Supreme Court has voted to overturn abortion rights per draft opinion (Update: Dobbs opinion official) (1 Viewer)

[LovesMusic7360]

Not long ago Kari Lake proclaimed Arizona's abortion law was a great law and wanted it the law of the state.

Now that she has gotten her way, she is lobbying for it to be repealed.

As I have been saying since 2022, the overwhelming vast majority of women aren't going to vote for the man who proudly boasts that he got rid of Roe V. Wade. Nor are those women going to vote for a forced birther politician.

Turns out, republican belief in "pro life" was all just lies to get votes. Who is surprised? I sure am not.

How many forced birthers will do the same about face?

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/ka ... r-BB1ltx3I.

Arizona Republican Senate candidate Kari Lake is actively lobbying state lawmakers to overturn a 160-year-old law she once supported that bans abortion in almost all cases, a source with knowledge of her efforts told CNN.

 

[DaveXA]

I wish her luck

Legislature debate slows to a crawl as senator promises to filibuster every bill this session

Legislature debate slows to a crawl after a senator promised to filibuster every bill that is debated this session.

www.3newsnow.com

Cavanaugh’s filibuster is one of the last strategies that liberal senators have in an overwhelmingly conservative body to slow the progress on controversial bills such as LB 626, which would ban any abortions after cardiac activity is detected in a fetus, or LB574, which would ban gender-affirming care for minors.

Cavanaugh said her fellow senators forced her hand with their lack of collegiality and promised they would be hearing from her on every bill being debated this session

Good for her. If they want to play dirty, return the favor.

 

[MT15]

In TN, every time a doctor performs a D&C to clear a doomed pregnancy and save the woman from deadly complications, they are committing a felony. If they do not act, they are performing medical malpractice. How many doctors will stay in TN, do you think? How many women would die if these procedures remain a felony?

Anti-abortionists would never oppose saving the lives of women you say?

 

[brandon]

In TN, every time a doctor performs a D&C to clear a doomed pregnancy and save the woman from deadly complications, they are committing a felony. If they do not act, they are performing medical malpractice. How many doctors will stay in TN, do you think? How many women would die if these procedures remain a felony?

Anti-abortionists would never oppose saving the lives of women you say?

I've said this multiple times - if you believe abortion is baby murder, then there's no logical room for exceptions that allow for baby murder. The life of the mother is irrelevant.

 

[Taurus]

I've said this multiple times - if you believe abortion is baby murder, then there's no logical room for exceptions that allow for baby murder. The life of the mother is irrelevant.

Especially when the baby's already dead. Just let the ho die.

 

[MT15]

So much for the will of the people:

 

[Bigdaddysaints]

So much for the will of the people:

"the part of smaller gov't"...lol
If you want a voice then vote!! well, except for the things we don't like, then we'll make it a law where you can't vote for stuff we don't like.

 

[Optimus Prime]

A woman in South Carolina has been arrested and charged for allegedly trying to induce her own abortion using medication.

The woman was reported by staff at a hospital in Greenville, South Carolina, after visiting a hospital in October 2021 with labor pains. Ultimately, she delivered a stillborn fetus at about 25 weeks and four days of pregnancy. In an incident report, staff claimed the woman had admitted to having taken abortion pills in an attempt to end her pregnancy.

The incident took place in 2021, before the constitutional right to abortion was overturned in June 2022. But a warrant was subsequently issued for the woman’s arrest in 2022, and she was arrested in February 2023, Sgt Jonathan Bragg, of the Greenville police department confirmed…….

South Carolina woman arrested for allegedly using pills to end pregnancy

Incident took place in 2021, but warrant was issued in 2022 and she was arrested in February, police confirm

www.theguardian.com

 

[superchuck500]

Good read:

Why the Supreme Court’s Leak Investigation Failed

The inquiry revealed once again the need for real oversight of the judicial branch.

www.theatlantic.com

 

[Optimus Prime]

A public college in Idaho is coming under pressure to explain why it has removed from an upcoming exhibition in its Center for Arts & History several artworks dealing with reproductive health and abortion.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the National Coalition Against Censorship have jointly written to Lewis-Clark State College expressing “alarm” at the decision to remove several pieces.

