Georgia governor signs strictest abortion bill in nation

[Bryan_Ekers]

@HurricaneDitka

Why would women “almost certainly” be jailed for miscarriage? Women today aren’t generally jailed if their children get sick and die, or die from an accident. Why would miscarriages “almost certainly” result in jailing?

It doesn’t have to be all women. If there’s a 1% rate of false accusation, then 1% of women who have a miscarriage become subject to arrest, imprisonment, etc. Sure, it won’t generally happen. Probably. Who knows, really, since a law written without rational purpose is not likely to be applied rationally.

[asahi]

@Rick_Kitchen

I’m reporting on what news reports I’ve read said. I have to ashamedly, admit to not having read the law.

I think Ditka’s right - I don’t think that’s accurate.

[HurricaneDitka]

@asahi

It doesn’t matter whether the law mentions miscarriage 1 time, 100 hundred times, or zero times. The effect of this law is that it will inevitably lead some women who have miscarriages to be investigated and even jailed, even if only temporarily. I never said that this will happen frequently or even in a majority cases - I don’t care. If a woman is investigated, booked, incarcerated, and later has the charges dropped because of a misunderstanding, that’s still a case of a woman being jailed for nothing more than being pregnant. That was my point. My other point is religious zealots have no fucking business making decisions about a woman’s healthcare - there’s that, too.

So you don’t have a cite. You just have some petty rage. Gotcha.

Do you know how Georgia law handled second- or third-trimester abortions prior to this law being enacted?

[HurricaneDitka]

@Rick_Kitchen

The Slate is liberal? OK.

Yes:

It has a generally liberal and left-of-center editorial stance.

[asahi]

@HurricaneDitka

So you don’t have a cite. You just have some petty rage. Gotcha.

Do you know how Georgia law handled second- or third-trimester abortions prior to this law being enacted?

Maybe: history + common sense > cite.

[Ravenman]

@HurricaneDitka

It’s a particular law, already enacted in the state of Georgia.

Over in this thread, you advised liberals: “So do it the right way: get a Constitutional amendment ratified. This gimmicky state law business where you threaten to keep him off the ballot is the wrong way to go about this.”

Do you believe Georgia should have passed a gimmicky state law instead of doing it the right way and changing the Constitution?

My guess is no. Only liberals have to change the Constitution, eh?

[HurricaneDitka]

@Bryan_Ekers

It doesn’t have to be all women. If there’s a 1% rate of false accusation, then 1% of women who have a miscarriage become subject to arrest, imprisonment, etc. Sure, it won’t generally happen. Probably. Who knows, really, since a law written without rational purpose is not likely to be applied rationally.

Same question for you: do you know how Georgia law handled second- or third-trimester abortions prior to this law being enacted?

[MEBuckner]

@Rick_Kitchen

The law also makes it illegal to travel to another jurisdiction to have an abortion, and anyone who facilitates the transfer of the mother to another jurisdiction to have an abortion can also be charged.

The only mention I can find of this is what looks to me like some rather speculative reasoning in this Slate article by Mark Joseph Stern:

Even women who seek lawful abortions out of state may not escape punishment. If a Georgia resident plans to travel elsewhere to obtain an abortion, she may be charged with conspiracy to commit murder, punishable by 10 years’ imprisonment. An individual who helps a woman plan her trip to get an out-of-state abortion, or transports her to the clinic, may also be charged with conspiracy. These individuals, after all, are “conspiring” to end of the life of a “person” with “full legal recognition” under Georgia law.

IANAL, but I’m really wondering if this holds water. Suppose Alice from Georgia travels to Texas and shoots Bob in the face; stipulate she traveled to Texas with the express purpose of doing that. But Texas’ reaction is basically Ah, he needed killin’. Can Georgia prosecute Alice here? Is there any precedent for such a prosecution? And if Alice got her friend Chris to give her a ride to Texas, is there any precedent for Georgia trying to prosecute Alice and Chris for conspiracy to murder Bob, where the alleged murder took place entirely in Texas (and which Texas, for whatever reason, has no interest in prosecuting)?

I’m not just JAQing off here; this all sounds very improbable to me–as I said, I am not a lawyer, but my understanding is that “jurisdiction” is a pretty fundamental concept in law. (I know the U.S. has some federal laws criminalizing conduct outside the United States, either because the victims of the crime are U.S. persons or because the perpetrators of the crime are U.S. persons; but the U.S. is a sovereign state; Georgia isn’t.)

Even if Roe were totally overturned, I think SCOTUS could very well quash such a (hypothetical) law as this on federalism and jurisdiction grounds.

I wonder if any actual lawyers have said anything about that claim in the Slate article.

[HurricaneDitka]

@asahi

Maybe: history + common sense > cite.

So let’s look at history. Georgia passed a 22-week abortion ban in 2012. Since then, how many women who have had miscarriages after 22 weeks have been jailed for it?

[Rick_Kitchen]

Do expectant mothers get to claim their fetuses as dependents on their taxes?

