Can states actually outlaw traveling out of state for an abortion?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Texas doesn’t “own” people who are in Texas. They aren’t citizens of Texas. They are citizens of the US or some other nation. Texas can require residents to pay state and local taxes, get a Texas drivers license, etc. but those things don’t give Texas control over those people. I can have a Texas ID, pay taxes, vote, etc. in Texas and none of that gives Texas any authority to prevent me from leaving the state. They have no legal basis to even ask why anyone is leaving.

Yup, even if you did pee on a stick at the border, and you were pregnant, and the embryo was deemed a “person,” the state still has no authority to prevent either of these “persons” from interstate travel.

What if a friend of the woman testified that she believed the woman intended to kill the fetus, which is considered a person in Texas, and the Texan government thinks that person is unable to consent to the procedure and therefore should not be, effectively, kidnapped by crossing state lines to a state where the procedure is available legally?

That would be stupid. Traveling while pregnant isn’t kidnapping. Are they going to make a law that no embryo or fetus can be transported out of state? That no woman can leave the state while pregnant?

Ikr. What in the heck? What state would have such ridiculous unenforceable restrictions? It is not possible for the current anti abortion laws to even be enforced much less some additional anti travel nonsense.

Do you doubt they are going to try? There is established law on jurisdiction for this kind of thing. They can certainly try to get a TRO preventing someone from traveling for an abortion.

Women are not going to be forced to give birth. They have always ended unwanted pregnancies and always will to the best of their ability.... regardless if it is legal or not.

What? Of course they are going to be forced.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Texas doesn’t “own” people who are in Texas. They aren’t citizens of Texas. They are citizens of the US or some other nation. Texas can require residents to pay state and local taxes, get a Texas drivers license, etc. but those things don’t give Texas control over those people. I can have a Texas ID, pay taxes, vote, etc. in Texas and none of that gives Texas any authority to prevent me from leaving the state. They have no legal basis to even ask why anyone is leaving.

Yup, even if you did pee on a stick at the border, and you were pregnant, and the embryo was deemed a “person,” the state still has no authority to prevent either of these “persons” from interstate travel.

What if a friend of the woman testified that she believed the woman intended to kill the fetus, which is considered a person in Texas, and the Texan government thinks that person is unable to consent to the procedure and therefore should not be, effectively, kidnapped by crossing state lines to a state where the procedure is available legally?

That would be stupid. Traveling while pregnant isn’t kidnapping. Are they going to make a law that no embryo or fetus can be transported out of state? That no woman can leave the state while pregnant?

Ikr. What in the heck? What state would have such ridiculous unenforceable restrictions? It is not possible for the current anti abortion laws to even be enforced much less some additional anti travel nonsense.

Do you doubt they are going to try? There is established law on jurisdiction for this kind of thing. They can certainly try to get a TRO preventing someone from traveling for an abortion.

Women are not going to be forced to give birth. They have always ended unwanted pregnancies and always will to the best of their ability.... regardless if it is legal or not.

I'll bet you that more women will endure pregnancies they don't want than if abortion and traveling for abortion remained legal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Texas doesn’t “own” people who are in Texas. They aren’t citizens of Texas. They are citizens of the US or some other nation. Texas can require residents to pay state and local taxes, get a Texas drivers license, etc. but those things don’t give Texas control over those people. I can have a Texas ID, pay taxes, vote, etc. in Texas and none of that gives Texas any authority to prevent me from leaving the state. They have no legal basis to even ask why anyone is leaving.

You need to read up on Texas’ bounty law. Which is being copied by other states.

I’m not understanding why people are refusing to believe what is already happening. The objective is to turn back the clock.

I don’t think people disagree that various states haven’t passed horrifically restrictive laws. But just because some rights have been abridged does not mean there are grounds to abridge others. Or that people post-Dobbs should stop fighting for obvious rights/ against state authority (eg inter-state travel) that clearly still provide protections.

The problem is you're using logic and fair play to discuss a legal issue with a group who is more into guns, book burning, cherry picking bible quotes to justify racism and misogyny, yelling, and punishing. You know that expression about bringing a knife to a gun fight? This is more extreme. You're showing up to their biblical, wrath of god/smite the whores and anyone else who got too uppity kind of war with an etiquette book.

