I think it would be an unwise law, but I have not been shown anything that would prohibit the MT legislature from passing such a law. Laws are presumed constitutional until shown otherwise. The burden is not on me.
And that’s how it works. TX passes this law (or MT in your example). Someone with standing must come to court to show why it is invalid. It is not up to TX or MT to show why it is valid. It is presumptively valid.
Would you happen to have a cite for a law of this type from any state in this country?
I did with the murder law and the travelling outside of the country to have sex with underaged kids. A state can indisputably punish what it deems punishable within its own state. And intent to commit an act undesirable by the state is capable of punishment.
Would you not agree that WV could still punish the hypothetical murder intent even if PA decided that some people just need a good killing? Is WV’s power restricted by what other states decide?
No, you referred to it. You did not cite it. And this is a federal law in any case, is it not?
No, you did not. I (and others, I believe) are asking about laws passed from one state that concerns events that happen in another state, not events that happen in another country.
Got cite?
§61-2-6. Homicide punishable within state if injury occurs within and death without, or vice versa.
If any person be stricken, wounded or poisoned in, and die by reason thereof out of, this state, the offender shall be as guilty, and be prosecuted and punished, as if the death had occurred in the county in which the stroke, wound or poison was given or administered. And if any person be stricken, wounded or poisoned out of this state, and die by reason thereof within this state, the offender shall be as guilty, and may be prosecuted and punished, as if the mortal stroke or wound had been given, or poison administered, in the county in which the person so stricken, wounded or poisoned may so die.
So how does WV get to punish murder when the victim did not die in this state? The death is the sine qua non of murder.
And murder is illegal in every state. If there was a state where murder was legal and someone travelled to that state and committed murder…but, well, there just isn’t.
Of which code? Federal, state or…? And if state, which state?
Again, please cite any instance where this was ever done by a state. In WV or anywhere else.
So you are saying that if PA legalized murder that this statute would be unconstitutional? I ask for a cite.
WV code, sorry.
I’ll have to find it. Someone kidnaps a girl in Wheeling and takes her to Ohio and rapes her. The rape is punishable under WV law.
A cite for something that’s never happened? It’s an interesting approach, for sure.
If you can’t provide a cite for your claim of legality for a real situation, asking me for a cite for a totally fictitious situation that hasn’t even been brought up before in serious conversation seems rather…silly.
Sure, but they’re being prosecuted for the rape, not the intent to commit rape. No?
What we’re talking about in this thread is the ability of the State of Texas to civilly prosecute cases against people such as family members or cab drivers who help a woman cross state lines to obtain an abortion. How could it ever be proved that these people knew they were aiding or abetting the “crime” – which isn’t even a crime in another state? Texas says intent is immaterial. I don’t see how.
I disagree. You agree that this WV statute is perfectly fine, but only because PA also makes murder illegal. What if PA has different elements for murder? What if it has different laws about who can be killed in self defense?
The constitutionality of the WV law cannot depend on what PA does.
It also happens to be illegal in Ohio, so it has no bearing on your argument.
I realize I must be apples-to-orange-ing here, but is that the same logic with Texas punishing Texans for having abortions in California? That “we still have authority over you even though you’re not on our soil?” I have always found this sort of “you’re not here, but still are within our jurisdiction” logic to be a bit creepy (could the U.S. give me a ticket for speeding or running red lights in Vietnam?)
Thank you for this, @nelliebly. I am heartened to learn this information.
Because in the law you cite, something is happening within the state. It says it right in the title- homicide is punishable by WV if the injury occurs in WV and the death occurs outside WV or if the injury occurs outside the state and the death occurs within. IOW , if I shot someone in WV and they are taken to a hospital in VA and die there or vice-versa or less plausibly, if I shot someone just on the WV side of the border and they fell over the border and actually died in VA.
It says nothing about homicide being punishable by WV if the injury occurred outside the state , the death occurred outside the state and the only thing that happened in WV was that someone formed the intent in their own mind while in WV and then traveled to VA where they shot the victim and the victim died. And certainly nothing about an action that is legal in VA being punished by WV