[Sinaptics]

@MEBuckner

The only mention I can find of this is what looks to me like some rather speculative reasoning in this Slate article by Mark Joseph Stern:

IANAL, but I’m really wondering if this holds water. Suppose Alice from Georgia travels to Texas and shoots Bob in the face; stipulate she traveled to Texas with the express purpose of doing that. But Texas’ reaction is basically Ah, he needed killin’. Can Georgia prosecute Alice here? Is there any precedent for such a prosecution? And if Alice got her friend Chris to give her a ride to Texas, is there any precedent for Georgia trying to prosecute Alice and Chris for conspiracy to murder Bob, where the alleged murder took place entirely in Texas (and which Texas, for whatever reason, has no interest in prosecuting)?

I’m not just JAQing off here; this all sounds very improbable to me–as I said, I am not a lawyer, but my understanding is that “jurisdiction” is a pretty fundamental concept in law. (I know the U.S. has some federal laws criminalizing conduct outside the United States, either because the victims of the crime are U.S. persons or because the perpetrators of the crime are U.S. persons; but the U.S. is a sovereign state; Georgia isn’t.)

Even if Roe were totally overturned, I think SCOTUS could very well quash such a (hypothetical) law as this on federalism and jurisdiction grounds.

I wonder if any actual lawyers have said anything about that claim in the Slate article.

I suppose they could still get Alice on conspiracy charges if they could prove it.

[HurricaneDitka]

@Ravenman

Over in this thread, you advised liberals: “So do it the right way: get a Constitutional amendment ratified. This gimmicky state law business where you threaten to keep him off the ballot is the wrong way to go about this.”

Do you believe Georgia should have passed a gimmicky state law instead of doing it the right way and changing the Constitution?

My guess is no. Only liberals have to change the Constitution, eh?

The Constitution does have a section detailing requirements to run for President. It does not have a section detailing requirements for abortions. Do you see the difference now?

[Ravenman]

@HurricaneDitka

So let’s look at history. Georgia passed a 22-week abortion ban in 2012. Since then, how many women who have had miscarriages after 22 weeks have been jailed for it?

Since you’re so busy asking chickenshit questions, can you answer some of my chickenshit questions?

1. Do you support the law?
2. Do you believe this law is constitutional?
3. If one is yes and the other is no; do you have a rough estimate of how many times you’ve criticized your political opponents for supporting laws that aren’t constitutional?
4. Do you think women should be subject to long prison sentences, or perhaps even the death penalty, for having an abortion that would otherwise be legal under Roe v. Wade?

[Ravenman]

@HurricaneDitka

The Constitution does have a section detailing requirements to run for President. It does not have a section detailing requirements for abortions. Do you see the difference now?

So your suggestion is… that liberals should get a constitutional amendment passed to protect Roe v. Wade?

I refer you to my earlier comment that it always seems like your opponents need to amend the Constitution, but your side does not.

[Bijou_Drains]

this could be another situation like HB2 that we had in NC where businesses and others decided to boycott a state over a law. GA is very big in movie production now and those folks are pretty far to the left.

[Rick_Kitchen]

So it turns out the article I was quoting about ectopic pregnancies comes from the author of the anti-abortion bill being considered in Ohio.

Ohio Legislature Considering Abortion Ban More Restrictive Than "Heartbeat Bill"

[HurricaneDitka]

@Ravenman

Since you’re so busy asking chickenshit questions, can you answer some of my chickenshit questions?

1. Do you support the law?
2. Do you believe this law is constitutional?
3. If one is yes and the other is no; do you have a rough estimate of how many times you’ve criticized your political opponents for supporting laws that aren’t constitutional?
4. Do you think women should be subject to long prison sentences, or perhaps even the death penalty, for having an abortion that would otherwise be legal under Roe v. Wade?

They’re not “chickenshit questions”. I’m trying to find out if there’s any real evidence to support asahi’s claim about women “almost certainly” being jailed for miscarriages. So far all I’ve seen is hand-waving like “history + common sense > cite”, but I’m happy to answer your questions anyways:

1. I have only a cursory understanding of this law (which is a good bit more than many of the Dopers posting in this thread have demonstrated), but I haven’t yet found anything in it I object to.

2. I don’t think there’s anything in the Constitution that precludes it. I understand that it is likely to run afoul of current Supreme Court precedent, but one of the goals is presumably to challenge that very precedent. I guess we’ll have to wait and see what SCOTUS says. I certainly hope they’ll find it Constitutional.

3. N/A

4. I haven’t given it much consideration, but probably not. More importantly, for this thread, I don’t believe this law does that, Slate’s nonsense notwithstanding.

[asahi]

@HurricaneDitka

So let’s look at history. Georgia passed a 22-week abortion ban in 2012. Since then, how many women who have had miscarriages after 22 weeks have been jailed for it?

Understand something, boy.

I don’t care whether I convince or persuade you. I don’t write for you.

[HurricaneDitka]

@asahi

Understand something, boy.

I don’t care whether I convince or persuade you. I don’t write for you.

Whether you want to convince me or not is irrelevant. You shouldn’t write things that are false, which you have in this thread.

[asahi]

@HurricaneDitka

Whether you want to convince me or not is irrelevant. You shouldn’t write things that are false, which you have in this thread.

Nope.