Trump Abortion Ban Kills Texas Teen

Friday, November 01, 2024

Candace Fails screamed for someone in the Texas hospital to help her pregnant daughter. "Do something," she pleaded, on the morning of Oct. 29, 2023. Nevaeh Crain was crying in pain, too weak to walk, blood staining her thighs. Feverish and vomiting the day of her baby shower, the 18-year-old had gone to two different emergency rooms within 12 hours, returning home each time worse than before.

Posted by reinheitsgebot at 12:48 PM | 108 COMMENTS | permalink

Comments

I'll protect you whether you like it or not.

~ Putin's bitch ~

#1 | Posted by reinheitsgebot at 2024-11-01 08:48 AM

As a follow up ... Remember that time Obama and the Democrats had a Super Majority in the Senate and chose to do crappy Obamacare over legalizing abortion into law? Good times ...

This is the expected and desired outcome of the Dobbs decision. Women who die from pregnancy aren't welcome in the ideal master race that the MAGATS envision.

Remember that time when Congress could have passed a bipartisan bill legslizing abortion in all 50 states but Republicans opposed anything Democrats tried to do and noe today they get the villsge useful idiots to repeat their talking points which try to shift the blame that results from abortion bans passed by Republicans which includes prison sentences for doctors who violate these deadly bans?

Apparently this is what the fine people of Texas want, since they re-elected Anti-choice Abbott guv by 12 points in 2022 and voted Republican in every single Presidential election since 1980.

"'I never thought leopards would eat MY face,' sobs woman who voted for the Leopards Eating People's Faces Party."

Danni, pro-abortion policy is the Dems bread and butter (you are running on it this cycle) with that said, I'm simply reminding you that you've actually had the opportunity 16 years ago to do something on it and chose not to.

The reason Democrats won't do anything on it is because your party leadership is well aware of the congressional/Senate seat backlash you would face. No matter which side of the aisle people are on it's always politicking for the people in charge and none of them truly want to touch the abortion issue nationally.

none of them truly want to touch the abortion issue nationally.

#6 | Posted by Bluewaffles at 2024-11-01 09:59 AM | Reply | Flag

Of course not. What would they do for a wedge issue if they did?

Photographic evidence of Democrat Party operative stuffing ballot box in Milwaukee.

Sad deflections are sad.

Women are going to destroy trump on Nov 5th and instead of accepting responsibility for that....you idiots are gonna say the election was stolen.

Easier than changing anything about yourself.

" I'm simply reminding you that you've actually had the opportunity 16 years ago to do something on it and chose not to."

The same Roberts Court would have thrown any such law out short of a Constitutional Amendment which the Democrats never had an opportunity to pass. realize one important point:

"In 1970, Jane Roe (a fictional name used in court documents to protect the plaintiff's identity) filed a lawsuit against Henry Wade, the district attorney of Dallas County, Texas, where she resided, challenging a Texas law making abortion illegal except by a doctor's orders to save a woman's life. In her lawsuit, Roe alleged that the state laws were unconstitutionally vague and abridged her right of personal privacy, protected by the First, Fourth, Fifth, Ninth, and Fourteenth Amendments."

When the Roberts Court threw out Roe v Wade they basically said that a woman does not have the rights cited ; right of personal privacy, protected by the First, Fourth, Fifth, Ninth, and Fourteenth Amendments." I honestly just can't wait until a more liberal court decides that every idiot in America does not have a Constitutional Right to buy and own an AR15. When that happens the hypocritucal Pro-Life busybodies will discover that valueing human life shoulld not be limited to unwanted fetuses, already born children matter too which basically proves that the whole Pro-Life movement is really just a political tool used by the Republicans to retain the support of the religious right which they need to win elections; do none of y'all remember Donald Trump of the 1980's; pro-choice in those days. But he holds up a bible and pretends to be this devout Christian and y'all completely buy it. If it wasn't so bad for America it would be funny to watch him do his Christian Act!

We can admire the courage of medical professionals that would would withhold life saving medical treatment in order to make a political point about policy with which they disagree.

#5 | Posted by Bluewaffles

Let me put this argument to bed in clear terms.

There is no law that Congress could have passed that would have changed the Dobbs decision.

Do you understand that?

