Roe v Wade is on deck

[Keith&Co.]

Among those who could face civil liability are physicians who provide abortion care, but also nurses, clinic staff, and any others who helped the patient access abortion care. This means that family members, clergy, domestic violence and rape crisis counselors, or referring physicians could be subject to tens of thousands of dollars in liability

Not too long ago, a state decided that pharmacists could refuse to fill prescriptions that conflicted with their religious beliefs, such as birth control and abortion.
Almost immediately, there was a case where a woman needed a prescription filled for a coagulant. This was post-surgery. The pharmacist wanted to know what the surgery was, as she suspected it was an abortion.
She never established that it was an abortion, and even if it was, the abortion was already done. The only life at risk was the woman standing at the counter. But she invoked this insanity as her defense and refused to fill the script.

In addition to everyone listed, there are going to be lawsuits against anyone that drives the woman home AFTER the abortion; doctors, nurses, and pharmacists who help deal with any complications; any employer that lets her take a day off either for the abortion, or to recover from the abortion; the pizza delivery because she didn't feel like cooking that night....

We could probably play a game of 6 Degrees of Separation. For any abortion that occurs in Texas, how are you culpable?

 

[TomC]

Texas "heartbeat bill" becomes law, banning abortions as early as six weeks | The Texas Tribune
links to
Attorney Letter in Opposition to HB 1515 & SB 8 April 28 2021 (1).pdf(Review)- Adobe Document Cloud

Nice to see what some lawyers have to say about it, since they would likely know their way around the relevant law.

That's a violation of the principle of  Standing (law), where one has to have suffered something bad from some action by one's lawsuit target. Like suing one's neighbors for using one's property as a garbage dump.

Venue shopping, choosing some suitable jurisdiction to sue from.

Perhaps most troubling is that these proposals would impose liability on people whose actions were legal at the time they took them. The bill specifically prohibits the defense that a party relied on a court decision that was valid at the time of their actions but that was later overruled—meaning even if a person was following the law, they could still be liable if the law changed later. This type of ex post facto liability violates the very bedrock of our legal system which requires notice and due process before imposing liability.

This is one of the reasons for RvW. Getting rid of stupid, badly written, state laws. Politicians writing terrible laws, at the state level, because they don't know what they're talking about. They only know what kind of political grandstanding will win them the next election.

I don't really support RvW. But I totally support having federal laws on the issue and not state laws. RvW is still better than this pile of crap.
Tom

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Just a thought, there are three federally declared Indian reservations in Texas.

When we were in the casino my BiL worked at, I noticed people were smoking in the building. He said only federal laws apply, not state laws.

I don't think that will protect against SB8 as it doesn't criminalize the abortion in the first place.

 

[Elixir]

Just a thought, there are three federally declared Indian reservations in Texas.

When we were in the casino my BiL worked at, I noticed people were smoking in the building. He said only federal laws apply, not state laws.

I don't think that will protect against SB8 as it doesn't criminalize the abortion in the first place.

So... casinos are a great place to talk to someone about how to get an abortion?

 

[Elixir]

Among those who could face civil liability are physicians who provide abortion care, but also nurses, clinic staff, and any others who helped the patient access abortion care. This means that family members, clergy, domestic violence and rape crisis counselors, or referring physicians could be subject to tens of thousands of dollars in liability

Not too long ago, a state decided that pharmacists could refuse to fill prescriptions that conflicted with their religious beliefs, such as birth control and abortion.
Almost immediately, there was a case where a woman needed a prescription filled for a coagulant. This was post-surgery. The pharmacist wanted to know what the surgery was, as she suspected it was an abortion.
She never established that it was an abortion, and even if it was, the abortion was already done. The only life at risk was the woman standing at the counter. But she invoked this insanity as her defense and refused to fill the script.

In addition to everyone listed, there are going to be lawsuits against anyone that drives the woman home AFTER the abortion; doctors, nurses, and pharmacists who help deal with any complications; any employer that lets her take a day off either for the abortion, or to recover from the abortion; the pizza delivery because she didn't feel like cooking that night....

We could probably play a game of 6 Degrees of Separation. For any abortion that occurs in Texas, how are you culpable?

In TX, ANYONE can claim harm and get in line for their $10K.
Every right wing moron in the State can join every single case against everyone they think they can connect to it.
I just can't wait for the first case to be filed! (If it ever is.)