Their letter says that the college’s response demonstrated the potential abuses of new laws that have come into effect in Idaho banning the use of public funds to “promote” or “counsel in favor” of pregnancy terminations.

Titled Unconditional Care, the show invites artists to reflect on some of the most pressing health issues today – from chronic illness to disability and pregnancy. The participants share the stories of people directly affected by the challenges.

Items that touch on abortion have been singled out for removal from the exhibition. Artists were told their work violated Idaho state law that kicked in after the US supreme court overturned the right to an abortion enshrined in Roe v Wade.

Scarlet Kim, a staff attorney with the ACLU’s speech, privacy and technology project, said that the removal of works of art silenced the voices of women.

“It jeopardizes a bedrock first amendment principle that the state refrain from interfering with expressive activity because it disagrees with a particular point of view,” Kim said…….

“You cannot ban abortion without banning speech about abortion, as Lewis-Clark students are now discovering,” he said.

Six artworks have been removed from the Unconditional Care exhibition at the instruction of senior college administrators, and a seventh has been edited to remove abortion references. Four of the works are videos and audio recordings created by a New York-based artist, Lydia Nobles, as part of a series named As I Sit Waiting……

Artwork referring to abortion removed from Idaho public college exhibition

Six pieces removed from show about health issues after school officials were given legal counsel about state’s abortion ‘gag rule’

www.theguardian.com

 

[Optimus Prime]

Five women denied abortions in Texas, along with two doctors, have sued the state after they were refused abortion care despite suffering severe complications with their pregnancies.

None of the plaintiffs’ fetuses had a chance of survival. The state’s abortion bans are supposed to allow for the procedure in cases where there is a fatal diagnosis for the fetus, as well as when thepregnancy poses substantial harms to the pregnant person’s health.

And yet, under the overlapping abortion bans in effect in Texas – which threaten doctors with losing their medical licenses, hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines and up to 99 years in jail for providing abortion care – the plaintiffs claim they were not given the healthcare they needed and were entitled to.

“People are scared and outraged at the thought of being pregnant in this state,” Amanda Zurawski, one of the plaintiffs in the case said on Tuesday in a press conference about the lawsuit in front of the Texas capitol in Austin.

According to the Center for Reproductive Rights, which is bringing the lawsuit, the case is the first since the US supreme court overturned Roe v Wade last year in which pregnant women are challenging the abortion bans that are wreaking havoc on reproductive health in much of the country.

“We want the state of Texas to acknowledge the women behind me should have received timely abortion care,” said Molly Duane, the lead litigator in the case, outside the Texas capitol. She said the lawsuit aimed to establish that what happened to the plaintiffs was a violation of their basic human rights according to the Texas constitution……

Five women denied abortion care in Texas sue state over bans

The women were refused abortions despite carrying nonviable pregnancies that posed major risks to their health

www.theguardian.com

 

[MT15]

Of course it was a violation of their basic human rights. I just don’t think Rs give a damn about that. They just don’t care. They cannot imagine it will happen to anyone in their families, and if it did they would just make sure that person can travel to wherever she needs to go to get the care she needs.

 

[MT15]

Just saw this clip on Twitter. This is one of the women who is suing Texas over their abortion ban. Her membranes broke at 18 weeks. This wasn’t a viable pregnancy at that point, which was devastating because they’d been trying for over a year to get pregnant. Normally, an abortion would have been provided and they could have grieved and started to heal. But because of the ban, doctors couldn’t do anything. They had to wait for the baby to die or her to get sick. After 3 days she became septic. She spent 3 days in ICU, then 3 more days in the the hospital fighting the infection. She has long term, possibly permanent effects on her health and her fertility. This is heartbreaking and enraging at the same time.

 

[Taurus]

Just saw this clip on Twitter. This is one of the women who is suing Texas over their abortion ban. Her membranes broke at 18 weeks. This wasn’t a viable pregnancy at that point, which was devastating because they’d been trying for over a year to get pregnant. Normally, an abortion would have been provided and they could have grieved and started to heal. But because of the ban, doctors couldn’t do anything. They had to wait for the baby to die or her to get sick. After 3 days she became septic. She spent 3 days in ICU, then 3 more days in the the hospital fighting the infection. She has long term, possibly permanent affects on her health and her fertility. This is heartbreaking and enraging at the same time.

