Mighty nice of you to oppose these things. But remind me: were you one of those people who thought that SCOTUS wasn't going to overturn Roe? And do you not acknowledge that there's already movement afoot to punish people who perform abortions, who seek ones and who assist in facilitating one?
I don’t believe there’s such a thing as criminal substitution of parties though, so any doctor who performs an abortion under EMTALA still has to raise this in a motion to dismiss. All it takes is a few judges going “nah, we think this SCOTUS will overturn the supremacy clause/won’t apply the supremacy clause re: abortion because abortion” (and there’s a good chance they’re right), and best case the doctor spends three years in jail waiting for higher courts to hear the appeals and for SCOTUS to come to their senses a tiny bit, worst case they get the death penalty in whatever shithole state they practiced in. What’s the worst penalty they could get for failing to treat under EMTALA?
Is it legal to imprison/execute someone based on what you THINK the law will be when SCOTUS decides it? You could start rounding up gun owners on the basis a liberal SCOTUS will one day rule than anything other than handguns in that case.
All of which is completely plausible with our current judiciary. It makes its way up to the Supreme Court, Roberts says I don’t want to touch this with a ten foot pole, the other firebrands say we want to rule on this case because abortion. They write an even nastier opinion stating we returned this issue to the states, Supremacy Clause is in tatters, conservatives pat themselves on the back and rejoice in owning the libs.
Jail yes, execute no. That would be for if/when SCOTUS guts the supremacy clause and the doctor is found guilty at trial. He’d then raise an 8th amendment claim after sentencing which would also work its way up to SCOTUS. I don’t think they’ve ruled in favor of a defendant in a death penalty case in a very long time.
Arizona has already had a law in place to define personhood as starting at conception. A federal court has just blocked the law as being impermissibly vague. https://thehill.com/regulation/cour...s-arizona-law-granting-personhood-to-fetuses/
lol. Ok. I demand the court tell me the dates both my boys were conceived. If they can’t, they can’t enforce the law.
"I demanded details from somebody who I know perfectly well is both legally and ethically prohibited from giving me details."
Indiana Attorney General on Fox News, talking about how they are going to investigate the doctor who performed an abortion on a 10 year old rape victim.
No, it's based on asshats realising they can use religion as a political wedge, and even bigger asshats buying into that.
No, it's about control. Religion just happens to still be an effective means of such, despite the fact the notion of an invisible sky being should simply be considered a sign of mental illness in an advanced society.
It's since come out that said child rapist happens to be an undocumented immigrant, and now the right has gone from being "#ThatHappened" to foaming at the mouth that tape could've been prevented if illegals were kept out the country faster than Game of Thrones Season 8 fell off it's creative cliff. Kinda like how quickly all those Christians suddenly were pro gay rights when the Pulse shooter turned out not to be a disturbed, "bullied" white boy for once, but a Muslim.
Ah, this explains it. All your family are too fucking lazy to cut teeth into their pumpkins. Don't project their failures onto everyone else, pumpkin.