One of the people responsible for creating the language of these laws against women literally testified to congress that the case of the 10 year old child who was raped and denied an abortion in her state wasn't actually an abortion. That's a problem on so many levels. She lied to congress. She tried to redefine what she's legislating against off the books. She's gaslighting. She's a leader for their movement, doing the opposite of logic. She's educated, so she knows damn good and well what she's doing. It's not like she was someone new to the discussion who got tripped up on her words but if you let her explain she can tell you what she meant and then it all makes sense.

No, it's not allowed for states to restrict travel to another state for healthcare, shopping, vacationing, whatever. But how are you going to stop them when they decide that's what they're going to do? When the police set up a barricade at the state line, are you going to drive through it? Have a shootout? Sneak through the woods and have someone pick you up when you get across the border? No, states can't make laws about what happens in other states. But what are you going to do when they issue a warrant for you for performing a service or paying for your daughter's abortion when she comes home from college in a red state where she has an apartment and votes and legally resides? Ignore it, hope the blue state you're in doesn't extradite you? Pay for legal fees to fight it in courts? Keep your daughter in your state and have her drop out of school and lose her apartment and all her belongings? Let her go back and never visit her, because if you cross state lines, they'll arrest you when they run your driver's license info in a "routine" traffic stop and realize there's a warrant out for you for some sort of murder conspiracy or aiding and abetting someone receiving healthcare?

It doesn't matter if you're technically correct. What matters is what's happening in real life, and how they're actively trying to ruin people's lives. They're willing to let women die. They're happy to ruin people financially to prove their point. And there's little you can do to stop them.

I don’t think we disagree on the intent or even some of the possible attempted tactics of the far right - but we part ways on the above. I think it is dangerous to just paint the worst case scenario and insist we are helpless against it. There is no deus ex machina that is going to swoop in to save us. This is not the playing field I would have chosen (in a million years) but there are plenty of ways to resist and fight this both in the courts and other venue - and it starts by not just conceding to ridiculous arguments that states can bar interstate travel and enforce their laws across state borders without check.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Texas doesn’t “own” people who are in Texas. They aren’t citizens of Texas. They are citizens of the US or some other nation. Texas can require residents to pay state and local taxes, get a Texas drivers license, etc. but those things don’t give Texas control over those people. I can have a Texas ID, pay taxes, vote, etc. in Texas and none of that gives Texas any authority to prevent me from leaving the state. They have no legal basis to even ask why anyone is leaving.

Yup, even if you did pee on a stick at the border, and you were pregnant, and the embryo was deemed a “person,” the state still has no authority to prevent either of these “persons” from interstate travel.

What if a friend of the woman testified that she believed the woman intended to kill the fetus, which is considered a person in Texas, and the Texan government thinks that person is unable to consent to the procedure and therefore should not be, effectively, kidnapped by crossing state lines to a state where the procedure is available legally?

That would be stupid. Traveling while pregnant isn’t kidnapping. Are they going to make a law that no embryo or fetus can be transported out of state? That no woman can leave the state while pregnant?

Ikr. What in the heck? What state would have such ridiculous unenforceable restrictions? It is not possible for the current anti abortion laws to even be enforced much less some additional anti travel nonsense.

Do you doubt they are going to try? There is established law on jurisdiction for this kind of thing. They can certainly try to get a TRO preventing someone from traveling for an abortion.

Women are not going to be forced to give birth. They have always ended unwanted pregnancies and always will to the best of their ability.... regardless if it is legal or not.

Some women will successfully have illegal abortions. Some women will die when their illegal abortions go badly. Some women will be afraid of what will happen physically or legally if they have an illegal abortion, so they won't try, and therefore will be forced to continue with an unwanted pregnancy. Even if women successfully obtain abortions, it will bring them much stress and unnecessary financial costs for what should be reasonable, safe, accessible and affordable healthcare.

When they start punishing women who obtain illegal abortions, there will be women who miscarry and are innocent of these so called crimes who are financially and socially ruined because of false accusations they'll have to defend themselves against. There will be women who take plea deals to avoid harsher sentences, and then they'll have criminal records, which will affect their employment prospects and limit their financial success.