 

[Shadowy Man]

So, judges are expected to go along with the idea that standing has no meaning anymore?

 

[ideologyhunter]

So, judges are expected to go along with the idea that standing has no meaning anymore?

That part I just can't see. Texas created that out of (((poof))) nothing. If that stands, you could set up vigilante action and bounty hunting on any social issue. Very destructive if this stands. Unsustainable except out of zealotry. Sheer malice out of whatever wretched human being came up with the concept.

 

[ZiprHead]

Just a thought, there are three federally declared Indian reservations in Texas.

When we were in the casino my BiL worked at, I noticed people were smoking in the building. He said only federal laws apply, not state laws.

I don't think that will protect against SB8 as it doesn't criminalize the abortion in the first place.

The woman can go to the reservation, get her abortion and no one can do a thing about it. The clinic is on federal Indian territory, technically not Texas.

 

[lpetrich]

I like this article: Texas' abortion bounty law

... but it provides that anyone who assists in one can be sued. By anyone. A private citizen with no stake in the case can sue a doctor or a clinic for performing an abortion, and be awarded $10,000 or more if they win.

This bizarre strategy, which is designed to avoid judicial review, encourages stalking and vigilantism. Even worse, the law bars people who are sued from recovering their legal fees, even if they win. It's an open invitation from the state of Texas for people with grudges to abuse the court system with frivolous and harassing lawsuits.

I thought that conservatives were opposed to frivolous lawsuits.

Then how the Supreme Court's conservative majority decided to make Roe vs. Wade a dead letter by not objecting to Texas's anti-abortion law.

When abortion was protected by the courts, right-wing politicians could grandstand and thump the Bible as much as they wanted. It was a potent way to eile up their base and get religious conservatives to vote in huge numbers. But because any abortion law they actually passed would be struck down, they'd face no backlash from moderate voters angry over their rights being curtailed. (Americans support Roe v. Wade by a two-to-one margin.)

Now that calculus has changed. Calling for an end to abortion is no longer a costless position. Republican legislators can do as they please - and that means they'll have to explain to middle-class white women why they're taking away their reproductive health care. Millions of people who voted for Republicans because they want lower taxes may feel differently when their own bodies are on the line. Abortion is about to become a live issue in American politics, in a way it a hasn't for some time, and conservatives may be caught a in a vise between an extremist primary electorate and a suddenly energized pro-choice general electorate.

It's possible that the GOP understands this. You might expect they'd be celebrating the win that they've been fighting for for decades. Yet as the Atlantic notes, conservative media outlets have been unusually quiet about the Texas law.

The article also discusses a chilling effect on medical practice that this law may have -- that doctors may not want to risk being sued for doing abortions, even if they did not do so.

 

[lpetrich]

Why Is the Right So Quiet About Texas's Abortion Law? - The Atlantic - "Why has the right fallen so quiet about Texas’s new abortion law?"

Liberal groups have been predictably furious and upset, though they recognize that Democrats who control the White House, the House, and (tenuously) the Senate cannot do much. More left-leaning and centrist media outlets, having largely ignored the law before it went into effect, have now entered overdrive in their coverage.

...
When liberals have triumphed in major cases at the Court, including the Affordable Care Act’s skin-of-the-teeth survival in 2012 and the success of marriage equality in 2015, they have exulted. Why is this moment playing out differently?

One possibility is because the law involves a rather unusual and risky legal mechanism: giving people the ability to sue abortion providers and abortion assisters.

Another is that conservative ideologists know that rejection of abortion does not have much support. So they may think that it is likely to provoke a big backlash against them.

 

[lpetrich]

Texas abortion tourism is already happening.

New Texas abortion law pushes women to out-of-state clinics

An Oklahoma clinic had received more than double its number of typical inquiries, two-thirds of them from Texas. A Kansas clinic is anticipating a patient increase of up to 40% based on calls from women in Texas. A Colorado clinic that already had started seeing more patients from other states was preparing to ramp up supplies and staffing in anticipation of the law taking effect.

....
The number of Texans seeking abortions in Planned Parenthood clinics in the Rocky Mountain region, which covers Colorado, New Mexico, Wyoming and southern Nevada, was 12 times higher that month. In California, 7,000 patients came from other states to Planned Parenthood clinics in 2020.

