that way, just have stricter standards/entry requirement whereby we anticipate useful contributions through their employment, and reject other immigrants.

this would still result in some immigrants being rapists, just like there are rapists among current us population. but it would result in fewer, give us more productive citizens on average, and burden a bad welfare system less. maybe a bit more money can go into that "health care" category then, though the way it's done now that's a money pit too.

this is getting tangential to abortions though, beyond noting that policy that leaves us citizens in better positions generally will create fewer situations where people want an abortion. that's useful, though it doesn't really inform abortion policy directly.

 

[JollyRoger]

We should have learned when we let the Irish in back in the 19th century. Generations later, and they still have not assimilated - just look at Sean Hannity for example.

Perhaps the real red states will create an exception to abortion restrictions when there is a potential anchoring.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

thinking entry requirements will restrict particular groups says more about the bias of the critics than it does about the policy. though that depends on the actual policy, too.

 

[Broken_Erika]

Texas cities are directing police to not enforce state abortion laws. Will it work?​

Advocates say the resolutions will effectively 'decriminalize' abortion in Austin, Denton​

Local governments in two Texas cities have voted in favour of directing police to depriortize the enforcement of abortion-related crimes under state law.

Advocates for the resolutions, passed unanimously on Thursday in Austin and late last month in a 4-3 vote at Denton city council, say the moves would effectively decriminalize abortion within city limits. A similar motion in El Paso, Texas, failed earlier this month.

"We don't want any real effort and resources put into, you know, tracking down these alleged abortion crimes," said José (Chito) Vela, council member for District 4 in Austin, who proposed the motion.

City officials responsible for implementing policy are now expected to direct local law enforcement to investigate other crimes, like vandalism, before they investigate crimes related to state abortion bans.

However, the resolutions do not legalize abortion in the cities or provide protection from state-level enforcement.

Parts of Texas have been grappling with how to protect access to abortion services in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 decision that made abortion a legal right in the United States.

Following the federal court's decision last month, Texas's highest court ruled that a law from 1925 banning abortion could be once again enforced. In a tweet, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton called it a "100 per cent good law."

A separate "trigger law" passed last year that would ban abortion from the moment of fertilization and open abortion providers up to the possibility of life in prison and $100,000 in penalties is expected to come into effect next month.

"It's just this absurdly political criminalization of abortion," Vela said.

Since the overturning of Roe v. Wade, many abortion providers in Texas have closed shop or stopped offering the procedure.

Whole Woman's Health, which operated four clinics in Texas, announced this month it would move operations to a New Mexico border city "to provide first and second trimester abortions."

"Women do not have the ability right now in parts of our state — I would say a majority of our state — to seek private health-care decisions with their health-care provider," said Julie Oliver, executive director of political advocacy group Ground Game Texas.

Her organization's goal is to bring resolutions like Austin council member Vela's to other cities in Texas.

Still too risky for providers​

Austin and Denton councils' resolutions could provide some peace of mind for residents living there who seek abortion services, said Elizabeth Sepper, a law professor at the University of Texas at Austin.

"If all of the activity is undertaken, say, within the confines of Austin or, say, Travis County, where prosecutors agree not to prosecute, police agree not to perform surveillance or investigate … I think it does provide some measure of legal reassurance," she said.

Travis County District Attorney José Garza, who oversees enforcement in Austin, has already indicated he will not prosecute people under Texas state law banning abortions.

Still, the resolutions will have "limited effectiveness" for those who provide abortions, Sepper said, and Vela admits that it's unlikely providers will return to Austin under the current state laws.

Without the protection of Roe v. Wade, and facing the threat of Texas's 1925 law and Senate Bill 8 (SB-8) — known as the Texas Heartbeat Act, which passed last year — there has been a chill on abortion access in the state.

• A new reality for U.S. doctors as they navigate exceptions to shifting abortion laws
• In a post-Roe America, abortion medication looms as the next legal battleground

SB-8 bans abortions after approximately six weeks and allows for civil lawsuits, providing any private citizen the ability to sue abortion providers for up to $10,000 US plus administration fees. It has been referred to as a "bounty law."

