The Unenforceability of abortion bans

[Blues Man]

Abortion is unique because you are talking about two lives, not one, despite abortion rights people trying to deny said reality.

Except in no state is there a law granting a fetus the rights of personhood.
So legally a fetus is not a person and does not have Constitutional protection.

 

[Roudy]

If the lunatics on the Left wouldn’t have pushed to allow abortions even up to the day of birth and in some states after the day of birth, it wouldn’t be necessary to hand the decision back to the individual states and how their voters and legislators see fit.

 

[forkup]

That would be unconstitutional.

Texas found a work-around remember. The states aren't charging anybody. Private citizens can sue them and the States simply award damages. Punishment is issued without the States doing anything.

 

[22lcidw]

The biggest problem I see with those on the anti-abortion side is that they never tell you how they are going to enforce a ban on abortion.

Lest, we forget, the main reason why the Court (including 5 Republicans) voted to end abortion laws in the US is because they were being routinely ignored by women and their health care providers. The court was merely recognizing the reality the prudes failed to admit.

If anyone doubts this, we only need to look at the birth rates for the 1970's.

Live Births and Birth Rates, by Year

The following table shows the number of live births and the birth rate in the United States between 1910 and...

www.infoplease.com

1970​	3,731,386​	18.4​
1971​	3,555,970​	17.2​
1972​	3,258,411​	15.6​
1973​	3,136,965​	14.9​
1974​	3,159,958​	14.9​
1975​	3,144,198​	14.8​
1976​	3,167,788​	14.8​

There was no sudden drop in the live birth rate because abortions were now available. In fact, it leveled off in 1973.

Why? Because abortion laws were being routinely ignored. Despite all the horror stories told by the abortion rights side about coat hangers and Lysol, most women were ending unwanted pregnancies in the comfort of their OB/GYN's office. Women were never arrested for having abortions, and providers were rarely prosecuted unless some kind of negligence that injured the women was involved

So you get the laws on the books you want in half the country, what happens? Abortions will simply move from abortion clinics back to OB/GYN offices.

if anything, an abortion ban will be harder to enforce in 2022 than in 1973, because more states WILL keep it legal now, because it will be much easier to cross state lines, and because the option of pharmaceutical abortions will be available.

Laws only really work when you have universal agreement there should be a law. If you don't, police won't investigate, prosecutors won't file charges, and juries won't convict.

The first prosecution for a woman for having an abortion will be a lightening rod of unpopularity. The only time I remember Trump ever backing down from saying something really stupid ws when he said that women should be punished for having abortions, and then immediately reversing himself.

Donald Trump retracts call for women who have abortions to be 'punished'

Republican frontrunner tells MSNBC there needs to be ‘some form of punishment’ for women, though he later disavowed controversial remarks

www.theguardian.com

The thought process though is far different today. Abortions will still be available but at the decision of the states.

 

[Nostra]

You do understand that at the moment of conception it isn't a baby. It's a zygote....right?
And why is it that the moment that baby that you forced a woman to keep drops out of her, you couldn't give a rat's ass about it?

science denier.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Moon Bat Joe spent months bitching about Kyle Rittenhouse using an AR to shoot some of his Commie buddies in self defense and now he will spend months bitching about the Supreme Court saving the lives of children.

Like most on the left wrong, but to a greater degree than most others of its kind, Incel Joe values the lives of the lowest of subhuman criminal shit above the lives of human beings and especially innocent children.

This thread reflects this.

 

[Nostra]

Except in no state is there a law granting a fetus the rights of personhood.
So legally a fetus is not a person and does not have Constitutional protection.

In many states if you kill a pregnant woman you are charged with two murders, so you are full of shit.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Except in no state is there a law granting a fetus the rights of personhood.
So legally a fetus is not a person and does not have Constitutional protection.

That is the same status that black people had early in our country's history. That was just as wrong.

 

[martybegan]

Except in no state is there a law granting a fetus the rights of personhood.
So legally a fetus is not a person and does not have Constitutional protection.

The State doesn't have to grant it personhood to protect it, they just have to pass laws restricting abortion. I am giving you the REASON, why abortion is a unique case.

 

[Burgermeister]

How about we start with confirming that it isn't a federally protected right and make sure no taxpayer money is ever spent on it. The best path for enforcement is probably to prosecute anyone performing an abortion where it is illegal. That would be state-level enforcement.

 

[martybegan]

Texas found a work-around remember. The states aren't charging anybody. Private citizens can sue them and the States simply award damages. Punishment is issued without the States doing anything.

Still would have the issue of someone doing something entirely legal in the State they had it done.

And Texas' end run law will be off the books as soon as Roe is overturned, and replaced with a straight up limit of a certain amount of weeks.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

At the moment of conception, the VERY moment, it is a separate living entity with unique human DNA. It is entitled to the same right to life the rest of us are.

So, then it is safe to assume you support mass murder charges for couples that use IVF and then have the remaining frozen embryos destroyed after they are successful in having a child?

 

[forkup]

Still would have the issue of someone doing something entirely legal in the State they had it done.

And Texas' end run law will be off the books as soon as Roe is overturned, and replaced with a straight up limit of a certain amount of weeks.

Just goes to show how much this is not about constitutionallity doesn't it?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

The best path for enforcement is probably to prosecute anyone performing an abortion where it is illegal. That would be state-level enforcement.

Why only the one preforming the abortion? If a mother paid a person to kill her 1 year old would you support only prosecuting the killer and not the mother?

 

[martybegan]

Just goes to show how much this is not about constitutionallity doesn't it?

It's my primary concern about the issue. I'm in NY and abortion will be legal here. I have no desire to see it otherwise.

 

[forkup]

It's my primary concern about the issue. I'm in NY and abortion will be legal here. I have no desire to see it otherwise.

Can I ask if you have a problem with a judge crafting a legal argument he is unwilling to apply consistently.

 

[Jets]

Banning abortion at the moment of conception is as absurd as allowing it during the third trimester sans emergency surgery.

IMHO

 

[martybegan]

Can I ask if you have a problem with a judge crafting a legal argument he is unwilling to apply consistently.

I need a specific example to properly respond to your question.

 

[Flash]

Except it's not stopping there

Missouri wants to stop out-of-state abortions. Other states could follow.

The first-of-its-kind proposal from Missouri lawmakers would allow private citizens to sue anyone who helps a Missouri resident have an abortion.

www.politico.com

How much control over you life are you willing to concede to a popular vote?

There are Constitutional rights to free speech, freedom of religion and the right to keep and bear arms.

There is no Constitutional right to jaywalk or (now) to kill a child for the purpose of birth control.

 

[forkup]

I need a specific example to properly respond to your question.

Let's say Allito crafts a legal argument that abortion isn't an enumerated right and isn't in the tradition of the country. Further says that his job isn't to take controversy in consideration but simply to apply the Constitution.

Than he follows that up be stating that this ruling is narrowly about abortion but doesn't apply to other things previously covered under the 14th amendment. Things like for instance contraceptives

Do you believe he has made a good legal argument here?