# Texas Abortion Case **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 8, 2015, 2:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/texas-abortion-case/709281 "2015-01-08T02:17:17Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2021, 12:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/texas-abortion-case/709281/81 "2021-09-01T00:32:14Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#): > > I don’t know how you got here, but I got here because a woman chose to give birth. Some women do that, y’know? Right. I did as well. But if she didn’t make that choice then my life was dependent on the lone choice of one person, and not the other parent. That doesn’t seem like a good system to choose who lives and dies, especially when you or I didn’t do anything wrong to deserve not to be born. > [@MandaJo](#): > > (Virtually) Everyone is the result of a sex act, but we don’t expect women to submit to that for the good of the species. Complete non-sequitur. Nobody is saying you must submit to a sex act. There is no life created or lost if you choose not to submit to that act. But if you do, and you create a life, then that person has just as much right to live as you or I. That is the main argument. Who are you (or I) or this person over here to be appointed executioner of the unborn child? ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2021, 12:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/texas-abortion-case/709281/82 "2021-09-01T00:34:46Z")
Setting aside the politics of it for a moment - how likely is the Supreme Court to actually **side** with the Texas law on this? 50-50? Better than half odds? A lot lower? ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2021, 12:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/texas-abortion-case/709281/83 "2021-09-01T00:37:09Z")
It looks like the MS case will be a test of Roe/Casey. There is no way they can uphold that law and say that Roe/Casey are still good law. So, if it is upheld, TX won’t have to go through with this sham and can just outlaw abortions, or if we are playing Socratic law school games, then they can have a tort like that because there would be no constitutional right at stake. Anyone would be guessing, but I think after June Medical, Roberts and Kavanaugh are done with the legal fiction of keeping abortion legal for the sake of keeping abortion legal. 75-25 for overruling Roe/Casey IMHO. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2021, 12:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/texas-abortion-case/709281/84 "2021-09-01T00:39:14Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > Right. I did as well. But if she didn’t make that choice then my life was dependent on the lone choice of one person, and not the other parent. That doesn’t seem like a good system to choose who lives and dies, especially when you or I didn’t do anything wrong to deserve not to be born. I don’t follow. Isn’t it the case that you still did nothing wrong even if the other parent also gets a choice? ---
**Author:** ![MandaJo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ac91a4/32.png) [@MandaJo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MandaJo)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2021, 12:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/texas-abortion-case/709281/85 "2021-09-01T00:40:11Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > . Who are you (or I) or this person over here to be appointed executioner of the unborn child? The person whose body is being used as a living incubator, and the person whose body will have to be cut open to get him or her out. I mean, we refuse to violate dead bodies to get organs to save lives, unless the now-dead person consented. Dead bodies have more rights to not be cut open than women do ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2021, 12:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/texas-abortion-case/709281/86 "2021-09-01T00:40:55Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > The pro-choice side […] don’t view the entity inside the woman as a human life, and would disagree with my use of the word “entity.” Wrong, AFAICT. For example, I personally have no problem with describing a previable embryo or fetus as an “entity” or as a “human life”. What I object to is the (purely arbitary and ultimately faith-based) “pro-life” claim that the embryo/fetus counts as a fully developed human person from the very instant of conception and thus its right to life as a human person overrides the pregnant woman’s right to bodily autonomy. Personhood IMHO is a status that develops over time during the gestation period, rather than being instantly and fully present at the moment of fertilization. > [@UltraVires](#): > > And I appreciate that, but what you are talking about is the very thing that every woman had to do for all of us to be here. Not “had” to do, chose to do (or so we hope). Just because female pregnancy is a necessary precursor to every human birth doesn’t mean that anyone is automatically entitled to force a woman to continue a pregnancy she doesn’t want to continue. Fertilization of an ovum by a sperm is a necessary precursor to every human birth too, but that wouldn’t automatically make it okay to compel fertilization by force. If bodily autonomy may be disregarded whenever “the idea of life itself” depends on it, then arguably it should be okay for a fertile woman to rape a man to make inseminate her, even though it would be illegal for another man to rape him. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2021, 12:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/texas-abortion-case/709281/87 "2021-09-01T00:43:16Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > What I object to is the (purely arbitary and ultimately faith-based) “pro-life” claim that the embryo/fetus counts as a fully developed human person from the very instant of conception and thus its right to life as a human person overrides the pregnant woman’s right to bodily autonomy. And I think that’s why these debates never have a solution. It’s a value judgment and yours is just as good as mine. What else can we say to each other that might make us think that we made the wrong one? ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2021, 12:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/texas-abortion-case/709281/88 "2021-09-01T00:47:47Z")
Guys, if I may junior-mod a bit, let’s not rehash the same abortion debate we’ve had 1000x before already. It won’t dig any fresh ground, and neither side is going to be persuaded. Let’s focus on specifics of **Texas** abortion laws - since this is a Texas thread - and if possible, specifically the new one that just came out. