Congress could in theory pass such a Federal law, but it doesn’t follow that an individual state could.
First, that means a woman could face federal charges for obtaining an abortion out of state if the feds pass that law, which is pretty bad all by itself.
Second, states can pass any laws they want. The question is, will it stand up to a constitutional challenge at the Supreme Court. With a 6-3 anti-abortion majority, how do you think the state would fare?
I actually think the Republicans will find a way to keep that from happening. For a variety of reasons, but mostly because I don’t think they want to give it up as a campaign issue. I don’t think they want to replace Roe v Wade with a Federal law that makes abortion illegal in every state. I think they want to have that fight in each of the 50 states . I don’t think the Supreme Court will find a law constitutional if it allows State A to criminalize conduct that legally takes place in State B. First, because whatever reasoning they give will apply to other situations - maybe NY will make it criminal for its residents to leave the state to work in fracking.
Second, how does State A write the law so that it’s illegal for a State A resident to travel to New Murdershire for an abortion but doesn’t also cover a State C resident who travels through State A to get to New Murdershire ? There might be a way to justify a state controlling its residents’ behavior in another state but I don’t see the basis for allowing New Jersey to prosecute a Pennsylvania resident who passed through NJ on the way to NY for an abortion.
Then there’s the issue of “who is a resident” ? The sections of the US Code that apply outside the US generally apply to US citizens or permanent residents. It’s very easy to tell if someone is a citizen or permanent resident. You become a citizen at a particular point ( either at birth or when you are naturalized) and you lose your citizen at a certain point( when you renounce it or when it is revoked). Not the same for a resident. When I move from one state to another, when does my residency change ? The answer generally depends on the purpose - I might have to have lived in a state for a whole year to get resident tuition at the public college or spent 186 days in the state to file a resident tax return or have to switch my car registration and driver’s license as soon as I start working in the New State. Will NJ have to wait until I live there six months before they can prohibit me from traveling to NY for an abortion, or will I become a NJ resident the moment I cross the border? If the latter, how do you distinguish a new resident from someone on a month-long vacation or even a weekend? I mean, I could be from NY and call the clinic to make my appointment from NJ, where I’m spending the weekend.
I don’t think there will either be 1) A federal law banning abortion or
2) A state law criminalizing out of state activity found constitutional. I don’t even think one will be passed. There’s a whole lot to worry about with a 6-3 pro-life Supreme Court but it’s not just abortion/reproductive issues I think the Republicans have been successful in causing everyone ( on both sides ) to pay attention to this one issue and to some extent , I suspect it’s being used as a distraction.
I hope you’re right! These are all hypotheticals, so who knows what could happen. As someone noted in another thread, it wasn’t until 1965 that birth control was legalized nationwide, and that was only for married couples. So, it’s not like the US can’t go back to that long ago time that many people on this board remember clearly.
Through a ruling that the Barrett doesn’t seem to support.
Overturning Roe is but the first step.
Right, the goal is to turn the US into a theocracy as thoroughly as Iran or Saudi Arabia.
Those who rail most strongly against Sharia law are the first in line to impose their religious beliefs on our country.
I say it all the time, right-wingers project like a movie theatre. hHatever they say their enemies are doing, they’re doing with more gusto.
I think it’s important to understand that yes, there really are people that feel this way. There are people that have been taught from their first breath that the liberals in our country are engaging in a genocide of unspeakable scope. This is the first thing that comes into their heads when they wake up in the morning and the last thing they think of before their heads hit the pillow. And they DO protest in the streets and try to kill abortion doctors when they think they can get away with it, but mostly they just vent by hanging out in front of clinics all day.
We don’t have daily suicide bombings because they lack conviction. Most of the people that agree that abortion is genocide belong to evangelical churches with a highly authoritarian power structure and their members have been indoctrinated from childhood, with techniques that make North Korea look liberal. Their leaders are a lot more calculating than the membership and they mitigate the violent impulses of their members - these people don’t do anything unless their church green lights it.
But they literally think abortion is genocide. They literally think Obamacare is slavery. This people were not raised with the modicum of critical thinking skills we take for granted. They believe everything they are told. Their education sucks. Here is a tidbit from a 4th grade fundamentalist Baptist textbook.
Which I just quoted as an example of what we are up against. Don’t underestimate the sincerity of these people’s beliefs.
I’m not going to say that there are no people who feel that way - but I’ve never seen a poll that reports more than 20% or so of Americans believing abortion should be illegal under all circumstances. So no more than about 20% can believe that abortion is child murder - probably less, because it is possible to believe all abortions should be illegal without believing that they are no different than murdering a 2 year old. The rest of the people who describe themselves as “pro-life” believe it should be legal under at least some circumstances - which suggests they don’t see it as “murder”. After all, I can’t kill an innocent person to save my own life.
Of course they do. Because if the RW’s didn’t do it with more gusto they’d surely lose the country to the Evil Communists. Or so they tell each other as they commit crime after crime.
I get that, I just think if your moral response to genocide and slavery is just… to grumble about it? To donate 50 bucks to a Republican? To have the occasional two-minutes hate in church?
If that’s the case, we can safely ignore accusations of “genocide” or “slavery” because those words obviously only have a trivial meaning for them.
They use those words because those words get a rise out of people, not because they actually believe those concepts apply. When you’re virtue signalling, you need to use the strongest words to show you have the biggest virtue.
I expect that, once they are done wit Roe v. Wade they will be going after Miranda v. Arizona. Up next, Brown v. Board of Education.
I may have missed something…
Who is it who thinks abortion is genocide?
I have seen mass murder but genocide?
You can start here,
Ah…yes.
So much bullshit.
For it to be genocide you would have to assume a woman is only capable of having a few children and each abortion takes one away.
Which is ridiculous.
A woman having an abortion today does not take away from children she may have in the future. Indeed…having a child too young may make her avoid having more children because she was put in a difficult place with the first one and could not climb out of the hole to be able to have a second (or more) children.
There is no genocide here. At all. A woman having an abortion today does not mean that she will not have a family later. This is an insignificant loss to the population (if any). Certainly not genocide (this assumes a woman’s right to choose and not others doing it to her).
https://www.conservapedia.com/Abortion_genocide
Want a couple dozen more?
Did you see the post just above yours?
When I lived in Missouri there were lots of anti-abortion protests, billboards, etc. I noticed that without fail the images of babies or of women were always white. And the protests always took place in the whiter areas. My normal driving took me to & through predominantly black parts of town too, so it wasn’t entirely sampling bias on my part. Some probably, but not entirely.
I took it as a sign that the local anti-abortion folks really wanted to stop white women from having abortions. If other colors had abortions that was fine with them.