Roe vs. Wade, American abortion rights

[AndyinPA]

IANAL, but I think if they hadn't agreed to take it, it would have let the lower court decision stand.

[MN-Skeptic]

IANAL, so I follow some on Twitter. This is what Steve Vladeck tweeted this morning -

Steve Vladeck
@steve_vladeck

#SCOTUS *agrees* to take up cases abortion pill cases; will reconsider lower-court rulings limiting access to mifepristone.

The Court *denied* the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine's cross-petition, a strong signal that the justices are focused only on the plaintiffs' standing.
----------------------
Sorry for the typo in the first line. Here's a link to the orders:

https://supremecourt.gov/orders/courtor ... r_f204.pdf
----------------------
This is a very *good* sign for access to mifepristone; by denying AHM's cross-petition, #SCOTUS *declined* to add the merits of the FDA's 2000 approval of mifepristone to their review.

Instead, they're focused on standing—where a reversal reverts to the pre-Kascmaryk status quo.
----------------------
Is there an obvious reason why #SCOTUS granted the Fischer January 6 case, but *not* the Lang and Miller cases that were consolidated with it both in the D.C. Circuit and in DOJ's response?

Seems like there's a clue here about how narrow the Court's intervention is going to be.
----------------------
And for everyone yelling at me in the replies, I'm not being coy. I *don't know* why they'd take only Fischer and not the other two, but it suggests that *perhaps* this is not as major an intervention as it's being portrayed—and is about something narrower in just Fischer's case.
----------------------
#SCOTUS taking the mifepristone case is a good thing for mifepristone access, not a bad thing.

Had the Court *denied* certiorari (or granted AHM's cross-petition and agreed to revisit the FDA's original approval of mifepristone back in 2000), that would have been *much worse.*

When a tweeter asked Vladeck why it would have been much worse, Vladeck tweeted:

Denying cert. would have left intact the Fifth Circuit decision that blocked some of the more recent expansions of access. Granting the cross-petition would have put before the justices whether the original approval in 2000 was itself valid.

[Slim Cognito]

https://www.newsbreakapp.com/n/0qDdLjcd ... 1702523770

The people of Florida have done it, collected enough signatures for our pro-choice initiative to be on the ballot in 2024… if the state Supreme Court allows it. We collected enough signatures for recreational marijuana quite some time ago but our idiot AG is working overtime to keep that one off the ballot.

Here you need 60% to pass. The pro-choice initiative is polling at 70%.

[raison de arizona]

[Ben-Prime]

https://www.newsbreakapp.com/n/0qDdLjcd ... 1702523770

The people of Florida have done it, collected enough signatures for our pro-choice initiative to be on the ballot in 2024… if the state Supreme Court allows it. We collected enough signatures for recreational marijuana quite some time ago but our idiot AG is working overtime to keep that one off the ballot.

Here you need 60% to pass. The pro-choice initiative is polling at 70%.

But will the legislature slow walk or cripple it they way they did with voting rights restoration, etc.?

[Slim Cognito]

They sure as heck will do their best..

[jemcanada2]

I thought that part of the reason they overturned Roe v Wade was because it’s supposed to be a state issue and it was being sent back to the states to decide. So why are they trying to push these archaic laws on the whole country?

I know! They’re lying hypocrites

[John Thomas8]

"And because it may be too great a temptation to human frailty, apt to grasp at power, for the same persons, who have the power of making laws, to have also in their hands the power to execute them, whereby they may exempt themselves from obedience to the laws they make, and suit the law, both in its making, and execution, to their own private advantage, and thereby come to have a distinct interest from the rest of the community, contrary to the end of society and government: therefore in well ordered commonwealths, where the good of the whole is so considered, as it ought, the legislative power is put into the hands of divers persons, who duly assembled, have by themselves, or jointly with others, a power to make laws, which when they have done, being separated again, they are themselves subject to the laws they have made; which is a new and near tie upon them, to take care, that they make them for the public good."