"Pre-Roe law did not impose really stiff criminal penalties — which isn't to say that several years in prison isn't enough to deter people — but now we're talking about [the] possibility of life imprisonment, mandatory revocation of medical licensure, and $100,000 in criminal fines," Sepper said.

Attorney general pushes back on federal intervention​

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott and Paxton, the attorney general, have repeatedly signalled their commitment to restricting abortion access in the state.

The Biden administration issued guidance last week indicating federal law requires doctors to provide abortions in emergency circumstances regardless of state laws. Hospitals that do not comply risk losing their Medicare and Medicaid status.

Days later, Paxton filed a lawsuit challenging the White House's guidance, saying it "forces hospitals and doctors to commit crimes and risk their licensure under Texas law."

Asked whether Paxton could do the same for Austin and Denton city council motions, Sepper said it's possible.

"There's a long history in Texas of the state taking away power and authority for municipalities and counties," she said. "So I would not be surprised if there's some legislative action in response to attempts by municipalities to safeguard some measure of abortion access or freedom from criminal sanction."

That could mean the loss of state funding for services like police.

CBC requested comment from the Office of the Attorney General in Texas about how it might respond to the local resolutions but did not hear back before publication.

• Biden signs executive order on abortion that aims to safeguard access, deter prosecution
• Choosing sterilization, delaying treatment: Medical choices in U.S. are changing amid new abortion laws

Oliver says she doesn't believe the local city council motions amount to breaking the law — but are rather a conscious choice of what laws to enforce.

And while she concedes it's not a perfect solution, she hopes other cities will adopt measures similar to Austin and Denton.

"For the cities that don't have a progressive city council, or the city council is staying silent on this issue, if the city has the power of the initiative, we can bring it to voters to decriminalize abortion in their cities and towns," she said.

https://www.cbc.ca/radio/day6/texas-abortion-police-enforcement-1.6528221

 

[EgonSpengler]

The American Taliban are on the march. 'All your uterus are belong to us.'

AL.com, 10 January 2023 - "Women can be prosecuted for taking abortion pills, says Alabama attorney general"

One week after the federal government made it easier to get abortion pills, Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall said Tuesday that women in Alabama who use those pills to end pregnancies could be prosecuted.

That’s despite wording in Alabama’s new Human Life Protection Act that criminalizes abortion providers and prevents its use against the people receiving abortions. Instead, the attorney general’s office said Alabama could rely on an older law, one initially designed to protect children from meth lab fumes.

 

[Angst]

"the attorney general’s office said Alabama could rely on an older law, one initially designed to protect children from meth lab fumes."

it's sad but lolwat

 

[Aiken_Drumn]

Man what a mess. I know its more anguish and pain for those already in termoil.. but I can imagine it very hard to catch, prove and prosecute taking an abortion pill?

 

[Birdjaguar]

@Broken_Erika

That could mean the loss of state funding for services like police.

Texas GOP: Defund the police!

 

[Angst]

Man what a mess. I know its more anguish and pain for those already in termoil.. but I can imagine it very hard to catch, prove and prosecute taking an abortion pill?

let's presume you can meaningfully trace some hormones or chemicals or whatever shortly after it's taken (and i'm not even sure you can, someone let me know)

then in order to catch a person having taken a pill... i don't even know. needs probably involuntary blood tests or similar? if so, the invasiveness of it

"since you should not be allowed to opt out of giving blood, we'll take some blood from you to make sure you didn't opt out from giving blood"

internally logical in some way, but thoroughly disgusting

 

[Valka D'Ur]

let's presume you can meaningfully trace some hormones or chemicals or whatever shortly after it's taken (and i'm not even sure you can, someone let me know)

How do you think they catch athletes who take performance-enhancing drugs, or get prosecuted and banned just for taking cold medication that has a forbidden ingredient (that the athlete/team doctor didn't catch)?