You see Congress has the power to do 2 categories of things:

1. their enumerated powers
2. protect both enumerated and unenumerated rights.

Dobbs SPECIFICALLY stated women do not have a right to an abortion.

Therefore, Congress has no authority to pass a law that protects a woman's right to an abortion or any medical procedure for that matter. Congress has no enumerated power to do so.

They can, effectively, deny abortions nationwide through regulating the interstate sale of the materials/equipment to perform abortions though.

You have been informed, now stop this argument.

We can admire the courage of medical professionals that would would withhold life saving medical treatment in order to make a political point about policy with which they disagree.

#11 | Posted by visitor_

reproductiverights.org

Texas REFUSES to define when an abortion is medically permitted under the law.

www.theguardian.com

State attorney general threatened to prosecute doctors if they provided abortion care to a woman with a nonviable pregnancy

When a Texas court ruled that a 31-year-old woman with a non-viable pregnancy could have an abortion despite the state's strict bans, the Texas attorney general, Ken Paxton, responded with a brazen threat to prosecute "hospitals, doctors, or anyone else" who would assist in providing the procedure. The letter he sent Texas hospitals hours after the ruling, threatening first-degree felonies that could result in life in prison, was a "stunning" move indicative of his longstanding crusade to criminalize abortion care, say legal experts and advocates.

Visitor do you wonder why people consider you scum?

"Women are going to destroy trump on Nov 5th and instead of accepting responsibility for that....you idiots are gonna say the election was stolen."

OK.

Trump has nothing to do with Texas abortion law. Whether he wins or loses, it will have no bearing on these laws.

What may have an effect is how Texas votes in the 2026 gubernatorial election, although I'm not sure even that would matter, at least in cases like this. Texas law already permits abortions of the mother is at risk of injury or death.

We can admire the courage of medical professionals that would would withhold life saving medical treatment in order to make a political point about policy with which they disagree.

Why don't you tell us the precise point they should have aborted the fetus?

Because doc #1 straight up misdiagnosed her and while a mistake, did not involve making a decision on abortion.

Doc #2 looks like they punted, like so many ER and OB's in Texas because they don't want to make the decision at all due to the risk of potential litigation directly tied to Texas abortion ban.

Doc #3 had to get a repeat ultrasound to prove for any future litigation that the there was no heartbeat (aka, the electrical activity whether there's an actual heart or not) due to the risk of potential litigation directly tied to Texas abortion ban. They wasted time getting the proper documentation and at that point she was effectively dead.

These things are the result of your politics.

I swear there's garden hoses smarter and more self-aware than Trump supporters.

you've actually had the opportunity 16 years ago to do something on it and chose not to.
#5 | Posted by Bluewaffles

Points for willful ignorance / pretending that any talibaptist SCOTUS that overruled Roe would let federal legislation protecting a right to abortion stand.

" Trump has nothing to do with Texas abortion law."

Amazing how appointing three justices, all clearly there to overturn Roe, is considered NOTHING.

Trump even BRAGS ... about being the one to thank for overturning 50 years of precedent.

It was Trump's fault from the moment SCOTUS refused to "stay" the Texas bounty law.

"Trump has nothing to do with Texas abortion law. Whether he wins or loses, it will have no bearing on these laws."

Christ the ignorance hurts

First, Texas wouldn't be able to enforce an abortion law if the SC didn't issue the Dobbs decision AND previously refuse to overturn SB-8

------- put 3 justices on the SC

Those 3 justices were part of the SC

Don't trust me, listen to the "man" himself: "After 50 years of failure, with nobody coming even close, I was able to kill Roe v. Wade, much to the shock' of everyone," Trump, the former president and front-runner for the 2024 Republican nomination, said on his social media platform.

Second,
If ------- is reelected it is HIGHLY likely that a nationwide abortion ban will be implemented.

Doctors have been making mistakes and people of have been dying of sepsis long before this law. It's just wild, politically motivated, speculation that the outcome would have been any different if the doctors were not "practicing in fear".

"Amazing how appointing three justices, all clearly there to overturn Roe, is considered NOTHING."

SCOTUS did not make abortion illegal. Texas did. And in this case, it actually looks like it would have been legal. Even in Texas.

I see visiturd refuses to read my #13

"If ------- is reelected it is HIGHLY likely that a nationwide abortion ban will be implemented."

