Abortion is illegal in Texas

[Alli]

Yes…



I wonder - could abortion clinics set up a scheme where lots of people sue them for $1, and they concede the lawsuit, thereby forcing Texas to pay them $10,000 each?

I kinda like that train of thought. Texas will bankrupt itself quickly.

 

[SuperMatt]

I kinda like that train of thought. Texas will bankrupt itself quickly.

I read the law. I’m not a lawyer, but I think it says the $10,000 is supposed to come from the person you sue. So it’s not a guarantee you will get the money even if you win. If you sue a taxi driver for taking somebody to get an abortion, are they likely to have $10,000 lying around to give you?

This law could get shot down for things that have nothing to do with abortion. Lawsuits require somebody to have standing. What standing does a random person have to sue somebody for having an abortion? What harm are they suffering? Also, is it constitutional for a law to prevent the person being sued from recovering court costs from the plaintiff? The point of allowing such things is to prevent frivolous lawsuits. If the person suing could be on the hook, they will be reluctant to sue.

I believe that judges do NOT like having their hands tied by laws like this. If a law says they cannot decide standing, or they cannot decide to reimburse a defendant being sued frivolously, they are going to block the law. They want some latitude to decide cash awards, court costs, etc.

 

[Alli]

I believe that judges do NOT like having their hands tied by laws like this. If a law says they cannot decide standing, or they cannot decide to reimburse a defendant being sued frivolously, they are going to block the law. They want some latitude to decide cash awards, court costs, etc.

Let’s hope that’s the case.

 

[JayMysteri0]

Some opinions really are not necessary

J.D. Vance Defends Texas Abortion Ban, Calls Rape ‘Inconvenient’

J.D. Vance, who is trailing several GOP candidates in the Senate primary, told Spectrum News 1 that “in Texas they’re trying to make it easier for babies to be born.”

www.thedailybeast.com

In a local news interview published Wednesday, author and venture capitalist turned Senate candidate J.D. Vance suggested he would support prohibiting abortion even in cases of rape and incest—and dismissed those catalysts as “inconvenient.”

Asked by Curtis Jackson of Spectrum News 1 in Columbus, OH, whether a woman should be forced to give birth even if the pregnancy was the result of incest or rape, Vance replied that “the question betrays a certain presumption that’s wrong.”

“It’s not whether a woman should be forced to bring a child to term; it’s whether a child should be allowed to live, even though the circumstances of that child’s birth are somehow inconvenient or a problem to the society,” said Vance, who lags behind several Republican candidates in his Ohio primary. “The question to me is really about the baby. We want women to have opportunities, we want women to have choices, but, above all, we want women and young boys in the womb to have a right to life.”

The exchange came amid an extended discussion about abortion laws in light of the broadly criticized new Texas ban on the procedure, which does not make exceptions for rape and incest. Vance, a multimillionaire investor whose 2016 bestseller, Hillbilly Elegy, detailed the plight of Appalachia’s poor, defended the ban, saying that “in Texas they’re trying to make it easier for babies to be born.”

He also claimed, falsely, that “the Supreme Court has upheld the Texas law,” referring to the Court’s eleventh-hour split decision last month to let the ban go into effect rather than issue an emergency injunction. Vance, a Yale Law grad, also stated that “the fundamental problem with abortion law in this country” is that it is “unsustainable and unstable.” Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court ruling which defined those laws, was decided 48 years ago.

Similarly, another voice that should be considered unnecessary

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1440831643468455940/

 

[Huntn]

My god how twisted csn these people and their base be??

 

[SuperMatt]

Here’s the latest from the governor. He is refusing to even discuss an exception to the law for rape.

Chris Wallace grills Greg Abbott for allowing 15,000 rapes: AIR.TV

via Fox News

www.air.tv

 

[Chew Toy McCoy]

Here’s the latest from the governor. He is refusing to even discuss an exception to the law for rape.

Chris Wallace grills Greg Abbott for allowing 15,000 rapes: AIR.TV

via Fox News

www.air.tv

Soon enough they'll pass a law stating that a rape charge can't be filed by any female who left their house without a male guardian, the "she was asking for it" doctrine.

 

[Pumbaa]

Soon enough they'll pass a law stating that a rape charge can't be filed by any female who left their house without a male guardian, the "she was asking for it" doctrine.