Deaths are coming soon. Then the GOP will be happy.

 

[Bigdaddysaints]

Deaths are coming soon. Then the GOP will be happy.

oh, they really don't care about deaths. most especially children. They want to cut medicaid and food stamps, etc. If they die they die, its the parents fault... Which they are correct, BUT they act like they want to "save" children at all costs. funny because they don't want to actually spend any money, just pass blame...

 

[Taurus]

oh, they really don't care about deaths. most especially children. They want to cut medicaid and food stamps, etc. If they die they die, its the parents fault... Which they are correct, BUT they act like they want to "save" children at all costs. funny because they don't want to actually spend any money, just pass blame...

I was referring to the defective baby-machines.

 

[MT15]

Deaths are coming soon. Then the GOP will be happy.

A few of the comments under the tweet are illuminating. From one word - “good” to people saying she doesn’t exist and the doctors don’t exist. They really don’t care what their laws do to women. Even women who weren’t seeking abortions are harmed and some will die.

 

[Optimus Prime]

She spent 3 days in ICU, then 3 more days in the hospital fighting the infection. She has long term, possibly permanent affects on her health and her fertility. This is heartbreaking and enraging at the same time.

And on top of everything else then gets an unnecessary monster of a hospital bill that easily could have been avoided

 

[Optimus Prime]

guess this can go here
================
FAIRFAX, Va. (AP) — Frozen human embryos can legally be considered property, or “chattel,” a Virginia judge has ruled, basing his decision in part on a 19th century law governing the treatment of slaves.

The preliminary opinion by Fairfax County Circuit Court Judge Richard Gardiner – delivered in a long-running dispute between a divorced husband and wife – is being criticized by some for wrongly and unnecessarily delving into a time in Virginia history when it was legally permissible to own human beings.

“It’s repulsive and it’s morally repugnant,” said Susan Crockin, a lawyer and scholar at Georgetown University’s Kennedy Institute of Ethics and an expert in reproductive technology law.

Solomon Ashby, president of the Old Dominion Bar Association, a professional organization made up primarily of African American lawyers, called Gardiner’s ruling troubling.

“I would like to think that the bench and the bar would be seeking more modern precedent,” he said.

Gardiner did not return a call to his chambers Wednesday. His decision, issued last month, is not final: He has not yet ruled on other arguments in the case involving Honeyhline and Jason Heidemann, a divorced couple fighting over two frozen embryos that remain in storage.

Honeyhline Heidemann, 45, wants to use the embryos. Jason Heidemann objects.

Initially, Gardiner sided with Jason Heidemann. The law at the heart of the case governs how to divide “goods and chattels.” The judge ruled that because embryos could not be bought or sold, they couldn’t be considered as such and therefore Honeyhline Heidemann had no recourse under that law to claim custody of them.

But after the ex-wife’s lawyer, Adam Kronfeld, asked the judge to reconsider, Gardiner conducted a deep dive into the history of the law. He found that before the Civil War, it also applied to slaves. The judge then researched old rulings that governed custody disputes involving slaves, and said he found parallels that forced him to reconsider whether the law should apply to embryos.

In a separate part of his opinion, Gardiner also said he erred when he initially concluded that human embryos cannot be sold.

“As there is no prohibition on the sale of human embryos, they may be valued and sold, and thus may be considered ‘goods or chattels,’” he wrote.

Crockin said she’s not aware of any other judge in the U.S. who has concluded that human embryos can be bought and sold. She said the trend, if anything, has been to recognize that embryos have to be treated in a more nuanced way than as mere property.

Ashby said he was baffled that Gardiner felt a need to delve into slavery to answer a question about embryos, even if Virginia case law is thin on how to handle embryo custody questions.

“Hopefully, the jurisprudence will advance in the commonwealth of Virginia such that ... we will no longer see slave codes” cited to justify legal rulings, he said.

Neither of the Heidemanns’ lawyers ever raised the slavery issue. They did raise other arguments in support of their cases, however..............

Judge uses a slavery law to rule frozen embryos are property

A Virginia judge has ruled that frozen embryos can legally be considered property, based partly on a 19th century law governing the treatment of slaves.

apnews.com