You think so?

You think the Supreme Court is going to reverse their position that it is up to the states?

And even if they did, some states have already written the right to an abortion into their state constitutions.

I don't think it would be possible to create a nationwide ban on abortion unless it were carried out through an amendment to the constitution. Which is not gonna happen.

SCOTUS did not make abortion illegal. Texas did. And in this case, it actually looks like it would have been legal. Even in Texas.

#22 | Posted by madbomber

For the thick skulled, I will repost this:

life in prison

for a procedure a texass court ruled was legal

#23 The beauty of the system is if you don't like Texas law, move. If there's one law over the whole nation, we can't escape.

You think so?

You think the Supreme Court is going to reverse their position that it is up to the states?

And even if they did, some states have already written the right to an abortion into their state constitutions.

I don't think it would be possible to create a nationwide ban on abortion unless it were carried out through an amendment to the constitution. Which is not gonna happen.

#24 | Posted by madbomber

Oh dear god!

take a civics course!!!

You have no idea how our government works.

Federal law trumps state laws. Full Stop.

You see federal law is passed by Congress

There is ALREADY a federal law on the books (the Comstock Act) that prohibits the mailing of abortion related materials.

All ------- has to do is to enforce the Comstock Act and poof abortion is effectively banned nationwide.

Because abortion medication and equipment has to be mailed you see.

And Congress has the enumerated power to regulate interstate commerce.

Which was the basis for the Comstock Act.

I predict you will ignore these FACTS and continue with your ignorance

#26 - Brain damage really is a terrible thing.

I predict you will ignore these FACTS and continue with your ignorance

That's a sure bet.

#23 The beauty of the system is if you don't like Texas law, move. If there's one law over the whole nation, we can't escape.

#26 | Posted by visitor_

1. Basic human rights should not be state by state
2. -------- state's abortion laws are clogging non--------- states abortion providers with patients, preventing the citizens of the non--------- states from getting necessary care
3. ------- will pass or enforce a nationwide ban

Magats are truly despicable people.

You think the Supreme Court is going to reverse their position that it is up to the states?

Why not? If they can undo 50 years of Roe.

And even if they did, some states have already written the right to an abortion into their state constitutions.

Do you seriously not understand that Federal law generally takes precedence over state law?

According to the Supremacy Clause (Article VI, clause 2) of the United States Constitution

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the Supreme law of the land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

As the Supreme Court stated in Altria Group v. Good, 555 U.S. 70 (2008), a federal law that conflicts with a state law will overtake, or "preempt", that state law:

Consistent with that command, we have long recognized that state laws that conflict with federal law are "without effect". Maryland v. Louisiana, 451 U. S. 725, 746 (1981)

Although many concurrent powers are subject to federal preemption, some are usually not, such as the power to tax private citizens.

Federal Preemption en.wikipedia.org

I don't think it would be possible to create a nationwide ban on abortion unless it were carried out through an amendment to the constitution. Which is not gonna happen.
#24 | Posted by madbomber

It's possible if SCOTUS says it's possible. You should know that by now.

I'm going to protect women whether they like it or not.

- Rapist McFelon.

The details of this story are absolutely horrific. All directly attributable to Donald "I will take care of women even if they don't like it!" Trump and the Scum Sharia Six Supremes and sick freaks (trumplicans) that make up today's GOP. These self-righteous idiots have manifested pure evil in their zealousness to show us all how moral they are, or in Trump's case for the never enough adulation.

#32 - thanks for the correct quote. I got it close. I should have looked it up first.

You think the Supreme Court is going to reverse their position that it is up to the states?

Why not? If they can undo 50 years of Roe.

All six of the corrupt justices REVERSED THEIR POSITIONS THEY SWORE UNDER OATH DURING THEIR HEARINGS THAT ROE WAS SETTLED PRECEDENT.

It is clear that the people that are bribing these corrupt justices TOLD THEM TO JUMP AND THEY DID.

What vacation was Clarence bribed with this time? Alito?

Did Keggenaugh have some more country club fees that needed paying?

Ken Paxton

Another slack jawed crooked eye corrupt piece of garbage.

"SCOTUS did not make abortion illegal. Texas did."

Pick up a history book, FFS. Abortion became illegal in Texas the moment Scotus refused to stay Texas's bounty law.