If they can do that, they can certainly figure out if a woman has used an abortion pill. Particularly since they're not some over-the-counter thing that you can pay for in cash and not leave a paper trail.

 

[Samson]

Particularly since they're not some over-the-counter thing that you can pay for in cash and not leave a paper trail.

You can get them on the dark web and not leave a paper trail.

 

[Snowygerry]

How do you think they catch athletes who take performance-enhancing drugs, or get prosecuted and banned just for taking cold medication that has a forbidden ingredient (that the athlete/team doctor didn't catch)?

If they can do that, they can certainly figure out if a woman has used an abortion pill. Particularly since they're not some over-the-counter thing that you can pay for in cash and not leave a paper trail.

Hm - they use mandatory urine and blood tests before or during competition, I doubt you can do that in this case ?

 

[Valka D'Ur]

Hm - they use mandatory urine and blood tests before or during competition, I doubt you can do that in this case ?

They test the medal winners after competition, and likely do random post-competition tests afterward as well.

How it would work for abortion... In Ceaucescu-ruled Romania, any pregnant woman had to submit to monthly checks. If she was discovered to be no longer pregnant, it had better be due to giving birth. If not, she was in a hell of a lot of trouble.

With the psychos running some U.S. states, is it that hard to imagine a similar law being enacted?

 

[Snowygerry]

I've never been to the US - but is not impossible, we have mandatory tests for driving under influence for instance,

but legally speaking it is hard for me to imagine yes, it would never pass the court here, not parliament either.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

I've never been to the US - but is not impossible, we have mandatory tests for driving under influence for instance,

but legally speaking it is hard for me to imagine yes, it would never pass the court here, not parliament either.

Same here in Canada. It would trigger a Charter challenge thisfast.

 

[Arwon]

let's presume you can meaningfully trace some hormones or chemicals or whatever shortly after it's taken (and i'm not even sure you can, someone let me know)

then in order to catch a person having taken a pill... i don't even know. needs probably involuntary blood tests or similar? if so, the invasiveness of it

"since you should not be allowed to opt out of giving blood, we'll take some blood from you to make sure you didn't opt out from giving blood"

internally logical in some way, but thoroughly disgusting

I think they'll be perfectly happy just relying on proof of purchase and mere knowledge of being pregnant when it comes time to outlaw reproductive health and prosecuting women for obtaining medications. The American anti abortion movement movement aren't big on doubt and legal protections.

 

[Farm Boy]

"the attorney general’s office said Alabama could rely on an older law, one initially designed to protect children from meth lab fumes."

it's sad but lolwat

People in desperate situations endanger children in some ways. It is sad, but it's kind of a nature of human life sort of thing. Our children are bound by the past as surely as our marks bind the future.

I am unfamiliar with the Alabama law in question, but I would assume there are similar statutes in place to assign criminal outcomes for exposing one's children to the byproducts of illicit methamphetamine production in the home, here in Illinois, too?

 

[Angst]

I think they'll be perfectly happy just relying on proof of purchase and mere knowledge of being pregnant when it comes time to outlaw reproductive health and prosecuting women for obtaining medications. The American anti abortion movement movement aren't big on doubt and legal protections.

what happens then if someone buys a bunch of abortion pills in a legal state and moves them over the border? is a state allowed to track such purchases outside itself?

also vaka said abortion pills aren't over the counter. that confuses me. they are in denmark i believe, so..?

 

[Valka D'Ur]

what happens then if someone buys a bunch of abortion pills in a legal state and moves them over the border? is a state allowed to track such purchases outside itself?

also vaka said abortion pills aren't over the counter. that confuses me. they are in denmark i believe, so..?

So not all countries' laws are the same as in Denmark. Some require a doctor's prescription. In Canada, there's a push to make it legal for pharmacists in every province to prescribe them (health is a provincial responsibility, so some health services are inconsistent from one to another).

And then you have the side that insists that pharmacists and doctors should have increased "conscience rights" that would not only allow them to refuse to provide services they don't approve of, but could legally stick their self-righteous noses in the air and refuse to refer the patient to another doctor/pharmacist.