The number of Texans getting abortions in Kansas jumped from 25 in 2019 to 289 last year. The Trust Women clinic in Wichita accounted for 203 of those procedures in a three-month period. Those patients traveled an average of 650 miles (1,000 kilometers), Trust Women spokesman Zack Gingrich-Gaylord said.

...
Trust Women Wichita clinic director Ashley Brink said the phones have been busier than normal this week with potential patients from Texas and beyond. Women also have been calling from Louisiana and Alabama who would typically get abortion care in Texas but are having to travel even farther.

The clinic typically sees 40 to 50 abortion patients in a week and now is expecting an additional 15 to 20.

At Trust Women’s clinic in Oklahoma City, 80 appointments were scheduled over the past two days, more than double the typical amount, co-executive director Rebecca Tong said. Two-thirds were from Texas, and the earliest opening was three weeks out.

Of the neighboring states mentioned, OK and maybe also KS might join TX in being very restrictive of abortion, while NM, CO, and NV are likely to continue to be abortion-friendly.

How long to drive from Dallas TX:

• Albuquerque NM: 649 mi, 9h 27m -- Las Vegas NV: 1223 mi, 17h 50m
• Oklahoma City OH: 206 mi, 3h 21m -- Wichita KS: 364 mi, 5h 34m (via OK City) -- East St. Louis IL: 634 mi, 9h 51m (direct), 708 mi, 10h 27m (via OK City), 807 mi, 11h 52m (via Wichita)

By air (nonstop from DFW): ABQ $200, 2h, LAS $55, 3h, OKC $240, 1h, ICT (Wich) $240, 1h 15m, MCI (KS City) $150, 1h 30m, STL (St. Louis) $150, 1h 45m

 

[lpetrich]

AP: Women seek abortions out of state amid restrictions

Although abortion opponents say the laws are intended to reduce abortions and not send people to other states, at least 276,000 women terminated their pregnancies outside their home state between 2012 and 2017, according to an Associated Press analysis of data collected from state reports and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

In New Mexico, the number of women from out of state who had abortions more than doubled in that period, while Missouri women represented nearly half the abortions performed in neighboring Kansas.

...
In pockets of the Midwest, South and Mountain West, the number of women terminating a pregnancy in another state rose considerably, particularly where a lack of clinics means the closest provider is in another state or where less restrictive policies in a neighboring state make it easier and quicker to terminate a pregnancy there.

...
Nationwide, women who traveled from another state received at least 44,860 abortions in 2017, the most recent year available, according to the AP analysis of data from 41 states.

That’s about 10% of all reported procedures that year, but counts from nine states, including highly populated California and Florida, and the District of Columbia were not included either because they were not collected or reported across the full six years.

Out-of-state abortions for 2012 to 2017:

• NM OOS: from 11% to 25%
• GA OOS: from 11.5% to 15%
• NC OOS: from 16.6% to 18.5%
• IL OOS: > 2x at16.5% (largely from MO)
• Hope Clinic in Granite City IL: 30% increase in patients, 55% from MO, also from IN, KY, OH
• In 2017, 47% of KS abortions for MO women
• NM total: 158% increase

Abortion opponents say the intent of laws limiting the procedure is not to push women to another state but to build more time for them to consider their options and reduce the overall number of abortions.

“I have been insistent in telling my pro-life colleagues that’s all well and good if the last abortion clinic shuts down, but it’s no victory if women end up driving 10 minutes across the river to Granite City, Illinois, or to Fairview Heights,” said Sam Lee, director of Campaign Life Missouri and a longtime anti-abortion lobbyist.

So they concede that abortion tourism means defeat for them.

Anti-abortion activists also hope a broader cultural shift eventually makes these issues disappear.

“We are seeing this trend toward life and a realization of what science tells us about when life begins,” said Cole Muzio, executive director of the Family Policy Alliance of Georgia who advocated successfully for new abortion limits there. “Just because something is legal does not mean that it is good.”

Wishful thinking. Given the big drop in religious affiliation since 1990, the trend is going in the other way. While one can be secular or nominally religious or religious-left and oppose abortion, that is not very common. It's in the Religious Right that religious opposition to abortion is concentrated.

 

[lpetrich]

Before this, opponents of abortion had tried to regulate abortion clinics to death, despite it being a part of right-wing ideology that it is wrong to regulate businesses.

"Texas lost more than half its clinics after lawmakers in 2013 required them to have facilities equal to a surgical center and mandated doctors performing abortions have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital."

Even as right-wingers brag about how business-friendly Texas is.