SCOTUS gave permission.

You're referring to a distinction without a difference, if you're a Texan.

"Women are going to destroy trump on Nov 5th and instead of accepting responsibility for that....you idiots are gonna say the election was stolen."

Mikey Johnson and dotard have a plan. The states must certify by 12/11. R governors of any state Kamala wins is going to refuse to do so. Mikey will then declare those EV's invalid, reducing the number of EV's needed to win in the hopes that will give dotard the election.

They don't work. They cheat.

If there's one law over the whole nation, we can't escape.

POSTED BY VISITOR_

There's always Venezuela.

"If something happens with this election, which would be a horror show, we'll meet the next time in Venezuela, because it'll be a far safer place to meet than our country. So you and I will go and we'll have a meeting and dinner in Venezuela."
-The OG. (Orange Guy).

As a follow up ... Remember that time Obama and the Democrats had a Super Majority in the Senate and chose to do crappy Obamacare over legalizing abortion into law? Good times ...

#2 | Posted by Bluewaffles

It's democrats fault that republicans banned abortion!

Just like the iraq war was democrats fault for not stopping republicans from invading!

The unnecessary death of this 18 year old girl is what happens when politicians decide things which should only be decided be a woman and her doctor. Abbott has blood on his hands and I hope that, somehow, that truth is creeping into his arrogant mind and that he carries the guilt for this unnecessary death for the rest of his life! This shouldn't have been a surprise to him because many doctors had informed him about the consequences of the politically motivated abortion ban!

I don't think it would be possible to create a nationwide ban on abortion unless it were carried out through an amendment to the constitution. Which is not gonna happen.

#25 | Posted by madbomber at 2024-11-01 11:13 AM |

How dare you take their tantrum away from them.

#23 The beauty of the system is if you don't like Texas law, move. If there's one law over the whole nation, we can't escape.

#27 | Posted by visitor_

If you truly believe that abortion is murder then you wont stop til it's illegal everywhere.

I don't think it would be possible to create a nationwide ban on abortion unless it were carried out through an amendment to the constitution. Which is not gonna happen.

#25 | Posted by madbomber

Or they could just pass a law, next time they have the senate, house, and presidency. Which they will.

#46 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2024-11-01 12:21 PM | Reply | Flag

It's always "next time"

" I don't think it would be possible to create a nationwide ban on abortion"

Step 1: Make the two pills needed illegal to mail or transport.

That's it.

#23 The beauty of the system is if you don't like Texas law, move. If there's one law over the whole nation, we can't escape.

#27 | Posted by VISITOR

Yeah, I can't believe that teen didn't just move to another state instead of dying in the hospital.

you've actually had the opportunity 16 years ago to do something on it and chose not to.

#6 | POSTED BY BLUEWAFFLES

Just more callous maga BS (and hateful gloating), of course.

There was no "opportunity". They barely passed Obamacare and have been struggling to protect and strengthen it ever since.

Speaking of 16 years ago... How is that "concept of a plan" to replace it coming along?

It's always "next time"

#47 | Posted by lfthndthrds

in 2015 dems warned next time we elect a repub they'll kill roe.

and they were right.

in 2015 dems warned next time we elect a repub they'll kill roe.

and they were right.

#51 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2024-11-01 12:46 PM | Reply | Flag

Seems like Democrats should have went to the legislative branch with it when they had the chance.

Before Dobbs:

"Look at you coozes hyperventilating again over something that will never happen!"

After Dobbs:

Seems like Democrats should have went to the legislative branch with it when they had the chance.

#52 | POSTED BY LFTHNDTHRDS

Nicely played maga maroons.

This must be the, "whether they like or NOT!" part.

'Member when Republicans were the Party of Small Gov, not the Party in Your Bedroom?

Rejected from TWO "emergency" room visits prior to death.

Profit remains death to those unworthy with complications.

Parasite capitalism.

Profit remains death to those unworthy with complications.
Parasite capitalism.
#55 | Posted by redlightrobot

What? That is completely the wrong take on this.

She wasn't turned away because of her lack of money. She was refused care because no one wants to go to jail for doing their job. They also don't want to risk fighting a criminal case, even if they are found not guilty. And they also don't want to deal with a civil trial.

