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

[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.

Let's see if the Ds are able to align on a path forward and craft legislation that has a shot in hell of passing. Dont hold your breath though. Because passing national legislation would 1) require limits on how old the fetus is, in order to pass, and 2) take away an incentive for people to vote D by making the issue moot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Loose lips sink ships. Kind of like that.

Why the hell would anyone choose to live in a red state under these conditions?

What’s great about our country is that you can choose to live in a Blue state and others can choose to live in a Red state. If you don’t like where you live, you can move.

The vast majority of poor people can't afford to move. Which is why rich republicans in red states are super happy right now.

Interesting. I’m what you’d call a “Rich Republican” in a red state and I’m not “super happy right now” because majority of poor people can’t afford to move. Can you provide a source for your claim that “rich republicans in red states are super happy right now” because “vast majority of poor people can’t afford to move?”

Are you happy that women in red states won’t be able to obtain abortions?

Do you understand that having unplanned children, having more children than you can afford, or having children at a younger age than you planned will lower earning potential for women, and make the poverty cycle continue?

If you answered yes to both question, then you get what the other PP was talking about. If you answered no to question 2, educate yourself.

Where is this sudden surge in sympathy for the poor in red states coming from? They are regularly mocked on this forum, and now y'all suddenly care about their lives and outcomes? Midterms, I guess.

[Anonymous]

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.

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.

Let's see if the Ds are able to align on a path forward and craft legislation that has a shot in hell of passing. Dont hold your breath though. Because passing national legislation would 1) require limits on how old the fetus is, in order to pass, and 2) take away an incentive for people to vote D by making the issue moot.

Nothing will pass without either a landslide blue wave or breaking the filibuster, which won't happen unless the D's hold serve and add Fetterman and Ryan at a minimum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Loose lips sink ships. Kind of like that.

Why the hell would anyone choose to live in a red state under these conditions?

What’s great about our country is that you can choose to live in a Blue state and others can choose to live in a Red state. If you don’t like where you live, you can move.

The vast majority of poor people can't afford to move. Which is why rich republicans in red states are super happy right now.

Interesting. I’m what you’d call a “Rich Republican” in a red state and I’m not “super happy right now” because majority of poor people can’t afford to move. Can you provide a source for your claim that “rich republicans in red states are super happy right now” because “vast majority of poor people can’t afford to move?”

Are you happy that women in red states won’t be able to obtain abortions?

Do you understand that having unplanned children, having more children than you can afford, or having children at a younger age than you planned will lower earning potential for women, and make the poverty cycle continue?

If you answered yes to both question, then you get what the other PP was talking about. If you answered no to question 2, educate yourself.

Where is this sudden surge in sympathy for the poor in red states coming from? They are regularly mocked on this forum, and now y'all suddenly care about their lives and outcomes? Midterms, I guess.

I don’t mock people for being poor. I grew up poor. Not just DCUM poor, but southern farm community poor. Those people are my family and the friends I grew up with.

Even if I were to mock them, that’s objectively better than trying to kill them, force them to bear children they don’t want, withhold medical care, keep wages low, keep education out of reach, and otherwise make life difficult for them and generations to come.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

The logistics are easy to solve. If a woman who can get pregnant wishes to travel out of the no-abortion state into a state where abortion is legal, she needs a special travel permit stating she is not pregnant.

The permit is updated once monthly at the appropriate time, by stopping into any Minute Clinic or Rite aid and getting a test.. That's where her travel permit is stamped. A positive pregnancy test means her travel permit is confiscated.

Highways and streets into abortion states are patrolled randomly (like HOV lanes) and women can be pulled over and asked for their out of state travel permit. The punishment for being caught without a "I'm not pregnant" travel permit into a non-abortion state is severe enough to be a disincentive.

Wow. Sounds like you have a wonderful imagination. Let us know when we should stop by our local Rite Aid.

I do have the ability to imagine what could happen in the future as a logical consequence of what is happening now.

What I have described is logistically possible, it may be legally possible; the biggest reason it won’t happen is that it could be politically unpopular; however women have become so brainwashed that they may go along with this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Loose lips sink ships. Kind of like that.

Why the hell would anyone choose to live in a red state under these conditions?

What’s great about our country is that you can choose to live in a Blue state and others can choose to live in a Red state. If you don’t like where you live, you can move.

The vast majority of poor people can't afford to move. Which is why rich republicans in red states are super happy right now.

Interesting. I’m what you’d call a “Rich Republican” in a red state and I’m not “super happy right now” because majority of poor people can’t afford to move. Can you provide a source for your claim that “rich republicans in red states are super happy right now” because “vast majority of poor people can’t afford to move?”