That article has three diagrams, showing how many abortions in each state, how many abortion clinics in each state, and how many people cross state lines to get abortions in each state.

• More than 200: IL, KS, NC, NM
• 101 to 200: DE, GA, LA, ND, TN
• 51 to 100: AL, AR, CO, IA, MN, NJ, PA, MT, NV, OR, WA
• 25 to 50: CT, IN, KY, MA, MI, ME, MO, NE, OH, OK, SD, VA, WV
• Less than 25: AK, AZ, HI, ID, MS, SC, UT, WI
• No data: CA, DC, FL, MD, NH, NY, RI, TX, VT, WY

Abortion still available to Texans — if they can afford to travel | The Texas Tribune

At a clinic in Albuquerque, New Mexico, an abortion provider said that on Tuesday, the day before the law’s enactment, every patient who had made an appointment online was from its neighbor state to the east. By Thursday, all of New Mexico’s abortion clinics were reportedly booked up for weeks, and a Dallas center had dispatched dozens of employees to help the much less populated state’s overtaxed system.

But for every Texan who is able to leave town to elude the new law, there are more who can’t.

“That’s the people that have a working car, that can get time off, who have somebody who can take care of their kids,” said Vicki Cowart, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains, which covers New Mexico, Colorado and Las Vegas, Nevada. “There are going to be thousands of individuals who don’t have that wherewithal, and it’s really particularly going to impact women of color, young women, rural women.”

...
Although the new limits on abortion — which providers estimate will ban about 85% of abortions in the state — just went into effect Wednesday, Texas women and neighboring providers had a glimpse last year of what was to come. In 2020, an executive order from Gov. Greg Abbott effectively banned abortion for more than a month during the pandemic, labelling the procedure elective as hospital space became limited. During that time, Cowart said, clinics in Colorado and New Mexico saw a 12-fold increase in patients.

...
Throughout 2020, the number of abortions performed on Texas residents out-of-state nearly doubled, from 654 the year before to 1,226, according to data from the Texas Health and Human Services Commission. The state did not split data by month for out-of-state abortions. Still, the number was relatively small compared with the nearly 54,000 performed in Texas.

About 3% of abortions for white and Black Texans were performed out of state, the health department reported. But while Hispanic women living in Texas had more abortions in 2020 than any other racial or ethnic group — nearly 20,000 — only two left the state for the procedure, the state reported. The health department could not clarify Thursday how other states reported on data about Hispanic people.

 

[lpetrich]

Now on AOC's official-Representative Instagram account: Rep. Ocasio-Cortez on Instagram: “Rep. AOC on Texas Abortion Law”

Sorry to breakdown Biology 101 on national TV, but since Governor Abbott doesn’t seem to know, six-weeks pregnant means your period is 2 weeks late.

No rape survivor truly has six weeks to get an abortion. Nor do many ever report their assaults. The Governor’s remarks are disgusting.

The Texas abortion law is about controlling the bodies of pregnant people. If the Republican Party truly cared about life, they would support an agenda that funds healthcare, maternal care, childcare, and other resources that keep pregnant people and children safe.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Twitter: "If @GovAbbott is as “anti-rape” as he claims, why doesn’t he just lead the Texas state leg to pass a law for $10k bounties on people who engage in or aid sexual assault?

Or is he opposed to that bc it’s a slippery slope of vigilantism where men could be unjustly targeted? " / Twitter
Certain men seem quick to become super civil libertarians about this issue.

About rape,
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Twitter: "Another reason we shouldn’t separate victims of rape from other abortions is bc forcing this disclosure from people is traumatizing +unnecessary.

Most survivors don’t report their assault. It can take years to even acknowledge what happened. People should get the care they need." / Twitter
Also, how would a woman qualify? Would her assailant have to be convicted of rape? That can take weeks. Would she have to file a police report? That would be quicker, but that's not her assailant being found guilty.

So it's best to have no-questions-asked abortion for the first three months of pregnancy.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Twitter: "Still thinking ...." / Twitter

Still thinking about how @GovAbbott’s message to survivors terrified of the bounties now on their heads is “I will end rape.”

No, he won’t. He & the GOP just gave abusers & coercive partners a powerful new tool to intimidate victims.

These GOP laws HELP abusers, not stop them.

By allowing any person to financially destroy pregnant people on a whim, they knowingly handed over the keys of manipulation & control to people most likely to use it.