…and if she was raped by her male guardian it doesn’t count as rape I’m sure, no matter if it was in her house or elsewhere.

 

[Chew Toy McCoy]

…and if she was raped by her male guardian it doesn’t count as rape I’m sure, no matter if it was in her house or elsewhere.

Of course that doesn't count! Male guardians can do whatever they want. God said so.

 

[fooferdoggie]

so have that backlog of rape kits been processed? or is it just the current rapes that count?

 

[SuperMatt]

so have that backlog of rape kits been processed? or is it just the current rapes that count?

The important thing to remember is that they “support” rape victims.

"Survivors of sexual assault, they deserve support," Abbott replied, skirting the question. "Texas is stepping up to make sure we provide that by signing a law and creating in the governor's office a sexual assault survivors task force."

When they are forced to carry the child of their rapist to term, I’m sure they will be very thankful for the “task force” mentioned above.

 

[fooferdoggie]

The important thing to remember is that they “support” rape victims.


When they are forced to carry the child of their rapist to term, I’m sure they will be very thankful for the “task force” mentioned above.

is that office going to pay for that forced pregnancy?

 

[lizkat]

Soon enough they'll pass a law stating that a rape charge can't be filed by any female who left their house without a male guardian, the "she was asking for it" doctrine.

Yet some hard right Republicans still pitch a conspiracy theory that Muslims residing in the USA want to install Sharia law.

 

[Chew Toy McCoy]

Yet some hard right Republicans still pitch a conspiracy theory that Muslims residing in the USA want to install Sharia law.

A good percentage of people on the right are incapable of comprehending anything beyond a word or three label. They'd probably all sign on for Christian law ...and then summarily get stoned to death for breaking it. Irony can be fun.

 

[ericwn]

As a foreigner, i think it’s ridiculous in the first place that topics as important as this one are decided on a state level in the first place.

 

[Chew Toy McCoy]

As a foreigner, i think it’s ridiculous in the first place that topics as important as this one are decided on a state level in the first place.

Kind of like voting. Haven’t heard any good reason why voting laws shouldn’t be the same nationally.

 

[ericwn]

Kind of like voting. Haven’t heard any good reason why voting laws shouldn’t be the same nationally.

Agreed - why add all that local bureaucracy and not have proper standards country-wide.

In this particular case I’m also wondering how anybody in the world would think a guy’s opinion should matter, at all.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Huntn]

Kind of like voting. Haven’t heard any good reason why voting laws shouldn’t be the same nationally.

The value of a Republic is standardization of rights and rules. States Rights is constantly being used by one group, usually white, to pull something over on some other group of people and deny them of their rights or level playing fields.

 

[Yoused]

The value of a Republic is standardization of rights and rules. States Rights is constantly being used by one group, usually white, to pull something over on some other group of people and deny them of their rights or level playing fields.

"The Civil War was not about Slavery, it was about States' Rights." Yeah, "states' rights" is code for "them darn nigras …" However, creating a centralized power structure for the US is somewhat problematic, as we have seen what happens when idiots and scumbags gain control of it.

I even have my misgivings about "freedom". The way that word is used is seriously wrong. It applies to the people I think it should apply to, not that half of the country who are not real Americans. Why should those people, furriners in their own land, be handed freedom and privilege just for free when they do not even belong here? America belongs to the folks I think it should, the people as think like me, and those Unamericans should be taken out and …

 

[SuperMatt]

"The Civil War was not about Slavery, it was about States' Rights." Yeah, "states' rights" is code for "them darn nigras …" However, creating a centralized power structure for the US is somewhat problematic, as we have seen what happens when idiots and scumbags gain control of it.

I even have my misgivings about "freedom". The way that word is used is seriously wrong. It applies to the people I think it should apply to, not that half of the country who are not real Americans. Why should those people, furriners in their own land, be handed freedom and privilege just for free when they do not even belong here? America belongs to the folks I think it should, the people as think like me, and those Unamericans should be taken out and …

One need only read a brief description of the Dred Scott supreme court case to see what “States’ Rights” are really about. Oh, and BTW, the southern states wanted their states to have rights, but also wanted federal rights to go to northern states and get their escaped slaves back, in violation of Northern states’ rights.