-- John Locke
(1632-1704) English philosopher and political theorist

[raison de arizona]

INSPIRING: These Republicans Talking About Obamacare in 2009 Make A Great Case for Abortion Rights

[AndyinPA]

Good find.

That was then; this is now.

[raison de arizona]

Fascinating. Infuriating. NYT.

Those dynamics help explain why the responses stacked up so speedily to the draft opinion in February 2022: Justice Alito appeared to have pregamed it among some of the conservative justices, out of view from other colleagues, to safeguard a coalition more fragile than it looked.

The Supreme Court deliberates in secret, and those who speak can be cast out of the fold. To piece together the hidden narrative of how the court, guided by Justice Alito, engineered a titanic shift in the law, The New York Times drew on internal documents, contemporaneous notes and interviews with more than a dozen people from the court — both conservative and liberal — who had real-time knowledge of the proceedings. Because of the institution’s insistence on confidentiality, they spoke on the condition of anonymity.

At every stage of the Dobbs litigation, Justice Alito faced impediments: a case that initially looked inauspicious, reservations by two conservative justices and efforts by colleagues to pull off a compromise. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., a conservative, along with the liberal Justice Stephen G. Breyer, worked to prevent or at least limit the outcome. Justice Breyer even considered trying to save Roe v. Wade — the 1973 ruling that established the right to abortion — by significantly eroding it.

To dismantle that decision, Justice Alito and others had to push hard, the records and interviews show. Some steps, like his apparent selective preview of the draft opinion, were time-honored ones. But in overturning Roe, the court set aside more than precedent: It tested the boundaries of how cases are decided.

Free: https://web.archive.org/web/20231215102 ... rtion.html
Paywall: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/15/us/s ... rtion.html

[John Thomas8]

COLUMBUS, Ohio – The Ohio Supreme Court dismissed an appeal in the case against the state’s ‘heartbeat’ abortion ban late Friday afternoon, citing a change in law just a week after an abortion rights amendment to the state constitution took effect.

The significance of the dismissal wasn’t immediately clear. The heartbeat law has been on a temporary hold for more than a year under a Hamilton County judge’s order after abortion providers sued to stop enforcement.

https://www.cleveland.com/open/2023/12/ ... -case.html

[AndyinPA]

https://wapo.st/3NxIm58

Gifted.

This one about a mother is Florida. She had to carry a baby with Potter Syndrome to term. He lived 99 minutes, gasping for air.

[Annrc]

So sad. These laws are cruel. The people instituting them need to be stopped.

[raison de arizona]

Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin will reopen its Sheboygan clinic after a Dane County Judge invalidated the state's 1849 abortion ban.

This is the third Planned Parenthood clinic to re-open in Wisconsin in 2023 since the 174-year-old law took effect after the Dobbs decision.

[raison de arizona]

https://thegrio.com/2023/12/08/brittany ... rand-jury/

More about horrific Brittany Watts case. Just as many women warned, miscarriage is being prosecuted as a felony.

https://x.com/laurahancock/status/17455 ... 47751?s=20

BREAKING: The grand jury has decided NOT to indict Brittany Watts. She's the Warren Ohio woman facing charges after miscarriage.

[Annrc]

Good. That poor lady.

[AndyinPA]

The people have more sense and empathy than the politicians. I'm glad for her. Such a travesty.

[raison de arizona]

The people have more sense and empathy than the politicians. I'm glad for her. Such a travesty.

I'd like to think that we as a society, regardless of tfg admonishing us that "the woman needs to be punished," are not going to do that. I could be wrong, but I'd LIKE to think that even conservatives will balk at punishing a woman for having a miscarriage.

[SuzieC]

The people have more sense and empathy than the politicians. I'm glad for her. Such a travesty.

I'd like to think that we as a society, regardless of tfg admonishing us that "the woman needs to be punished," are not going to do that. I could be wrong, but I'd LIKE to think that even conservatives will balk at punishing a woman for having a miscarriage.

