More than a dozen states have laws shielding medical providers and others from out-of-state investigations and prosecutions regarding abortions and gender affirming care. But six states — Colorado, Massachusetts, New York, California, Vermont and Washington — have gone even further.
Those shield laws offer protection for doctors, nurses and other practitioners who prescribe and send abortion pills to people living in states that ban or severely restrict abortion.
“States have a duty to protect their most vulnerable citizens and their families from harm. One state cannot intrude on another state’s efforts to protect the lives and health of its citizens — including the lives and health of unborn children and their families,” said Erin Hawley, a top attorney at the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), a right-wing legal powerhouse.
“Pro-abortion states who don’t recognize the basic principle that life is a human right cannot undermine the laws of other states simply because they don’t agree with them,” she said.
Hawley and the ADF represented anti-abortion doctors at the Supreme Court who are trying to restrict access to one of the two abortion medications.
The Alliance Defending Freedom didn’t comment on potential shield law litigation efforts, but advocates on both sides of the abortion divide said they think a court challenge is only a matter of time.
“It’s hard for me to imagine that you’re not going to see some attempts to challenge these things. And the best way to do that probably is to try to indict a provider,” said Greer Donley, an abortion law expert and associate professor at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law.
“This is not just a state determining what their policy is going to be. This is really a state trying to sabotage the governance of their neighboring states,” said John Seago, president of Texas Right to Life organization. “It’s a complicated legal and policy question. But it is something that we take seriously, and we do feel like there will have to be some challenges.”
@LoyalOcelotDemocrat2wks2W
We just never learn: You can't legislate morality. People will do what they do because they feel it in their own best interest, no matter what the law says. Many lives were impacted before abortion was first made legal, for better or for worse. But in the end it's still each person that has to make their own choice, and live with it.
Why society continues to think that it can force peoples decision to fit someone elses values still surprises me. Making criminals out of normal people just doing their best to get along with their lives is counterproductive, and in the end pointless. It never really changes anything.
@YearlyCardinalPatriot2wks2W
I share your animus toward gov't "interference," but your "people will do what they feel is in their best interest" baloney needs a reality check. We're talking sexual activity here, and "self-interest" JUST THIS ONCE might not be uppermost in 2 people's minds or extremities.
@SeafowlChrisDemocrat2wks2W
We need abortion to remain legal, medically supervised, and safe. Pharmaceutical abortion is safe —in theory, but it can go wrong when it isn't administered as directed. People need to be examined before an abortion to make sure they are in the parameters of when it is safe. There have been people who were way too far along attempt termination using the pill. For all intents and purposes an abortion induced by using the pill is the same as a miscarriage. You can bleed out, or have an incomplete evacuation.
That's why we need supervision. To save the lives, health and future fertility of women.
Trust a woman! Trust a woman to know whether and when she should have a child. When a woman chooses to have a child you can trust her to take care of that child.
Forced childbirth may actually increase the incidence of child abuse. An unwanted child may be in danger from his/her own parent.
The "pro-life" crowd needs to understand that everyone is pro-life except those who would deny food or medical care, for example, to people who need it. Contraception and medicine designed to allow women to live their lives is a no-brainer.
The Roe decision has created all sorts of problems for women, families, doctors, hospitals, etc. It has demonstrated that the laws in our country are always subject to challenge and change no matter how fundamental they were supposed to be. Perhaps slavery can make a comeback or putting twelve-year-olds to work in slaughterhouses (oh wait did that already begin?). Can I travel to another state for a procedure not allowed where I live? If a doctor follows the Hippocratic oath, can he or she be jailed for doing so? When a society loses its moorings to this degree sometimes ships start crashing in the night, not passing.
@TreasuryMandrillGreen2wks2W
“But recent research has found increases in birthrates in states after they banned abortions.”
Soon to follow in those states:
Increases in childhood poverty, neglect, and abuse;
increases in the number of children in foster care;
increases in all social pathologies;
after some years, increases in crime (and, thus, taxes).
@HumanR1ghtsLizardGreen2wks2W
“But recent research has found increases in birthrates in states after they banned abortions.”
Soon to follow in those states:
Increases in childhood poverty, neglect, and abuse;
increases in the number of children in foster care;
increases in all social pathologies;
after some years, increases in crime (and, thus, taxes).
@MellowHumanR1ghtsGreen2wks2W
“But recent research has found increases in birthrates in states after they banned abortions.”
Soon to follow in those states:
Increases in childhood poverty, neglect, and abuse;
increases in the number of children in foster care;
increases in all social pathologies;
after some years, increases in crime (and, thus, taxes).
@ISIDEWITH2wks2W
@ISIDEWITH2wks2W
@ISIDEWITH2wks2W
@ISIDEWITH2wks2W
@ISIDEWITH2wks2W
The historical activity of users engaging with this general discussion.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
