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:

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 them. But, if I'm being honest, I honestly don't have sympathy for them, either. They are getting what they voted for. It's just sad that they are dragging down everyone else with them.

They aren't changing anything in blue states. In fact, this has had the effect of expanding abortion in blue states. So both sides are going to get what they want, and if both sides can respect the differences and not interfere, this will not become a major issue.

What makes you think both sides can respect differences and not interfere? The extremists on the right are going for a national ban. They may not achieve it if people wake up, but they're definitely not going to sit by and let blue states be blue states.

This is what all the DCUM Republicans refuse to acknowledge.

[Anonymous]

Oh yes the right will stop free travel between the states because they can. There will be check points and demands for papers at the border of the red states. SCOTUS will rubber stamp this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Oh yes the right will stop free travel between the states because they can. There will be check points and demands for papers at the border of the red states. SCOTUS will rubber stamp this.

No court would uphold that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Oh yes the right will stop free travel between the states because they can. There will be check points and demands for papers at the border of the red states. SCOTUS will rubber stamp this.

What is to stop dems, next time they get power, to do the same for purchasing guns?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh yes the right will stop free travel between the states because they can. There will be check points and demands for papers at the border of the red states. SCOTUS will rubber stamp this.

No court would uphold that.

How do you figure that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Oh yes the right will stop free travel between the states because they can. There will be check points and demands for papers at the border of the red states. SCOTUS will rubber stamp this.

Does this law also apply to flying out of Red state airports? For example, a woman flies to Orlando to go to Disney World with her family. Would she need to take a pregnancy test, obtain a travel permit, etc. before flying back home to Maryland?

[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.

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.

Jesus. This "law" is ridiculous and unconstitutional and would be struck down by at least 8 of current SCOTUS members if it even got that far. In fact, its passage would be a huge gift to the pro-choice movement because it would, if anything, undermine Dobbs.

[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.

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.

Jesus. This "law" is ridiculous and unconstitutional and would be struck down by at least 8 of current SCOTUS members if it even got that far. In fact, its passage would be a huge gift to the pro-choice movement because it would, if anything, undermine Dobbs.

You can’t confidently say that all the justices would uphold the constitution. You’re acting like people are being hyperbolic while in the same breath saying it’s not a given that all the justices would uphold the constitution.

[Anonymous]

My neighbor’s daughter plays travel soccer in Virginia. Would she and her teammates have to get the pregnancy test/travel permit every time they have a tournament in Maryland?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My neighbor’s daughter plays travel soccer in Virginia. Would she and her teammates have to get the pregnancy test/travel permit every time they have a tournament in Maryland?

There is no traveling to Maryland until they can prove then are post menopausal.

[Anonymous]

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.

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.

Jesus. This "law" is ridiculous and unconstitutional and would be struck down by at least 8 of current SCOTUS members if it even got that far. In fact, its passage would be a huge gift to the pro-choice movement because it would, if anything, undermine Dobbs.

You can’t confidently say that all the justices would uphold the constitution. You’re acting like people are being hyperbolic while in the same breath saying it’s not a given that all the justices would uphold the constitution.

You only need 5.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh yes the right will stop free travel between the states because they can. There will be check points and demands for papers at the border of the red states. SCOTUS will rubber stamp this.

What is to stop dems, next time they get power, to do the same for purchasing guns?

Um, the Constitution, which has been interpreted to protect the right to purchase guns.

[Anonymous]

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.

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.

Jesus. This "law" is ridiculous and unconstitutional and would be struck down by at least 8 of current SCOTUS members if it even got that far. In fact, its passage would be a huge gift to the pro-choice movement because it would, if anything, undermine Dobbs.

You can’t confidently say that all the justices would uphold the constitution. You’re acting like people are being hyperbolic while in the same breath saying it’s not a given that all the justices would uphold the constitution.

You only need 5.

The point is, the constitution states some things quite clearly, and it’s unknown whether all the justices will twist themselves into pretzels to interpret those things differently than they’re written just to get to impose their religious beliefs on the country. It’s almost like we’re saying we don’t know if all the justices will respect that it’s not allowed to divide by 0. And when one Justice decides to divide by 0, everything is redefined, and who knows how long it will be before the others start doing this new math. I think it’s blind optimism to state with such certainty that 8 of the 9 will uphold anything, especially when toppling these norms, laws, precedents, and sections of the constitution will spread their goal of forcing women to stay pregnant or die trying.

[Anonymous]

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.

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.

Jesus. This "law" is ridiculous and unconstitutional and would be struck down by at least 8 of current SCOTUS members if it even got that far. In fact, its passage would be a huge gift to the pro-choice movement because it would, if anything, undermine Dobbs.

You can’t confidently say that all the justices would uphold the constitution. You’re acting like people are being hyperbolic while in the same breath saying it’s not a given that all the justices would uphold the constitution.

You only need 5.

The point is, the constitution states some things quite clearly, and it’s unknown whether all the justices will twist themselves into pretzels to interpret those things differently than they’re written just to get to impose their religious beliefs on the country. It’s almost like we’re saying we don’t know if all the justices will respect that it’s not allowed to divide by 0. And when one Justice decides to divide by 0, everything is redefined, and who knows how long it will be before the others start doing this new math. I think it’s blind optimism to state with such certainty that 8 of the 9 will uphold anything, especially when toppling these norms, laws, precedents, and sections of the constitution will spread their goal of forcing women to stay pregnant or die trying.

Are you making a general statement? Or a statement referring to a pending case before the Supreme Court restricting interstate travel?

[Anonymous]

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.

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.

Jesus. This "law" is ridiculous and unconstitutional and would be struck down by at least 8 of current SCOTUS members if it even got that far. In fact, its passage would be a huge gift to the pro-choice movement because it would, if anything, undermine Dobbs.

You can’t confidently say that all the justices would uphold the constitution. You’re acting like people are being hyperbolic while in the same breath saying it’s not a given that all the justices would uphold the constitution.

You only need 5.

The point is, the constitution states some things quite clearly, and it’s unknown whether all the justices will twist themselves into pretzels to interpret those things differently than they’re written just to get to impose their religious beliefs on the country. It’s almost like we’re saying we don’t know if all the justices will respect that it’s not allowed to divide by 0. And when one Justice decides to divide by 0, everything is redefined, and who knows how long it will be before the others start doing this new math. I think it’s blind optimism to state with such certainty that 8 of the 9 will uphold anything, especially when toppling these norms, laws, precedents, and sections of the constitution will spread their goal of forcing women to stay pregnant or die trying.

+1. The justices get to have the final say about what laws are or or not constitutional. And if you change the justices, this opinion changes.

And they have life long terms so democratic control of the power to replace justices is critical to get back rights for women in all the states and not have some gilead states.