Are you happy that women in red states won’t be able to obtain abortions?

Do you understand that having unplanned children, having more children than you can afford, or having children at a younger age than you planned will lower earning potential for women, and make the poverty cycle continue?

If you answered yes to both question, then you get what the other PP was talking about. If you answered no to question 2, educate yourself.

Where is this sudden surge in sympathy for the poor in red states coming from? They are regularly mocked on this forum, and now y'all suddenly care about their lives and outcomes? Midterms, I guess.

So you are one of those "bless your hearts" who don't dare say a bad word about someone but are fine to vote against a better life or better opportunities for people who are different than you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Loose lips sink ships. Kind of like that.

Why the hell would anyone choose to live in a red state under these conditions?

What’s great about our country is that you can choose to live in a Blue state and others can choose to live in a Red state. If you don’t like where you live, you can move.

The vast majority of poor people can't afford to move. Which is why rich republicans in red states are super happy right now.

Interesting. I’m what you’d call a “Rich Republican” in a red state and I’m not “super happy right now” because majority of poor people can’t afford to move. Can you provide a source for your claim that “rich republicans in red states are super happy right now” because “vast majority of poor people can’t afford to move?”

Are you happy that women in red states won’t be able to obtain abortions?

Do you understand that having unplanned children, having more children than you can afford, or having children at a younger age than you planned will lower earning potential for women, and make the poverty cycle continue?

If you answered yes to both question, then you get what the other PP was talking about. If you answered no to question 2, educate yourself.

Where is this sudden surge in sympathy for the poor in red states coming from? They are regularly mocked on this forum, and now y'all suddenly care about their lives and outcomes? Midterms, I guess.

You’re deflecting instead of answering the questions.

Let’s try again:

1) Are you happy that women in red states won’t be able to obtain abortions?

2) Do you understand that having unplanned children, having more children than you can afford, or having children at a younger age than you planned will lower earning potential for women, and make the poverty cycle continue?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

The logistics are easy to solve. If a woman who can get pregnant wishes to travel out of the no-abortion state into a state where abortion is legal, she needs a special travel permit stating she is not pregnant.

The permit is updated once monthly at the appropriate time, by stopping into any Minute Clinic or Rite aid and getting a test.. That's where her travel permit is stamped. A positive pregnancy test means her travel permit is confiscated.

Highways and streets into abortion states are patrolled randomly (like HOV lanes) and women can be pulled over and asked for their out of state travel permit. The punishment for being caught without a "I'm not pregnant" travel permit into a non-abortion state is severe enough to be a disincentive.

I'm not saying this can't happen...but do you think that if Republicans tried to pass this, it would be popular among the white suburban women who would have to undergo this? Republicans aren't really known for pumping government money into things, so I assume they'd hire a private company and make women pay for this travel privilege. Right? Otherwise they'd want to spend government funds on this? They want to run on kitchen table issues....how would this be popular for millions of families who need to go over state lines daily or monthly for jobs, dr. appointments, errands, family visits, etc.? This would be a lot of money. I don't picture a private company doing this out of the goodness of their hearts. Rite Aid would love the foot traffic. But how would people really feel about this?

Again, not saying this couldn't happen, but to the people who feel helpless, wouldn't people have backlash against this? Just to go further, to keep the white voters would they find a way to exempt white women from this? I mean there is no bottom so tossing that out there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

The logistics are easy to solve. If a woman who can get pregnant wishes to travel out of the no-abortion state into a state where abortion is legal, she needs a special travel permit stating she is not pregnant.

The permit is updated once monthly at the appropriate time, by stopping into any Minute Clinic or Rite aid and getting a test.. That's where her travel permit is stamped. A positive pregnancy test means her travel permit is confiscated.

Highways and streets into abortion states are patrolled randomly (like HOV lanes) and women can be pulled over and asked for their out of state travel permit. The punishment for being caught without a "I'm not pregnant" travel permit into a non-abortion state is severe enough to be a disincentive.

Wow. Sounds like you have a wonderful imagination. Let us know when we should stop by our local Rite Aid.

I do have the ability to imagine what could happen in the future as a logical consequence of what is happening now.

What I have described is logistically possible, it may be legally possible; the biggest reason it won’t happen is that it could be politically unpopular; however women have become so brainwashed that they may go along with this.

I just posted, and I agree, I think what would stop it is not the absurdity, or even the politics, but the financial implications of women/families having to pay for it cause I don't picture the government paying for every woman age....what.....12 to 52 every month? It would have to be an individual expense, and that would be unpopular.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am reading about bills being introduced to make it illegal for a woman to leave the state in order to get an abortion.