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2021, 12:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/texas-abortion-case/709281/89 "2021-09-01T00:49:30Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > But if she didn’t make that choice then my life was dependent on the lone choice of one person, and not the other parent. Yeah, the one person whose body was having to do the work and run the risks of supporting your pre-personhood embryonic/fetal life. Sounds entirely reasonable to me. > [@UltraVires](#): > > That doesn’t seem like a good system to choose who lives and dies, especially when you or I didn’t do anything wrong to deserve not to be born. What’s all this sentimental tosh about “deserving” to be born or not to be born? Untold billions of potential human persons every day lose their opportunity to be born, through miscarriage, abortion or simple non-fertilization, and it’s got jack-shit to do with whether or not they “deserved” such an opportunity. The idea that the continuation or termination of pregnancy should depend on what the embryo/fetus “deserves” is based on that same arbitrary and ultimately faith-based assumption that the embryo/fetus possesses full human personhood and rights, no matter what its stage of development. That’s not a scientific view, that’s a spiritual one. I don’t object to anybody else choosing to hold such a view as their personal belief, but they mustn’t talk as though they’re entitled to assume that everybody else holds the same belief they do. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2021, 12:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/texas-abortion-case/709281/90 "2021-09-01T00:52:17Z")
Fair enough. So what would you like to discuss about it? I agree it is a sham. It is unconstitutional under Roe/Casey and the lawyers who came up with this “bright idea” are too smart by only half. The law will fall if Roe/Casey survives. If they don’t, then law will be quickly converted into an abortion ban. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2021, 12:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/texas-abortion-case/709281/91 "2021-09-01T00:56:33Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > It’s a value judgment and yours is just as good as mine. What else can we say to each other that might make us think that we made the wrong one? Nothing, probably, and that’s okay. I don’t object to your holding a different view from mine, I was just objecting to your mischaracterization of my view. > [@Velocity](#): > > Guys, if I may junior-mod a bit, let’s not rehash the same abortion debate we’ve had 1000x before already. Fair enough (ETA: or, what UltraVires said), given that you are sort of the junior-OP of this thread, as its recent re-opener. I hereby cease and desist from disputing about the morality of abortion rights in this thread. I’ll note, though, that your junior-OP of post #67 didn’t provide much in the way of guidance for your desired limits of debate. So it might help if you would explicitly state such limits in more detail than just “let’s focus on specifics of Texas abortion laws”. ---
**Author:** ![carrps](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carrps/32/2957_2.png) [@carrps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carrps)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2021, 12:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/texas-abortion-case/709281/92 "2021-09-01T00:56:35Z")
> [@MandaJo](#): > > ETA: the “talking past” I always see in these threads is that men think abortion is a debate about having or not having a child. Women understand it as a debate about being pregnant. Men so often hand wave off the pregnancy itself as irrelevant. Holey moley, is this ever the truth. ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2021, 1:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/texas-abortion-case/709281/93 "2021-09-01T01:16:21Z")
So, I have a barrage of layman questions: - Is this Texas law trying to _dodge_ Roe, or _confront_ Roe? - Is it accurate to say that the law means “abortion will remain legal, but you’ll be punished if you get or perform one?” - If so, then could a government also use that precedent to punish all kinds of legal activities (i.e., you can legally have a Black Lives Matter bumper sticker on your car, but will have to pay a fine for doing so?) - Does anyone else’s gut tell them that the Supreme Court would vote to uphold Roe 6-3, with only Alito, Thomas and Barrett trying to overturn? - If the Supreme Court simply declined to hear the Texas abortion case, then the new law would stand, right? ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2021, 1:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/texas-abortion-case/709281/94 "2021-09-01T01:29:02Z")
My $0.02: > - Is this Texas law trying to _dodge_ Roe, or _confront_ Roe? I’d say dodge. It is the strategy of death by a thousand cuts. If they cannot outlaw abortion directly they can simply make it a practical impossibility with many laws that lay a burden on getting one. > - Is it accurate to say that the law means “abortion will remain legal, but you’ll be punished if you get or perform one?” The Texas law makes it much more expensive for an abortion provider to operate. That effectively puts them out of business. If some abortion clinic operated in violation of these laws the state would close them down. > - If so, then could a government also use that precedent to punish all kinds of legal activities (i.e., you can legally have a Black Lives Matter bumper sticker on your car, but will have to pay a fine for doing so?) I’ve often said that this shows the way to gun control. You can’t outlaw it so just start tossing dozens of “reasonable” laws on gun owners and gun stores and gun manufacturers that individually pass muster but collectively shut it down. For example, akin to the Texas law, mandate that all gun stores must meet some minimum vault requirement to store their guns in. Make every gun store install a bank vault or close. > - Does anyone else’s gut tell them that the Supreme Court would vote to uphold Roe 6-3, with only Alito, Thomas and Barrett trying to overturn? I can buy this. Abortion is a wedge issue and one the conservatives whip to no end for money and votes. The last thing they want to do is make it outright illegal which would only empower liberals. We saw this with Trump. Republicans had complete control of the government. Democrats could not stop them from doing anything. How many abortion restrictions did they pass? (IIRC: Zero…they did not even try) > - If the Supreme Court simply declined to hear the Texas abortion case, then the new law would stand, right? Yes ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2021, 1:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/texas-abortion-case/709281/95 "2021-09-01T01:49:57Z")