Texas abortion ban turns citizens into "bounty hunters"
The Texas law that bans abortions after six weeks of pregnancy includes an unusual measure designed to ensure the law is enforced: Residents of the state can sue clinics, doctors, nurses and even people who drive a woman to get the procedure, for at least $10,000.
www.cbsnews.com

------- (Trump) put 3 justices on the SC

And all three lied during their confirmation hearings, saying Roe was "settled law" they wouldn't touch.

Profit remains death to those unworthy with complications.
Parasite capitalism.
#55 | Posted by redlightrobot
What? That is completely the wrong take on this.
She wasn't turned away because of her lack of money. She was refused care because no one wants to go to jail for doing their job. They also don't want to risk fighting a criminal case, even if they are found not guilty. And they also don't want to deal with a civil trial.
Texas abortion ban turns citizens into "bounty hunters"
The Texas law that bans abortions after six weeks of pregnancy includes an unusual measure designed to ensure the law is enforced: Residents of the state can sue clinics, doctors, nurses and even people who drive a woman to get the procedure, for at least $10,000.
www.cbsnews.com
#56 | Posted by censored at 2024-11-01 01:31 PM

Thanks!

"She was refused care because no one wants to go to jail for doing their job."

followed by....

"Residents of the state can sue clinics, doctors, nurses and even people who drive a woman to get the procedure, for at least $10,000."

which is it?

-What? That is completely the wrong take on this.

It's a factor. It's not unrelated.

You think healthcare in Texas for everyone, including pregnant women was performing swimmingly prior to an of this?

Seems like Democrats should have went to the legislative branch with it when they had the chance.

#52 | Posted by lfthndthrds

Morons like you appear to refuse to actually read the thread.

Here is a simple question for you, if you are right:

What power does Congress have to pass a law that protects abortion (or ANY medical procedure) nationwide, that this court would be bound to respect?

It should be a simple question to answer.

But like madbummer and visiturd you will refuse to answer.

I don't think it would be possible to create a nationwide ban on abortion unless it were carried out through an amendment to the constitution. Which is not gonna happen.

#25 | Posted by madbomber at 2024-11-01 11:13 AM |

How dare you take their tantrum away from them.

#44 | Posted by lfthndthrds

One idiot crowing for another moron.

You and madbummer do not understand basic civics.

Abortion is no longer a right, per Dobbs.

So, Congress cannot protect it.

Congress CAN restrict it through the commerce clause-a power they actually have.

-What power does Congress have to pass a law that protects abortion (or ANY medical procedure) nationwide, that this court would be bound to respect?

That's a stupid question.

They have the power to pass that law. Period. You're just giving them a pass for inaction because you're predicting how the court would uphold or not uphold. A law that doesn't exist at this point. You're concluding the SCOTUS's ruling on it.

www.texasobserver.org

Texas has been a dumpster fire of healthcare for a long time.

She was refused care because no one wants to go to jail for doing their job."
followed by....
"Residents of the state can sue clinics, doctors, nurses and even people who drive a woman to get the procedure, for at least $10,000."
which is it?
#59 | Posted by eberly

It's both. There is no contradiction in criminal and civil liability. Ask Dead OJ Simpson.

It's a factor. It's not unrelated.
You think healthcare in Texas for everyone, including pregnant women was performing swimmingly prior to an of this?
#60 | Posted by eberly

Her ability to pay was not a factor in refusing her care, unless you know something that the rest of us do not.

The civil penalty is spelled out.

Where is the criminal penalty spelled out?

Where is the criminal penalty spelled out?
#66 | Posted by eberly

Are you unable to run an Internet search?

sll.texas.gov

CHAPTER 170A. PERFORMANCE OF ABORTION
Sec. 170A.004. CRIMINAL OFFENSE.
(a) A person who violates Section 170A.002 commits an offense.

(b) An offense under this section is a felony of the second degree, except that the offense is a felony of the first degree if an unborn child dies as a result of the offense.

Added by Acts 2021, 87th Leg., R.S., Ch. 800 (H.B. 1280), Sec. 2, eff. August 25, 2022.
statutes.capitol.texas.gov

Seems like Democrats should have went to the legislative branch with it when they had the chance.

#52 | Posted by lfthndthrds

I guess it's their fault for believing republicans when they called it SETTLED LAW.