Don’t let them feign ignorance about this. They know exactly what they’re doing. This is about fear & control.

Another reason we shouldn’t separate victims of rape from other abortions is bc forcing this disclosure from people is traumatizing +unnecessary.

Most survivors don’t report their assault. It can take years to even acknowledge what happened. People should get the care they need.

 

[lpetrich]

The Daily Mail: "AOC calls women 'menstruating people' while explaining the female body"

She responded:
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Twitter: "Not just women! ..." / Twitter

Some women also *don’t* menstruate for many reasons, including surviving cancer that required a hysterectomy.

GOP mad at this are protecting the patriarchal idea that women are most valuable as uterus holders.

Trans, two-spirit, and non-binary people have always existed and will always exist.

People can stay mad about that if they want, or they can grow up * *️

People whose somatic and psychological gender identities don't match.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Twitter: "Sexual assault is ..." / Twitter

Sexual assault is an abuse of power that attempts to seize sexual control over another person’s body.

Anti-choice laws are also an abuse of power that attempts to seize sexual control over people’s bodies en masse.

And that’s 1 way rape culture informs anti-choice legislation.

It’s not a coincidence that Texas is where GOP are testing new ways to retake sexual control via legislation. TX had “anti-sodomy” laws in place until 2003 (!) that made non-PIV sex illegal until the Supreme Court overturned it on the basis of Roe v Wade’s right to privacy.

The Supreme Court and GOP’s coordinated attack on Roe v Wade isn’t only about abortion rights - it’s also an attack on our overall right to privacy.

Roe v Wade allowed SCOTUS to overturn state laws that criminalized private, consensual acts that especially targeted LGBT+ people.

The gutting of Roe v Wade imperils every menstruating person in the US, every person who engages in sex, and every person who values our constitutional right to privacy.

Just one reason Roe isn’t a “women’s issue” beyond the fact that people who aren’t women can menstruate too!

Such people are somatically female even if not psychologically female.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

So, judges are expected to go along with the idea that standing has no meaning anymore?

That part I just can't see. Texas created that out of (((poof))) nothing. If that stands, you could set up vigilante action and bounty hunting on any social issue. Very destructive if this stands. Unsustainable except out of zealotry. Sheer malice out of whatever wretched human being came up with the concept.

Which is why I say we should impeach the 5 justices that voted for this abomination. Whatever you think about abortion is this a very bad law that most certainly should have been stayed. Any justice who says otherwise isn't competent and doesn't belong on any bench, let alone the top one.

 

[Rhea]

If that stands, you could set up vigilante action and bounty hunting on any social issue. Very destructive if this stands. Unsustainable except out of zealotry.

Which is why I say we should impeach the 5 justices that voted for this abomination. Whatever you think about abortion is this a very bad law that most certainly should have been stayed. Any justice who says otherwise isn't competent and doesn't belong on any bench, let alone the top one.

Agree.

 

[Jarhyn]

If that stands, you could set up vigilante action and bounty hunting on any social issue. Very destructive if this stands. Unsustainable except out of zealotry.

Which is why I say we should impeach the 5 justices that voted for this abomination. Whatever you think about abortion is this a very bad law that most certainly should have been stayed. Any justice who says otherwise isn't competent and doesn't belong on any bench, let alone the top one.

Agree.

Third.

 

[Patooka]

So, judges are expected to go along with the idea that standing has no meaning anymore?

That part I just can't see. Texas created that out of (((poof))) nothing. If that stands, you could set up vigilante action and bounty hunting on any social issue. Very destructive if this stands. Unsustainable except out of zealotry. Sheer malice out of whatever wretched human being came up with the concept.

Which is why I say we should impeach the 5 justices that voted for this abomination. Whatever you think about abortion is this a very bad law that most certainly should have been stayed. Any justice who says otherwise isn't competent and doesn't belong on any bench, let alone the top one.

Is that possible? How would that work in the US system?

 

[Rhea]

Is that possible? How would that work in the US system?

It would be nearly impossible. Being incompetent at judging and unconstitutional would need to be carefully formed into the case. A good teeam of lawyers could make a very sound case, but the GOP would never support a sound case.

https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/impeachment-and-removal-judges-explainer

Of the 15 federal judicial impeachments in history, the most common charges were making false statements, favoritism toward litigants or special appointees, intoxication on the bench, and abuse of the contempt power.