Plenty of motivation on the right as well, since voting Republican is finally starting to deliver what's been long promised.
Let me rephrase that. If people, in Texas, who are against this law, really cared, they would have voted long before 2022.
Don't forget all the voting restrictions and gerrymandering the Republicans have done in the past 18 months. This truly is the tyranny of the minority, and the Dems have no one else but themselves to blame. They are gutless wonders. They have control of all three branches of government and easily could have done something about the sustained attack on democracy, but they didn't.
End the filibuster? Damn straight. But the Dems might need it some day so they like it. Pack the Supreme Court? Absolutely. But the Dems are scared the Republicans would do the same thing. But had they done those two things, they could use the time they have left to actually make some meaningful change. After January 6th, anyone who doesn't see the threat to American democracy is either actively working against it or is a passive part of the problem. The Democrats had a small window to do stuff that would hopefully save the nation's democracy. They could have even structured things so it would be very difficult for the Republicans to unwind them, should they regain control of Congress in 2022 or the White House in 2024. But nope, the Dems are fucking cowards.
Very few American politicians have any ethics or care about the American people. That's why the people need to come together to create change from a grass roots level. It's the only way to save our democracy. Unfortunately, I think it's too late.
They say that every year. Then they say that the Democrats cheated to justify their voter suppression. It's not like this is a new cycle.
There's a potential difference between the "At some point soon, the rightwing is in the abstract going to try to overturn Roe" and "The Republicans have put together an insurmountable majority on the Supreme Court to overturn Roe as soon as this fall, and they've signaled what they are going to do by not placing on hold this crazy Texas law that calls for vigilante justice against people who have 'aided or abetted' abortions." It was easy to be complacent by thinking that the Republicans would never tilt the Court as far to the right as they did, or that the Court will never overturn Roe because of stare decisis (the notion that legal precedents should generally remain intact), or that in a worst-case scenario individual states would decide the issue sensibly and without imposing any undue burdens. And although some will still believe those things, it's probably harder to do so without willfully turning a blind eye to reality.
I wouldn't say they're cowards, it's more than their top people are so insulated from the real world (due to their advanced age or wealth) that they don't take anything that happens seriously anymore. They were plenty angry when an armed mob came within moments of reaching them personally, but everything else is abstract and meaningless to them.
One thing is that Democratic Supreme Court justices need to learn to retire when they are in the 80s and that someone can be appointed behind them. For all the good she did, and that was considerable, RBG REALLY screwed the pooch by not retiring when Obama had the Senate. As to 2022, we'll see. I am not ready to write the death knell of US democracy quite yet.
A few years ago I probably would have said "this sounds like a troll." Every detail is too over-the-top, and it reads like not-particularly-good satire. But now ... Yeah, sounds like a garden-variety Trumper.
Except that they won't. Only the most naive could possibly imagine that, if Mitch McConnell were in a situation where jettisoning the filibuster would get him what he wanted, he wouldn't do it in a heartbeat. Unfortunately, a few of the most naive are in the Democratic caucus in the Senate.
Went to that political forum Dayton posts at and the guy has to be legitimately dying because he hasn't been jizzing his pants over this news like I thought he would
There are (presumably) no inherent penalties to the law to filing frivolous/wrong claims attached to this law. But also presumably, there are the regular, general set of sanctions that would apply. That said, there are probably at least some hypocritical Republicans who have preached anti-abortion but have advocated or paid for their children, girlfriends, mistresses to seek an abortion. I would never advocate filing a suit claiming that prominent Republicans were known to have done such things to engage in embarrassing discovery prying into their personal lives. But I wouldn't cry a river if that happened. A lot.
I m wondering how this works with out of state people. If the abortion is not performed in texass then Texass has no say about when it can be performed. If I pop into texass and give someone a ride, or they catch a flight or train out of state then you would have trouble making a civil suit against the out of state people who assisted. If you mailed someone the pills then the texass people are not going to get their pay as there was no crime committed in texass. Of course there should be a public database of every person who files one of these civil suits created. If only for the purpose of making it easier for some serial killer to come collect their body parts easier. Oh my some spit on your grave woman came along and cut all your tiny little texass dicks off. I keep on losing that tiny violin so I can play for you.
Oh, shit, when they finally invent the technology to clone you a womb, you won't be able to get an abortion now! Fascist Fetus Cop- Hey....you ain't gonna get an abortion with this are ya? Tererun-Ye....nooooo.
If I could get an abortion right now I would be driving to the texass legislature with a coathanger. As it is I am already preparing my abortion Uber for the duh when desantis outlaws them.
Isn't revealing a person's medical information to the public without their permission a HIPAA violation punishable by jailtime? I do not think 10k is going to cover your lawyer when you have to go to trial for releasing private medical information. Shouldn't the FBI be looking into everyone who releases this information as a federal felony?