Nothing is ever republicans fault. Anything bad they do is democrats' fault for not stopping them.

Seems like Democrats should have went to the legislative branch with it when they had the chance.

#52 | Posted by lfthndthrds

What law could congress have passed that would have changed Dobbs?

@ eberly

Following up on your criminality question, please see truthhurts #14 above where the Texas AG threatened to bring first degree felony charges against anyone providing a woman with an abortion.

Thanks!
#58 | Posted by redlightrobot

You're welcome!

Please let me know if you have any further questions. I know that the functioning of this nation can be confusing to foreigners.

The demented orange chomo vows to protect the women he doesn't rape or kill.

Thanks Censored. I appreciate the response

Newly minted MDs are choosing to NOT do their residencies in TEX-ASS! I'll bet the outflow of OB/GYN specialists will be obvious soon. Never forget, when Mexico outlawed slavery the Mexican piece of stinking desert called Texas became the Republic of Texas and went to war with Mexico over Texan's right to own slaves.

#9, #12, #17, #22, #27 | Posted by visitor_

F__k you. Seriously. All your useless ignorant rhetoric. "all you have to do is move" - this teen was supposed to move? She was DYING. Again - F__k you. She is dead because of right wing religious hate politics period. Individual Human Rights should be universal. Not what can the "state" limit me on.

Photographic evidence of Democrat Party operative stuffing ballot box in Milwaukee.
#9 | Posted by visitor_
Pretty sure that was actual Russian operatives in Georgia as in the country of Georgia and not "Milwaukee" in the state of Wisconsin. I haven't seen one single video or photograph that was credible in the US. You do realize ALL ballots are traceable to the voter right? Of course you didn't. It is also not illegal for someone to deposit multiple ballots for others. I just deposited 4 of them to save folks a trip. If you think that is wrong - why?

We can admire the courage of medical professionals that would would withhold life saving medical treatment in order to make a political point about policy with which they disagree.
F__k you again. She would have got treatment if there were not draconian laws meaning massive jail time if they saved her. Honestly F__k them too. Any descent human being of a medical professional would have helped. I for one couldn't sit by and let another human being die when I am capable of helping. Apparently you can.

Should have passed a law under Obama... How are you literally so F__king stupid? It was legal under Obama and has been for 50 years. The grounds that made Roe v Wade legal still apply. The fact the corrupt on this SCOTUS wanted to find a way to kill it doesn't mean the argument is rooted in anything legally accurate. I question if half of them that voted for it are legally literate enough to understand what was wrote on their behalf. It should also be clear a law was not necessary at that time.

How many illegals (or Biden/Harris "refugees) were clogging up the emergency room on the day she needed treatment? The staff may have been overworked and running on fumes due to the flood of illegals needing care.
None - she was seen twice you twit. RIF - Reading is fundamental. She was refused assistance because of draconian laws. I have spent a lot of time in emergency rooms in the last month. Let me say no Illegals. And by "illegals" I suppose you include the people that have documentation and are awaiting adjudication of their cases. It's really interesting when you start looking at the numbers and how they started spiking while Trump was still in office.

Doctors have been making mistakes and people of have been dying of sepsis long before this law.
Refusing her treatment in Texas is not "making mistakes" it is an attempt to avoid going to prison.

I am wondering when someone on the right is going to get the balls to challenge the Civil Rights Act on the same grounds with this court. Love to see how Uncle Thomas votes on that.

Thanks Censored. I appreciate the response
#73 | Posted by eberly

No problem! Apologies if I came across a bit snippy.

Thanks!
#58 | Posted by redlightrobot
You're welcome!
Please let me know if you have any further questions. I know that the functioning of this nation can be confusing to foreigners.
#71 | Posted by censored at 2024-11-01 02:22 PM

I'm satisfied that you are a troll, sure.

Inner workings of the health care system is your "forte", but Gaza is just too hard.

It takes a village.

Bad enough Texas infant mortality rate keeps getting worse and worse, the maternity mortality rate is skyrocketing under Trump/Abbot/GOP. All due to this crap-ass morality police legislation. Hold my beer, Tehran.