Not only will this kill women, this will impoverish many people. Poor women have poor babies. Poverty is cyclical. These laws are intentionally increasing the number of poor people in red states, where things like quality education and healthcare aren't easy to obtain when you're poor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Texas doesn’t “own” people who are in Texas. They aren’t citizens of Texas. They are citizens of the US or some other nation. Texas can require residents to pay state and local taxes, get a Texas drivers license, etc. but those things don’t give Texas control over those people. I can have a Texas ID, pay taxes, vote, etc. in Texas and none of that gives Texas any authority to prevent me from leaving the state. They have no legal basis to even ask why anyone is leaving.

Yup, even if you did pee on a stick at the border, and you were pregnant, and the embryo was deemed a “person,” the state still has no authority to prevent either of these “persons” from interstate travel.

What if a friend of the woman testified that she believed the woman intended to kill the fetus, which is considered a person in Texas, and the Texan government thinks that person is unable to consent to the procedure and therefore should not be, effectively, kidnapped by crossing state lines to a state where the procedure is available legally?

That would be stupid. Traveling while pregnant isn’t kidnapping. Are they going to make a law that no embryo or fetus can be transported out of state? That no woman can leave the state while pregnant?

Ikr. What in the heck? What state would have such ridiculous unenforceable restrictions? It is not possible for the current anti abortion laws to even be enforced much less some additional anti travel nonsense.

Do you doubt they are going to try? There is established law on jurisdiction for this kind of thing. They can certainly try to get a TRO preventing someone from traveling for an abortion.

Women are not going to be forced to give birth. They have always ended unwanted pregnancies and always will to the best of their ability.... regardless if it is legal or not.

I'll bet you that more women will endure pregnancies they don't want than if abortion and traveling for abortion remained legal.

I agree but any thought that just passing a law will stop abortions is nonsense. It makes them more dangerous and difficult but it does not stop them. No worm will just say. "oh well... those old men in robes said I have to keep this unwanted pregnancy so that's that". Total bull crap.

[Anonymous]

No woman*

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Texas doesn’t “own” people who are in Texas. They aren’t citizens of Texas. They are citizens of the US or some other nation. Texas can require residents to pay state and local taxes, get a Texas drivers license, etc. but those things don’t give Texas control over those people. I can have a Texas ID, pay taxes, vote, etc. in Texas and none of that gives Texas any authority to prevent me from leaving the state. They have no legal basis to even ask why anyone is leaving.

They have no legal basis to ask why a woman is leaving, but if she is taking a "person" with her (in her womb) with the intent to "murder" it (their words not mine), don't you think Texas has the authority to prevent her from doing that?

No, they don’t. They don’t even have authority to ask whether she is pregnant or why she is leaving the state. Also, the law does not define or treat abortion as murder., not in Texas or any other state.

Not yet, but what is to stop the law from changing?

If an embryo has personhood status, why isn't an abortion a homicide?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I don’t think we disagree on the intent or even some of the possible attempted tactics of the far right - but we part ways on the above. I think it is dangerous to just paint the worst case scenario and insist we are helpless against it. There is no deus ex machina that is going to swoop in to save us. This is not the playing field I would have chosen (in a million years) but there are plenty of ways to resist and fight this both in the courts and other venue - and it starts by not just conceding to ridiculous arguments that states can bar interstate travel and enforce their laws across state borders without check.

I'm the OP of this thread and I am not conceding that states will be able to bar interstate travel; I am trying to predict what they will try to do based on the argument that an embryo is a person and has constitutional rights to life and liberty or whatever the legal argument is.

I also believe that people who are pro choice should not be arguing about whether an unborn child is or is not alive, or a person. Nor that women have the right to decide their own health care.

