Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If inside my body is less private than inside my house (where government can not search without a warrant), I don't know what is privacy anymore and where government intrusion can stop.

That makes sense at first pass, but Roe v. Wade was decided under the 14th Amendment, not the 4th.

How does the 14th Amendment apply to abortion?

The Fourteenth Amendment (Amendment XIV) to the United States Constitution was adopted on July 9, 1868, as one of the Reconstruction Amendments. The amendment addresses citizenship rights and equal protection of the laws, and was proposed in response to issues related to former slaves following the American Civil War.

If you want to read up for a layman's description on landmark 20th Century SCOTUS cases, I highly recommend Archie Cox's (JFK's SG) book: "The Court and the Constitution". He does a particularly good job explaining the evolution of 14th Amendment jurisprudence. It was published in 1987, though. I'm not aware of anything that covers more recent cases in the same way...though I'd welcome suggestions.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If inside my body is less private than inside my house (where government can not search without a warrant), I don't know what is privacy anymore and where government intrusion can stop.

That makes sense at first pass, but Roe v. Wade was decided under the 14th Amendment, not the 4th.

How does the 14th Amendment apply to abortion?

The Fourteenth Amendment (Amendment XIV) to the United States Constitution was adopted on July 9, 1868, as one of the Reconstruction Amendments. The amendment addresses citizenship rights and equal protection of the laws, and was proposed in response to issues related to former slaves following the American Civil War.

http://law.justia.com/constitution/us/amendment-14/31-abortion.html

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Texas is looking at an similar law to Indiana's, after having lost recently. The courts will strike all of these laws down. But it will take time.

Yes, like a couple of administrations. That is too long.

Trial and appellate courts are compelled to follow precedent in accordance with the doctrine of state decisis. Even if a trial judge goes rogue, it is much more difficult for an appellate panel to uphold any such ruling. And it will be difficult for SCOTUS to throw out the well-established right to privacy now recognized under several Constitutional amendments.

Which constitutional amendments would those be?

Maybe not an amendment but The Patriot Act?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If inside my body is less private than inside my house (where government can not search without a warrant), I don't know what is privacy anymore and where government intrusion can stop.

That makes sense at first pass, but Roe v. Wade was decided under the 14th Amendment, not the 4th.

How does the 14th Amendment apply to abortion?

The Fourteenth Amendment (Amendment XIV) to the United States Constitution was adopted on July 9, 1868, as one of the Reconstruction Amendments. The amendment addresses citizenship rights and equal protection of the laws, and was proposed in response to issues related to former slaves following the American Civil War.

Anonymous wrote:If inside my body is less private than inside my house (where government can not search without a warrant), I don't know what is privacy anymore and where government intrusion can stop.

That makes sense at first pass, but Roe v. Wade was decided under the 14th Amendment, not the 4th.

If inside my body is less private than inside my house (where government can not search without a warrant), I don't know what is privacy anymore and where government intrusion can stop.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Texas is looking at an similar law to Indiana's, after having lost recently. The courts will strike all of these laws down. But it will take time.

Yes, like a couple of administrations. That is too long.

Trial and appellate courts are compelled to follow precedent in accordance with the doctrine of state decisis. Even if a trial judge goes rogue, it is much more difficult for an appellate panel to uphold any such ruling. And it will be difficult for SCOTUS to throw out the well-established right to privacy now recognized under several Constitutional amendments.

Which constitutional amendments would those be?

State = stare

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Texas is looking at an similar law to Indiana's, after having lost recently. The courts will strike all of these laws down. But it will take time.

Yes, like a couple of administrations. That is too long.

Trial and appellate courts are compelled to follow precedent in accordance with the doctrine of state decisis. Even if a trial judge goes rogue, it is much more difficult for an appellate panel to uphold any such ruling. And it will be difficult for SCOTUS to throw out the well-established right to privacy now recognized under several Constitutional amendments.

Anonymous wrote:Laws like this will be tested at the supreme Court. This is just the process we employ to decide on these tough questions. Let's ponder the question, not lament the process.

It won't make it to the Supreme Court. It's unconstitutional and they know this, will be struck down before it gets there.

Anonymous wrote:Texas is looking at an similar law to Indiana's, after having lost recently. The courts will strike all of these laws down. But it will take time.

Yes, like a couple of administrations. That is too long.

Laws like this will be tested at the supreme Court. This is just the process we employ to decide on these tough questions. Let's ponder the question, not lament the process.

Texas is looking at an similar law to Indiana's, after having lost recently. The courts will strike all of these laws down. But it will take time.

You can't let people suffer just to prove a point.

The courts will not uphold the law.

I think abortion will be outlawed in Ohio pretty soon - I am sure Kasich will sign the bill.
I also think this is one of the appropriate consequence of the election.
I was upset about this bill at first but now I think it's a good thing.
Just like the anti-vaccine people forgot how bad it was before they were made mandatory, people who don't care about abortion rights enough to vote have forgotten how bad it was before. And after we go back to the '50s for a little while, prepare yourself for the 60s!!