"The bellwether state is Texas, the only state to impose its abortion ban as early as September 2021, even before the Supreme Court's June 2022 ruling

The maternal mortality rate rose by 56% in Texas from 2019 through 2022, the figures show, well exceeding the national increase of 11%. The rate for Black women rose by 38% and for Hispanic women by 30%.

What was especially striking, Cohen told me, was that the maternal mortality rate for white women in Texas nearly doubled in 2019-22, while rising by only 6% nationwide."

www.latimes.com

Remember that time Obama and the Democrats had a Super Majority in the Senate and chose to do crappy Obamacare over legalizing abortion into law? Good times ...

#2 | Posted by Bluewaffles

Remember that time Republican nominated SC justices testified that Roe v Wade was settled law? Yet another example of why Republicans can't be trusted. You're all a pack of sneering liars. Why would "Obama and the Democrats" have spent resources passing abortion legislation when Roe was already settled law, when those same legislative resources could be used to further improve people's lives? Clearly in hindsight they should have, because YOU CAN'T TRUST REPUBLICANS.

"You and madbummer do not understand basic civics."

C'mon. You're joking, right?

How can you say someone doesn't understand civics when you don't understand it yourself?

Where did you study constitutional law again?

"What power does Congress have to pass a law that protects abortion (or ANY medical procedure) nationwide, that this court would be bound to respect?"

Through an amendment to the constitution. It can occur two ways. Either 2/3rds of state legislatures, OR, a 2/3rds vote in both the house and the senate.

But you knew this, right, being an expert on constitutional law and all...

"You and madbummer do not understand basic civics."

C'mon. You're joking, right?

How can you say someone doesn't understand civics when you don't understand it yourself?

Where did you study constitutional law again?

#81 | Posted by madbomber

I am not joking because you repeatedly express wrong positions.

"What power does Congress have to pass a law that protects abortion (or ANY medical procedure) nationwide, that this court would be bound to respect?"

Through an amendment to the constitution. It can occur two ways. Either 2/3rds of state legislatures, OR, a 2/3rds vote in both the house and the senate.

But you knew this, right, being an expert on constitutional law and all...

#82 | Posted by madbomber

Congrats, you sort of got an answer and it only took 24 hours.

YOU also seem to be getting closer to seeing a distinction between protecting and restricting something

>"What power does Congress have to pass a law that protects abortion (or ANY medical procedure) nationwide, that this court would be bound to respect?"

Through an amendment to the constitution.

#82 | Posted by madbomber

In other words, Congress can't, since there is zero chance of such an amendment happening.

So, despite your claim that "Trump has nothing to do with Texas abortion law. Whether he wins or loses, it will have no bearing on these laws." it's pretty clear that the only way to stop these laws is to make sure Dems win the presidency and Senate for the next few terms (so we can replace the talibaptists on SCOTUS as they age out) and restore Roe.

Censored FINALLY found the right answer!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11

Censored FINALLY found the right answer!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11
#86 | Posted by truthhurts

Thank you. Please, you're too kind.

No applause, just venmo money (MattGaetzIsNotAPedo@pedosRUs.com)

Stunning how ignorant some are about this nation, about Civics, about our Constitution and the way our Laws and Judiciary work. How anyone can spend time on this board and not know that is just amazing to me.

(not talking about Censored!)

Too late!

If the doctors are not helping in cases where the mother's life is at risk, that's more them than any ban. All the bans have exceptions for just this. The Big Health lawyers are wanting this as an issue, and sacrifice these womwn for it. the doctors just go along, not wanting to rock the boat. 'Sure, I gotta cover my tail. Sorry lady, lawyer says the exceptions are unclear' as she dies... Who defines the exception?! NOT the lawyer.

"I am not joking because you repeatedly express wrong positions."

As in-positions that are in conflict with the constitution? Do elaborate.

"In other words, Congress can't, since there is zero chance of such an amendment happening."

Then it probably shouldn't happen.

Listen, princess. I get it. You think your pet causes are so important-so tantamount-that they should be law based solely on your beliefs.

You're not the only child to feel that way.

"So, despite your claim that "Trump has nothing to do with Texas abortion law. Whether he wins or loses, it will have no bearing on these laws." it's pretty clear that the only way to stop these laws is to make sure Dems win the presidency and Senate for the next few terms (so we can replace the talibaptists on SCOTUS as they age out) and restore Roe."