The Youngstown/NE Ohio area has not yet gone full MAGA/Texas/Florida evil.

[Tiredretiredlawyer]

The fetus was nonviable. She endured two days of medical delays and had the nonviable fetus emerge. Its location in the toilet did not kill it. The judge at the initial probable cause hearing couldn’t decide whether it was a”corpse” per the statute or whether what she did fit the statute so he bumped up to the prosecuting attorney who was forced to file charges per an article I read. The judge said something about a legal scholar could better figure this out than he could. If it ain’t clear, IMHO, there ain’t no probable cause.

[RTH10260]

‘We don’t want to be the bad guys’: anti-abortion marchers seek post-Roe stance
On the 51st anniversary of Roe v Wade, a sparse crowd of activists brave snow on March for Life in Washington DC

Carter Sherman
Sat 20 Jan 2024 00.35 CET

While Joe Biden and Kamala Harris are planning a cascade of ads and events to coincide with the 51st anniversary of Roe v Wade, hundreds of anti-abortion activists gathered on the National Mall in Washington DC on Friday in hopes of re-energizing a movement that has repeatedly stumbled since Roe’s overturning.

Originally organized around the goal of overturning the Roe precedent that established federal abortion rights, the March for Life has seen what was once its greatest victory become a political liability. In the 18 months since Roe’s demise, abortion rights supporters have trounced anti-abortion activists in state-level ballot referendums. Yet the march’s message was largely similar to past years: speakers and attendees alike talked about the need to make abortion “unthinkable” rather than just illegal – with scant details on how to make that happen.

“We don’t want to just go in and be the bad guys,” said Elijah Persinger, a 19-year-old from Fort Wayne, Indiana. “We want to make make people understand and help them understand the science behind things and the logic that we’re going by as well.”

As in years past, march attendees skewed young. Schools and universities organize trips for students to attend the march, and groups often carry banners and flags with their schools’ names. Some groups all wear bright-colored, matching hats in order to keep from getting lost in the crowd.

Persinger took a 12-hour, overnight bus ride to attend Friday’s March for Life. His group planned to leave DC after the event.

But the crowd on Friday seemed relatively sparse. When the US House speaker, Mike Johnson, stood on a podium to speak, he was met with only muted applause – despite being a high-profile attendee for the march. The greatest response came when he mentioned Biden: when he said that the president’s administration planned to restrict funding to crisis pregnancy centers, the crowd booed loudly.

Organizers also spoke from the stage about the need to support maternity homes and crisis pregnancy centers, facilities that aim to convince people to keep their pregnancies.



https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... hington-dc

[Slim Cognito]

‘We don’t want to be the bad guys’: anti-abortion marchers seek post-Roe stance

That ship has sailed. Cue Celine Dion.

(Or would There's Got To Be A Morning After from The Poseidon Adventure be more appropriate?)

[Tiredretiredlawyer]

https://arkansasadvocate.com/2024/01/23 ... oon-begin/

Ballot initiative to legalize abortion in Arkansas advances; signature gathering to soon begin
Arkansas attorney general certifies proposed amendment’s ballot title and popular name

Arkansans in November will vote on whether to enshrine abortion rights into the state Constitution if supporters can collect enough signatures in the next five months.

Arkansas’ attorney general on Tuesday certified a third draft of a proposed constitutional amendment that would guarantee a limited right to abortion in the state.

The Arkansas Abortion Amendment of 2024 is backed by ballot initiative group Arkansans for Limited Government, which expressed appreciation for Attorney General Tim Griffin’s decision and gratitude for his staff’s professionalism. The group is now focused on “the immense work ahead.”

“Just yesterday, we acknowledged what would have been the 51st anniversary of Roe v. Wade. Today, we are one step closer to restoring the freedom that was taken from individuals when Roe v. Wade was overturned,” AFLG Treasurer Jim McHugh said. “We won’t stop until Arkansans can use their voice at the ballot box in November.”