Rather the argument should be that no human has to share their blood, nerves and other organs with another human against their consent. No matter how that situation started -- voluntary, rape. No matter the age of the person, no matter the health of the person. A perfectly healthy 25 year old who accidentally gets pregnant through consensual sex and doesn't want to share her organs with a fetus, doesn't have to share use of her organs with a fetus. There is no other relationship in human existence that is the same as that of a fetus sharing a mother's body. Only that mother gets to decide how much of her body, her blood, her digestive system, her organs, she wants to share

THAT's what we need to fight for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I don’t think we disagree on the intent or even some of the possible attempted tactics of the far right - but we part ways on the above. I think it is dangerous to just paint the worst case scenario and insist we are helpless against it. There is no deus ex machina that is going to swoop in to save us. This is not the playing field I would have chosen (in a million years) but there are plenty of ways to resist and fight this both in the courts and other venue - and it starts by not just conceding to ridiculous arguments that states can bar interstate travel and enforce their laws across state borders without check.

I'm the OP of this thread and I am not conceding that states will be able to bar interstate travel; I am trying to predict what they will try to do based on the argument that an embryo is a person and has constitutional rights to life and liberty or whatever the legal argument is.

I also believe that people who are pro choice should not be arguing about whether an unborn child is or is not alive, or a person. Nor that women have the right to decide their own health care.

Rather the argument should be that no human has to share their blood, nerves and other organs with another human against their consent. No matter how that situation started -- voluntary, rape. No matter the age of the person, no matter the health of the person. A perfectly healthy 25 year old who accidentally gets pregnant through consensual sex and doesn't want to share her organs with a fetus, doesn't have to share use of her organs with a fetus. There is no other relationship in human existence that is the same as that of a fetus sharing a mother's body. Only that mother gets to decide how much of her body, her blood, her digestive system, her organs, she wants to share

THAT's what we need to fight for.

Adding this:

Because EVEN IF states decide an embryo is a person with full rights, it doesn't matter. The mother still gets to decide if she wants to share her organs with another legal person.

[Anonymous]

We're going to have slave states and free states. And, despite their pretending to value "state's rights," the slave states will always want a federal Fugitive Slave Act and complain bitterly when the free states don't help them keep their slaves in line. This time around, the servitude might be limited to women's uteruses, but a lot of the other things will be the same.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Texas doesn’t “own” people who are in Texas. They aren’t citizens of Texas. They are citizens of the US or some other nation. Texas can require residents to pay state and local taxes, get a Texas drivers license, etc. but those things don’t give Texas control over those people. I can have a Texas ID, pay taxes, vote, etc. in Texas and none of that gives Texas any authority to prevent me from leaving the state. They have no legal basis to even ask why anyone is leaving.

You need to read up on Texas’ bounty law. Which is being copied by other states.

I’m not understanding why people are refusing to believe what is already happening. The objective is to turn back the clock.

I don’t think people disagree that various states haven’t passed horrifically restrictive laws. But just because some rights have been abridged does not mean there are grounds to abridge others. Or that people post-Dobbs should stop fighting for obvious rights/ against state authority (eg inter-state travel) that clearly still provide protections.

The problem is you're using logic and fair play to discuss a legal issue with a group who is more into guns, book burning, cherry picking bible quotes to justify racism and misogyny, yelling, and punishing. You know that expression about bringing a knife to a gun fight? This is more extreme. You're showing up to their biblical, wrath of god/smite the whores and anyone else who got too uppity kind of war with an etiquette book.

One of the people responsible for creating the language of these laws against women literally testified to congress that the case of the 10 year old child who was raped and denied an abortion in her state wasn't actually an abortion. That's a problem on so many levels. She lied to congress. She tried to redefine what she's legislating against off the books. She's gaslighting. She's a leader for their movement, doing the opposite of logic. She's educated, so she knows damn good and well what she's doing. It's not like she was someone new to the discussion who got tripped up on her words but if you let her explain she can tell you what she meant and then it all makes sense.

No, it's not allowed for states to restrict travel to another state for healthcare, shopping, vacationing, whatever. But how are you going to stop them when they decide that's what they're going to do? When the police set up a barricade at the state line, are you going to drive through it? Have a shootout? Sneak through the woods and have someone pick you up when you get across the border? No, states can't make laws about what happens in other states. But what are you going to do when they issue a warrant for you for performing a service or paying for your daughter's abortion when she comes home from college in a red state where she has an apartment and votes and legally resides? Ignore it, hope the blue state you're in doesn't extradite you? Pay for legal fees to fight it in courts? Keep your daughter in your state and have her drop out of school and lose her apartment and all her belongings? Let her go back and never visit her, because if you cross state lines, they'll arrest you when they run your driver's license info in a "routine" traffic stop and realize there's a warrant out for you for some sort of murder conspiracy or aiding and abetting someone receiving healthcare?