States could still ban abortion.

The 21st amendment legalized the production and sale of alcohol, but there are still dry counties in some parts of the US (that I would never visit).

Do you know why?

Human rights are "pet causes" now

States could still ban abortion.
Not if SCOTUS says there is a fundamental right to privacy (abortion), which is exactly what Roe said.

The 21st amendment legalized the production and sale of alcohol, but there are still dry counties in some parts of the US (that I would never visit).
Do you know why?
#94 | Posted by madbomber
Because the 21st Amendment expressly allows that to happen.

Listen, princess. I get it. You think your pet causes are so important-so tantamount-that they should be law based solely on your beliefs.
#93 | Posted by madbomber
This isn't about my feelings. This is about you make an incorrect statement that Trump's presidency (past and future) "will have no bearing on these laws."

His presidency very much had every bearing on Texas's law becoming enforceable. And his future presidency will also have an impact.

I'm really not sure why you're being obtuse about this, intentionally so, it would appear.

"I am not joking because you repeatedly express wrong positions."

As in-positions that are in conflict with the constitution? Do elaborate.

#92 | Posted by madbomber

Well, I will just post a few examples:

You think the Supreme Court is going to reverse their position that it is up to the states?

And even if they did, some states have already written the right to an abortion into their state constitutions.

I don't think it would be possible to create a nationwide ban on abortion unless it were carried out through an amendment to the constitution. Which is not gonna happen.

Posted by madbomber

TH: A nationwide ban is as simple as enforcing the Comstock Act. You seem to not understand that federal law is supreme over state law. So an amendment is NOT required to implement a ban.

"IDK, maybe dictating to Congress on how to spend? As in Congress delegated the authority to forgive student loans to the executive branch, but the SC overturned that action."

More like dictating to congress how not to spend, right? In this case, telling the president what he couldn't do with taxpayer dollars. That'd kinda their job.

Posted by madbomber

TH: You completely and utterly mistakes what the Supreme Court's powers are. There sole power is to adjudicate conflicts between parties where an injury has occurred. It is not to dictate to congress how to or not to spend. Nor is it their job to tell the president what he can or can't do with taxpayer dollars. It is Congress' job to tell the Executive Branch how to spend taxpayer dollars. If there is an injured party by the way the president interprets the law, the injured party can seek redress through the Courts.

It is NOT the SC's job to say that the president's acts are not within his authority unless related to a specific injury. no injury no SC role. The MO agency was not injured by the Exec. Branch's actions. THUS THE SC HAD NO AUTHORITY TO ADJUDICATE and say the Executive Branch couldn't forgive loans. All through the process, if Congress did not want Biden to do that, they could have passed a law saying he couldn't. that is why what the SC did was legislating

"Therefore, Congress does not have the authority to tell states that they must allow abortions."

They can. They did. SOCTUS determined that they lacked the authority under the constitution to do so.

So...what's the problem?

Posted by madbomber

TH: Congress did not tell the states to do anything. The SC did not determine they lacked the authority to do so.

These are 3 obvious examples, there are more.

"...pet causes ..."

This is an incredibly disgusting attitude.

Do you have women in your life?

Do you not care that they have fewer rights now?

Do you not care that their ability to plan their lives is hindered?

Do you not care that their health is at risk?

Do you not care that women will have less opportunities for education and careers because they will be stuck raising unwanted children?

I have said it before, I'll say it again, I have ZERO respect for any man that does not fully support a woman's reproductive freedom.

Here's hoping you never find yourself wandering a hospital begging someone, anyone, to help a loved one. If what I went through happened today, in a -------- state, that would have been me.

I have a daughter, and I have made it clear to her that as long as I am alive she will have the ability to choose what to do with her body.

Get over the lies as there is no Trump 'abortion ban'.

Get over the lies as there is no Trump 'abortion ban'.

Every ban of abortion we have is due to Trump.
End of story.

Own it. You voted for that fccker. Women are dying because of it.

#101 | Posted by lfthndthrds* at 2024-11-01 10:22 PM | Reply | Flag: Challenged

* lfthndthrds (NSFW) has me plonked. Would someone be so kind as to let him/her know that while he/she cannot see my posts (head in the sand, if you will) I can still see his/her posts, and he/she cannot see my retort.

Thank you.