> [@Velocity](#): > > So, I have a barrage of layman questions: > > - Is this Texas law trying to _dodge_ Roe, or _confront_ Roe? It is a too clever by half method of dodging Roe and allowing abortion to be effectively illegal as we move into your second question. > [@Velocity](#): > > Is it accurate to say that the law means “abortion will remain legal, but you’ll be punished if you get or perform one?” Yes, if the law stands, abortion will be effectively illegal because nobody will perform abortions if they have to pay out the lawsuit money that the law provides for. The religious groups will get test/mock plaintiffs to sue every one of them until they go out of business. > [@Velocity](#): > > If so, then could a government also use that precedent to punish all kinds of legal activities (i.e., you can legally have a Black Lives Matter bumper sticker on your car, but will have to pay a fine for doing so?) This is why this law can’t stand as written. As a state, you cannot allow people to sue someone else for performing a constitutionally protected act for the very reasons you describe. None of our rights would be safe. As the prior poster mentioned, you can sue people for owning guns, or for “dangerous” speech or do almost anything to backdoor outlaw a right that you can’t through the front door. Courts just don’t permit that. > [@Velocity](#): > > Does anyone else’s gut tell them that the Supreme Court would vote to uphold Roe 6-3, with only Alito, Thomas and Barrett trying to overturn? As you said, it is just anyone’s gut. I said what I believed before that Roberts and Kavanaugh see how absurd the state of the law is, how exceptions are made solely for abortion cases, how rules are promulgated only for abortion cases, how standing requirements are created only for abortion cases, and they see what a disaster this precedent is. > [@Velocity](#): > > If the Supreme Court simply declined to hear the Texas abortion case, then the new law would stand, right? It depends on what the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals rules. If they allow the law to stand, and SCOTUS doesn’t hear it, it stands. If they strike it down, and SCOTUS doesn’t hear it, it stays struck down. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2021, 2:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/texas-abortion-case/709281/96 "2021-09-01T02:43:47Z")
And if I must turn in my conservative card I will, but I have equal opportunity criticism. I think Heller is bad law. But that is a hijack, so we will talk about that in Gun Wars XXIV ---
**Author:** ![Leaper](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/4bbf92/32.png) [@Leaper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leaper)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2021, 7:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/texas-abortion-case/709281/97 "2021-09-01T07:09:47Z")
And it’s been declined: [Supreme Court allows Texas’ 6-week abortion ban to take effect - POLITICO](https://www.politico.com/news/2021/09/01/supreme-court-texas-abortion-ban-508275) ---
**Author:** ![Lord\_Feldon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lord_feldon/32/341_2.png) [@Lord\_Feldon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lord_Feldon)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2021, 7:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/texas-abortion-case/709281/98 "2021-09-01T07:39:56Z")
It hasn’t been declined _yet_. The law was allowed to go into effect, but that’s of little consequence outside of business hours, and I expect there to be _something_ in writing when there’s an actual decision. (There would have to be at least a brief order if the petition was granted, and if it’s declined I am 100% certain that there will be a written dissent.) ---
**Author:** ![not\_what\_you\_d\_expect](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/not_what_you_d_expect/32/3246_2.png) [@not\_what\_you\_d\_expect](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/not_what_you_d_expect)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2021, 12:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/texas-abortion-case/709281/99 "2021-09-01T12:07:39Z")
I’m seeing a lot of articles this morning about the 5th court and some are calling the Supreme Court a “Shadow Court”, which is acting in the dead of night and releasing decisions with no commentary and other irregularities. ---
**Author:** ![Martin\_Hyde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Martin\_Hyde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martin_Hyde)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2021, 12:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/texas-abortion-case/709281/100 "2021-09-01T12:49:09Z")
Due to the decline of the blue slipping practice and eroding standards in the Senate confirming nominees from the same-party President under Trump, the 5th Circuit has moved into the territory of being “far right”, with a number of individual judges who would be classified as extremists and unlikely to have been confirmed in previous eras when the judicial process was not so hyperpartisan. The 5th Circuit has always been one of the most conservative circuits, under Trump it became extremist. The “Shadow Docket” is a mechanism where the SCOTUS can issue quick rulings which typically have no precedential value, but clear up some sort of procedural process. A lot of times they relate to granting or not granting stays, a procedural process that doesn’t establish precedent–these rulings contain little or no explanation/justification and thus don’t contribute to judicial precedent. If the court had full published opinions on every decision in procedural matters like this, it would have no time to operate otherwise, so there has always been a “Shadow Docket.” Some think pieces are suggesting that the Roberts court of late has been ruling on more and more cases in a Shadow Docket in a way that undermines the court’s standing. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/texas-abortion-case/709281.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/texas-abortion-case/709281.md?page=6)