So if one of these actually passes, how could it realistically be enforced?

Would pregnant women from the state outlawing travel be refused permission to travel to a state which allows abortions?'

Or, would pregnant women need to certify their pregnancy status with a doctor before leaving, and again upon return?

What about international travel?

The bills floating around that I’m aware of would not actually “prevent” anyone from traveling to get an abortion. They are more targeted at the providers of out of state abortion. So if it’s illegal in, say Kentucky, but legal in Illinois, Kentucky would purport to have jurisdiction over Illinois providers for performing abortion on a Kentucky resident. It’s not like they are going to have checkpoints at every state crossing giving pea stick tests.

There is absolutely no way in hell that Kentucky should be able to have jurisdiction over Illinois.

One, I think that these laws are patently unconstitutional, even under this SCOTUS.

But even if this statute survives judicial review for a few weeks, what exactly is Kentucky's recourse here? They are going to have their state troopers march into Illinois to try to arrest and drag away an out-of-state OB-GYN? Illinois is going to love having its sovereignty mocked so much that it extradites? The enforcement difficulties further underscore how ludicrous this whole thing is (though I suppose the nightmare scenario is that the Illinois OB unwittingly decides to vacation in KY and... ...)

A Kentucky judge will issue an arrest warrant based on a funding of probable cause (a grand jury indictment will also work). It will then fall upon the Illinois resident to fight extradition and prosecution. This is designed by the Republican Attorneys General to create a constitutional crisis. Koch, Lowes, Comcast (NBC), Walmart, GM and Johnson & Johnson sponsor these extremists.

https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2022/07/14/republican-ag-group-holds-private-retreat-for-corporate-donors-at-swanky-palm-beach-resort-.html

What good is an arrest warrant floating around KY? Absent cooperation from IL law enforcement and/or courts, it is not self-executing. Thus my question re: enforcement (and this isn’t even getting to question of the many blue states who have passed or otherwise indicated non-extradition policies here)…

I think this misses the point. There are conservative judges who will happily issue an arrest warrant for a women's healthcare provider if given the pretext. Let's not pretend that there aren't people on the right monitoring and posting the personal information and/or locations of abortion providers and their family members (and many more who are willing to do so), and law enforcement who believe providers should be in jail or dead. So then providers -- often women -- cannot travel to any red state that has issued a warrant for their arrest, for their own safety.

Give it a couple of years, and I don't think we're all that far from a scenario where through a concerted effort of anti-abortionist activists, law enforcement and the courts, a women's health clinic doctor from say, NY or Illinois takes a family vacation to Mexico and during her two-hour layover in Houston, gets arrested, with the whole thing videotaped by Fox (who would have been alerted beforehand to be on-site), to massive applause on the right. So essentially treating fellow U.S. citizens like international criminals who are surveilled and arrested as soon as they step into a location where they can be.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Loose lips sink ships. Kind of like that.

Why the hell would anyone choose to live in a red state under these conditions?

What’s great about our country is that you can choose to live in a Blue state and others can choose to live in a Red state. If you don’t like where you live, you can move.

The vast majority of poor people can't afford to move. Which is why rich republicans in red states are super happy right now.

Interesting. I’m what you’d call a “Rich Republican” in a red state and I’m not “super happy right now” because majority of poor people can’t afford to move. Can you provide a source for your claim that “rich republicans in red states are super happy right now” because “vast majority of poor people can’t afford to move?”

Are you happy that women in red states won’t be able to obtain abortions?

Do you understand that having unplanned children, having more children than you can afford, or having children at a younger age than you planned will lower earning potential for women, and make the poverty cycle continue?

If you answered yes to both question, then you get what the other PP was talking about. If you answered no to question 2, educate yourself.

Where is this sudden surge in sympathy for the poor in red states coming from? They are regularly mocked on this forum, and now y'all suddenly care about their lives and outcomes? Midterms, I guess.

You’re deflecting instead of answering the questions.

Let’s try again:

1) Are you happy that women in red states won’t be able to obtain abortions?

2) Do you understand that having unplanned children, having more children than you can afford, or having children at a younger age than you planned will lower earning potential for women, and make the poverty cycle continue?

Okay, I'll answer. 1) No, and 2) yes.

I am also extremely skeptical about Democrats actually being able to do anything about either 1 or 2. And I am also not buying that Democrats would prioritize the needs of red state "pregnant people" given all the other goals they are chasing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Loose lips sink ships. Kind of like that.

Why the hell would anyone choose to live in a red state under these conditions?

