Yeah, I don’t see the point that Overreacting Guy in that comic is apparently trying to make. Over-Credulous Guy is correct that it’s possible to infer something meaningful about current social conditions from the kinds of false claims that are widely believed to be true, as well as from the claims that actually are true.
Just to move back into the biased, activist, judges realm, Judge Kacsmaryk, a Trump appointee, (to absolutely no-one’s surprise) has decided to do away with judicial restraint, judicial deference, standing (I can almost hear the far off wails of our dearly departed Bricker), and decades of precedent interpreting the Comstock Act, to ban FOR THE ENTIRE COUNTRY, the FDA’s medical approval of mifepristone.
Already a thread on it:
Bumped.
Just in case:
Bumped again.
Some good news from SCOTUS:
The right to travel (the real on, not the SovCit version) is enshrined in Article IV, Section 2 and the 14th Amendment, Section 1 as a privilege and immunity guarantied to a citizen of the United States. The question you are posing is: If X is illegal in my state but legal in State Y, can my state punish me for traveling to Y to do X. I think that is an interesting question. The Feds make it illegal to participate in activities in countries where those activities are legal there but illegal in the United States. Can states apply the same legal principles or does that violate the right to travel? It does not. Under the landmark case Saenz v. Roe SCOTUS defined the right to travel as
The right to travel embraces three different components: the right to enter and leave another State; the right to be treated as a welcome visitor while temporarily present in another State; and, for those travelers who elect to become permanent residents, the right to be treated like other citizens of that State.
So how do laws like Texas’s not violate “the right to enter and leave another State”?
Which laws?
I haven’t heard about Texas attempting to prohibit leaving the state for an abortion. There are some localities that are trying to prohibit traveling on their roads for the purpose of obtaining an abortion , but that has nothing to do with leaving the state. There is a Texas law prohibiting mailing abortion pills into Texas - but that has nothing to do with either travel or the person receiving the pills. Texas is currently trying to get a judgement enforced against a doctor in NY. The doctor mailed pills from NY to someone in Texas, the Texas AG won a default judgment in a Texas court and the NY court is prohibited from enforcing it under NY law.
Not the result I expected, to be honest.
It is not illegal to leave Texas to have an abortion but Texas has been dancing close to something like that:
Signaling a new tactic by anti-abortion groups, a Texas man has taken legal action against his ex-girlfriend over her alleged out-of-state abortion. Texas has a strict abortion ban.