Supporters have until July 5 to collect 90,704 signatures from registered voters to qualify for a statewide vote on the Nov. 5 general election ballot. AFLG will kick off its statewide signature collection effort with a rally at 2 p.m. Sunday at the Fayetteville Town Center.

Griffin twice rejected the proposed measure before certifying the popular name and ballot title Tuesday. In a five-page-opinion, Griffin said he certified the proposal after adding some clarifying language to the ballot text and title.

However, he said a cautionary note is warranted “in light of the significance of the subject matter undertaken and the potential complexity and far-reaching effects” of the proposal.

“Any ambiguity in the text of a measure could lead to a successful court challenge,” Griffin wrote. “Significant changes in law often have unintended consequences that, if known, would give voters serious ground for reflection.”

If approved by voters, the constitutional amendment would not allow state government to “prohibit, penalize, delay, or restrict abortion services within 18 weeks of fertilization.” Abortion has been illegal in Arkansas except to save the life of a pregnant person in a “medical emergency” since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022. It is one of the strictest abortion bans in the U.S.

The amendment would also permit abortion services in cases of rape, incest, a fatal fetal anomaly or “to protect a pregnant female’s life or to protect a pregnant female from a physical disorder, physical illness, or physical injury.”

In a statement, Family Council President Jerry Cox called the proposed measure “a radical amendment legalizing abortion in a way Arkansas has never seen before.”

“It writes abortion into the Arkansas Constitution,” Cox said. “It erases virtually all of Arkansas’ pro-life laws, and it allows abortion on demand without restriction through the first eighteen weeks of pregnancy.”

Griffin said while he is pro-life, he must follow an 80-year-old process when reviewing proposed ballot initiatives.

“I am and have always been strongly pro-life, but the law does not allow me to consider my own personal views,” he said. “I am guided by the law and the law alone. I routinely certify proposals I personally oppose. Conversely, I routinely reject proposals I personally support.”

[RTH10260]

US single people under 50 having less sex since Roe overturned, study finds
Annual study from Match Group of 5,000 single people finds shift in behavior since supreme court ruling on abortion

Carter Sherman
Wed 24 Jan 2024 14.00 CET

More than one in 10 single people under 50 say they are having less sex because the US supreme court overturned Roe v Wade, according to a new study.

On Wednesday, Match Group, which operates Tinder, Hinge and a slew of other matchmaking platforms, released the latest findings from its long-running Singles in America survey, a snapshot of more than 5,000 single Americans’ thoughts and experiences around dating and sex. For the second year in a row, Match has found that the demolition of the national right to abortion is affecting how Americans say they date and have sex with one another.

Since Roe fell, more than 20 states have significantly restricted abortion access. Thirteen per cent of singles under 50 said that they are now more afraid of getting pregnant or getting someone else pregnant, including 21% of gen Z singles between the ages of 18 and 26. Twelve per cent of singles under 50 also said that Roe’s demise has made them more hesitant to date, while 11% said they have casual sex less frequently and the same number reported having less sex overall. Seven per cent said that they are more likely to have sex in ways that lower the risk of pregnancy, such as non-penetrative sex.

“It has become a litmus test for people that it’s too much trouble to date,” one survey respondent said of Roe. Another added: “I’m bisexual, so it makes me think I should strictly date women.”

One in 10 say that, when they do have sex, they are more nervous or anxious.

“Not only is it impacting behavior, it’s also impacting the meaning and the quality of the experience that people are having. It’s really remarkable that legislation is making people feel more nervous or worried or less comfortable with their sexual lives,” said Justin Garcia, the executive director of the Kinsey Institute and a scientific adviser to Match Group.

This kind of anxiety, Garcia said, threatens people’s ability to form partnerships: “You’re not gonna connect that well if you’re feeling anxious the whole time.”




https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... roe-v-wade