It doesn't matter if you're technically correct. What matters is what's happening in real life, and how they're actively trying to ruin people's lives. They're willing to let women die. They're happy to ruin people financially to prove their point. And there's little you can do to stop them.

I don’t think we disagree on the intent or even some of the possible attempted tactics of the far right - but we part ways on the above. I think it is dangerous to just paint the worst case scenario and insist we are helpless against it. There is no deus ex machina that is going to swoop in to save us. This is not the playing field I would have chosen (in a million years) but there are plenty of ways to resist and fight this both in the courts and other venue - and it starts by not just conceding to ridiculous arguments that states can bar interstate travel and enforce their laws across state borders without check.

Oh I didn't mean stop fighting, but as a citizen in another state, you can't even vote for reasonable state congressmen or governors who will veto these unconstitutional laws. And as an individual, if you're targeted, you can fight back, but you can't put the toothpaste back in the tube. You'll have to pay, your life will be changed, and you might go to jail. We can keep protesting, donating, educating... hell, we can even set up an underground railroad for pregnant women if we have to. I'm not giving up. I'm also discouraging my daughter from applying to colleges in red states where we have family (we haven't gotten to the point where we need to lay down ultimatums, but I don't think I can pay to send her to a place I don't think is safe for her to live), because I don't want to risk her getting caught up in any of that nonsense. I won't risk her getting in a position where she's risking a criminal record, financial hardship, or public shaming because corrupt people want to misuse religion and morality to oppress women. I've already escaped that culture once, having grown up in a conservative evangelical christian community. I'll fight from afar because these cheaters will burn the house down before they admit defeat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We're going to have slave states and free states. And, despite their pretending to value "state's rights," the slave states will always want a federal Fugitive Slave Act and complain bitterly when the free states don't help them keep their slaves in line. This time around, the servitude might be limited to women's uteruses, but a lot of the other things will be the same.

This is precisely what will happen, which is exactly why we need to be ready to fight this by all lawful means, and not give up any ground (literally, as well as figuratively).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Texas doesn’t “own” people who are in Texas. They aren’t citizens of Texas. They are citizens of the US or some other nation. Texas can require residents to pay state and local taxes, get a Texas drivers license, etc. but those things don’t give Texas control over those people. I can have a Texas ID, pay taxes, vote, etc. in Texas and none of that gives Texas any authority to prevent me from leaving the state. They have no legal basis to even ask why anyone is leaving.

They have no legal basis to ask why a woman is leaving, but if she is taking a "person" with her (in her womb) with the intent to "murder" it (their words not mine), don't you think Texas has the authority to prevent her from doing that?

No, they don’t. They don’t even have authority to ask whether she is pregnant or why she is leaving the state. Also, the law does not define or treat abortion as murder., not in Texas or any other state.

Not yet, but what is to stop the law from changing?

If an embryo has personhood status, why isn't an abortion a homicide?

You clearly have not been paying attention. Pre-Roe many states treated abortion as murder and are now rapidly moving to recriminalize it.

[Anonymous]

Think about all of the cars that cross over from Virginia to Maryland on the beltway during the morning and evening rush hour commutes. Probably hundreds of cars *per minute*. Would Virginia really force an epic logjam on the beltway so that every single female traveler could undergo a pregnancy test? The logistics of this is mind-boggling to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Think about all of the cars that cross over from Virginia to Maryland on the beltway during the morning and evening rush hour commutes. Probably hundreds of cars *per minute*. Would Virginia really force an epic logjam on the beltway so that every single female traveler could undergo a pregnancy test? The logistics of this is mind-boggling to me.

To repeat. You need to read up on the Texas bounty law. The enforcement will happen through people reporting women to the authorities. No need for a logjam. Just better hope no one is out to get you.