Don't worry, it is coming back. It does sound like my assumptions are possibly right that there may be some liability with publishing medical information on your property. Just because the supreme court is avoiding the issue for the moment does not mean the law does not have huge constitutional problems. Like a lot of overreaching republican laws, this one is violating multiple laws and not just a supreme court decision. Citizens are not allowed to have a person's medical records, nor are they allowed to get their medical procedures outside of that person telling them. Just do not tell a person why you are going to a hospital or medical professional. When they ask why, you say fuck you HIPAA and if they demand the information you shoot them in self defense because that is legal in Texass. Aside from some idiot telling a person they are getting an abortion, how is anyone but their doctor going to know? I am noty saying it is a great solution and that the texass republicans should not have their genitals mounted on a wall for a number of reasons, but why are you telling people? If your doctor or their staff rats you out that is their medical license and a crime. The state would need a warrant for out of state procedures to find out. If the abortion is done outside of Texass in a state where it is legal they have no standing to criminalize it or get a warrant. Some of this stuff will be tried in the lower courts anyway. First they have to get by the warrant issue to gather evidence. Then they have to somehow show that an action committed in another state can be criminalized in Texass. That is a huge leap that would effect everyone. It would make it illegal for me to buy some pot in Colorado because it is illegal in florida. What would happen to alcohol sales? GA does not sell on sundays and at certain times. Does that mean the supermarket in another state broke the law by selling to a person from GA on sunday? This law is so absurd it is temporary at best. You cannot outlaw a person who leaves the state to do something illegal in that state. Everyone has an interest in keeping this sort of thing within the state, and the havoc you would cause by opening up prosecution for acts committed outside of your state.
The left- You see women as brood mares, and you hate them. The right- Ohhhh, hooow could you saaayyy thaaat?! I'm sooo offeeeended! The right first fucking chance they get- They're brood mares!!! Get them!! Get theeeem!!! Yeah, I remember when you shits used to go to the fainting couches over being called racist too.
Keeping in mind that how all this might play out is at least somewhat unclear: There is at least an argument to be made that the right of action to sue civilly would still cover aiding and abetting abortions that take place in other states, as long as the aiding and abetting happens in Texas. There is nothing (at least in my quick read of the law) that directly states that the law only applies to abortions that are performed in Texas. If someone in Texas says, "I know you're two months pregnant, so I'm giving you airfare so that you can go to California and get an abortion," it seems that at least hypothetically, one could sue. What is meant by "aiding and abetting" is not defined. It would seem that merely giving words of encouragement would not subject someone to jeopardy. But take the tweet from AOC Tuckerfan linked to above. Hypothetically, if a Texas woman two months pregnant read that tweet and followed AOC's advice to figure out how to get abortiofacient drugs and used them, could someone attempt to sue AOC under this law? My thought would be yes. Trying to serve her with process might be rough. It also is hypothetically retroactive. It explicitly covers reimbursing expenses for an abortion even if it is through insurance. So again hypothetically, an HMO could be sued for providing coverage to someone who gets an abortion past 16 weeks. So can someone be held to be an "accessory after the fact" so to speak under this law? I wouldn't be surprised. https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/privacy/laws-regulations/index.html To oversimplify, HIPAA covers health care organizations, agencies that are closely related to health care, and their employees, and violations are penalized mainly through fines, though prison time is possible. The average person or group can broadcast private health information all they want without running afoul of HIPAA. Which is not to say that some other law might apply instead. But HIPAA doesn't.
It just seems like a poorly written law. Using civil courts to sue someone should mean you need standing as part of the case. It seems like that part of the law contradicts the ways laws work and will be thrown out by lower courts which will eventually be challenged up to the supreme court. It will punish whoever gets served initially but you cannot allow this without setting a precedent that would change the way civil cases work. I might be mistaken here, but doesn't a civil suit have to be filed in the state where the defendant resides, or the business resides? Texass law is not the law of the land. So if I sent airfare to a person in texass to travel out of texass I am not subject to the laws of texass at any time because I was never present in texass. It just seems like all of this gets challenged on the first case, and the courts have to throw it out or change all sorts of laws on how things work between states. Then how does it work outside of the country? If @spot261 decided to send airfare for a woman to go to a state where abortion is legal how the fuck do you bring a civil case against him for breaking a texass law as a foreign citizen who may never come to the US? This goes down the path of how would you ever get this information if the person having the abortion never told anyone. Assuming she goes to a doctor in texass to confirm her pregnancy, how does someone else get that information? If the medical staff is prohibited from giving out patient info based on HIPAA then there would be retaliation possible by the woman. That doctor would lose their license, get fined, and be in violation of criminal law if they went and reported this, or allowed that information to be viewed by others. The doctor should not be allowed to report a pregnancy to the state or others. I do understand that for her to communicate a purpose to get money or assistance in getting to another state would potentially lead to a method of discovery, and that would make it difficult for a charity or another person compelled by a warrant to give up the information, you could not necessarily ask the information of them as law enforcement without them invoking their right to remain silent. Since you have now made the act of assisting something you need to protect yourself against, you can now claim the fifth or remain silent and not be compelled to testify against the woman. Before they could have compelled you to testify against her crime as you had not committed one, and you do not have a relationship with her that is protected by law. Now you are on the hook, so they cannot ask you to incriminate yourself in regards to assisting her. Again, it seems the republicans did not think all of this through. This law was just the hopeful writings of idiots, and it has been allowed to exist for some extra time because of the fascist five on the supreme court.