What’s great about our country is that you can choose to live in a Blue state and others can choose to live in a Red state. If you don’t like where you live, you can move.

The vast majority of poor people can't afford to move. Which is why rich republicans in red states are super happy right now.

Interesting. I’m what you’d call a “Rich Republican” in a red state and I’m not “super happy right now” because majority of poor people can’t afford to move. Can you provide a source for your claim that “rich republicans in red states are super happy right now” because “vast majority of poor people can’t afford to move?”

Are you happy that women in red states won’t be able to obtain abortions?

Do you understand that having unplanned children, having more children than you can afford, or having children at a younger age than you planned will lower earning potential for women, and make the poverty cycle continue?

If you answered yes to both question, then you get what the other PP was talking about. If you answered no to question 2, educate yourself.

Where is this sudden surge in sympathy for the poor in red states coming from? They are regularly mocked on this forum, and now y'all suddenly care about their lives and outcomes? Midterms, I guess.

You’re deflecting instead of answering the questions.

Let’s try again:

1) Are you happy that women in red states won’t be able to obtain abortions?

2) Do you understand that having unplanned children, having more children than you can afford, or having children at a younger age than you planned will lower earning potential for women, and make the poverty cycle continue?

Okay, I'll answer. 1) No, and 2) yes.

I am also extremely skeptical about Democrats actually being able to do anything about either 1 or 2. And I am also not buying that Democrats would prioritize the needs of red state "pregnant people" given all the other goals they are chasing.

This issue is just as selfishly about our daughters in the blue states is you want to look at this way. You are not stripping away a right from millions of american women and turningthem into murderous criminals with out a long sustained fight where women will be victorious again. We will fight for a very long time to get some respect from what is supposed to be our supreme court.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Loose lips sink ships. Kind of like that.

Why the hell would anyone choose to live in a red state under these conditions?

What’s great about our country is that you can choose to live in a Blue state and others can choose to live in a Red state. If you don’t like where you live, you can move.

The vast majority of poor people can't afford to move. Which is why rich republicans in red states are super happy right now.

Interesting. I’m what you’d call a “Rich Republican” in a red state and I’m not “super happy right now” because majority of poor people can’t afford to move. Can you provide a source for your claim that “rich republicans in red states are super happy right now” because “vast majority of poor people can’t afford to move?”

Are you happy that women in red states won’t be able to obtain abortions?

Do you understand that having unplanned children, having more children than you can afford, or having children at a younger age than you planned will lower earning potential for women, and make the poverty cycle continue?

If you answered yes to both question, then you get what the other PP was talking about. If you answered no to question 2, educate yourself.

Where is this sudden surge in sympathy for the poor in red states coming from? They are regularly mocked on this forum, and now y'all suddenly care about their lives and outcomes? Midterms, I guess.

You’re deflecting instead of answering the questions.

Let’s try again:

1) Are you happy that women in red states won’t be able to obtain abortions?

2) Do you understand that having unplanned children, having more children than you can afford, or having children at a younger age than you planned will lower earning potential for women, and make the poverty cycle continue?

Okay, I'll answer. 1) No, and 2) yes.

I am also extremely skeptical about Democrats actually being able to do anything about either 1 or 2. And I am also not buying that Democrats would prioritize the needs of red state "pregnant people" given all the other goals they are chasing.

Too late! PP drowned in the Kool-aid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am reading about bills being introduced to make it illegal for a woman to leave the state in order to get an abortion.

So if one of these actually passes, how could it realistically be enforced?

Would pregnant women from the state outlawing travel be refused permission to travel to a state which allows abortions?'

Or, would pregnant women need to certify their pregnancy status with a doctor before leaving, and again upon return?

What about international travel?

The bills floating around that I’m aware of would not actually “prevent” anyone from traveling to get an abortion. They are more targeted at the providers of out of state abortion. So if it’s illegal in, say Kentucky, but legal in Illinois, Kentucky would purport to have jurisdiction over Illinois providers for performing abortion on a Kentucky resident. It’s not like they are going to have checkpoints at every state crossing giving pea stick tests.

There is absolutely no way in hell that Kentucky should be able to have jurisdiction over Illinois.

One, I think that these laws are patently unconstitutional, even under this SCOTUS.

But even if this statute survives judicial review for a few weeks, what exactly is Kentucky's recourse here? They are going to have their state troopers march into Illinois to try to arrest and drag away an out-of-state OB-GYN? Illinois is going to love having its sovereignty mocked so much that it extradites? The enforcement difficulties further underscore how ludicrous this whole thing is (though I suppose the nightmare scenario is that the Illinois OB unwittingly decides to vacation in KY and... ...)

A Kentucky judge will issue an arrest warrant based on a funding of probable cause (a grand jury indictment will also work). It will then fall upon the Illinois resident to fight extradition and prosecution. This is designed by the Republican Attorneys General to create a constitutional crisis. Koch, Lowes, Comcast (NBC), Walmart, GM and Johnson & Johnson sponsor these extremists.

https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2022/07/14/republican-ag-group-holds-private-retreat-for-corporate-donors-at-swanky-palm-beach-resort-.html

What good is an arrest warrant floating around KY? Absent cooperation from IL law enforcement and/or courts, it is not self-executing. Thus my question re: enforcement (and this isn’t even getting to question of the many blue states who have passed or otherwise indicated non-extradition policies here)…

I think this misses the point. There are conservative judges who will happily issue an arrest warrant for a women's healthcare provider if given the pretext. Let's not pretend that there aren't people on the right monitoring and posting the personal information and/or locations of abortion providers and their family members (and many more who are willing to do so), and law enforcement who believe providers should be in jail or dead. So then providers -- often women -- cannot travel to any red state that has issued a warrant for their arrest, for their own safety.

Give it a couple of years, and I don't think we're all that far from a scenario where through a concerted effort of anti-abortionist activists, law enforcement and the courts, a women's health clinic doctor from say, NY or Illinois takes a family vacation to Mexico and during her two-hour layover in Houston, gets arrested, with the whole thing videotaped by Fox (who would have been alerted beforehand to be on-site), to massive applause on the right. So essentially treating fellow U.S. citizens like international criminals who are surveilled and arrested as soon as they step into a location where they can be.

I'm playing devil's advocate a little on this thread, just for my own sanity.

What if this dr. were white, and attractive, and married, and is traveling with her 3 cute kids on said family vacation? And Savannah Guthrie does a heart-wrenching interview with the family on the Today Show, and one of the kids is sad and confused that mommy, who helps women for her job, is in jail?

Or I'll do you one better, what if the dr. is an attractive white man with 3 cute kids a pretty wife?

I'm not saying these things can't happen, but it does create a PR challenge for the republicans. Not an insurmountable one. But we are getting a long way from when Kellyanne Conway could coach the republican men to talk about their feelings when they saw their pregnant wives getting an ultrasound. That for years, was the winning anti-abortion talking point that got us past a lot of the missteps on anti-abortion rhetoric, like the politician who said some women "rape easy" or the other politician who said rape "shuts that whole thing down" and can't result in pregnancy. Kellyanne swept in and solved a lot of those problems. But arresting nice white parents....that could be tougher?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Loose lips sink ships. Kind of like that.

Why the hell would anyone choose to live in a red state under these conditions?

What’s great about our country is that you can choose to live in a Blue state and others can choose to live in a Red state. If you don’t like where you live, you can move.

The vast majority of poor people can't afford to move. Which is why rich republicans in red states are super happy right now.

Interesting. I’m what you’d call a “Rich Republican” in a red state and I’m not “super happy right now” because majority of poor people can’t afford to move. Can you provide a source for your claim that “rich republicans in red states are super happy right now” because “vast majority of poor people can’t afford to move?”

Are you happy that women in red states won’t be able to obtain abortions?

Do you understand that having unplanned children, having more children than you can afford, or having children at a younger age than you planned will lower earning potential for women, and make the poverty cycle continue?

If you answered yes to both question, then you get what the other PP was talking about. If you answered no to question 2, educate yourself.

Where is this sudden surge in sympathy for the poor in red states coming from? They are regularly mocked on this forum, and now y'all suddenly care about their lives and outcomes? Midterms, I guess.

You’re deflecting instead of answering the questions.

Let’s try again:

1) Are you happy that women in red states won’t be able to obtain abortions?

2) Do you understand that having unplanned children, having more children than you can afford, or having children at a younger age than you planned will lower earning potential for women, and make the poverty cycle continue?

Okay, I'll answer. 1) No, and 2) yes.

I am also extremely skeptical about Democrats actually being able to do anything about either 1 or 2. And I am also not buying that Democrats would prioritize the needs of red state "pregnant people" given all the other goals they are chasing.

This issue is just as selfishly about our daughters in the blue states is you want to look at this way. You are not stripping away a right from millions of american women and turningthem into murderous criminals with out a long sustained fight where women will be victorious again. We will fight for a very long time to get some respect from what is supposed to be our supreme court.

I dont understand much of what you wrote. I will give you a tip, however. Dont fight for "respect" from the supreme court. Come up with a clear legislative goal and work on that.

See, this is why I have no faith in the Ds to fix this in red states.