this post was submitted on 24 Oct 2023
1077 points (98.0% liked)

News

23837 readers
3459 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Lubbock County, Texas, joins a group of other rural Texas counties that have voted to ban women from using their roads to seek abortions.

This comes after six cities and counties in Texas have passed abortion-related bans, out of nine that have considered them. However, this ordinance makes Lubbock the biggest jurisdiction yet to pass restrictions on abortion-related transportation.

During Monday's meeting, the Lubbock County Commissioners Court passed an ordinance banning abortion, abortion-inducing drugs and travel for abortion in the unincorporated areas of Lubbock County, declaring Lubbock County a "Sanctuary County for the Unborn."

The ordinance is part of a continued strategy by conservative activists to further restrict abortion since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade as the ordinances are meant to bolster Texas' existing abortion ban, which allows private citizens to sue anyone who provides or "aids or abets" an abortion after six weeks of pregnancy.

The ordinance, which was introduced to the court last Wednesday, was passed by a vote of 3-0 with commissioners Terence Kovar, Jason Corley and Jordan Rackler, all Republicans, voting to pass the legislation while County Judge Curtis Parrish, Republican, and Commissioner Gilbert Flores, Democrat, abstained from the vote.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] trash80@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

I know that it is a lot to ask of you, but if you read the article, it explains the mechanism of enforcement for this ordnance.

"This ordinance does not interfere with anyone's right to travel - neither the born or the unborn. This ordinance prohibits abortion trafficking, which like sex trafficking, is a great evil in our country worthy of being abolished in every single state in America. The ordinance is enforceable through the private enforcement mechanism which has proven its success in both the Lubbock City Ordinance and the Texas Heartbeat Act. This is how the ordinance is enforced," the statement said.

edit: I don't support this shit.

[–] pinkdrunkenelephants@lemmy.cafe 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

So in principle, if you get sued over this by an abusive spouse, he could:

  • Never tell you

  • Hide the mail

  • Show up to court that day and you don't

  • Cackle maniacally as the judge signs a bench warrant for his victim's arrest she doesn't know about

  • He now can get her thrown in jail whenever she acts up, e.g. runs away or fights back

  • The legal system is now his personal army


And we pretend that democracy, rule of law and the legal system is supposed to be capable of protecting innocent people from abusers and preventing tyranny. We pretend it was ever even able to, let alone willing.

We obviously need something better.

[–] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Isn't hiding an official summons a felony?

[–] trash80@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

No.

Much like that ordinance, the travel ban would be enforced through private lawsuits filed against the people who “knowingly transport any individual for the purpose of providing or obtaining an elective abortion, regardless of where the elective abortion will occur.” It would not punish the pregnant woman.

https://www.texastribune.org/2023/10/23/abortion-travel-ban-lubbock-county/

edit: Also, I think the plaintiff is required to give the defendant legal notice if they are suing them. I'm not sure of that though.

edit 2:

Both the Texas Heartbeat Act and Lubbock County's ordnance specifically prohibit cause of action and/or prosecution of the woman seeking the abortion.

Section 171.206 (Page 5): This subchapter may not be construed to authorize the initiation of a cause of action against or the prosecution of a woman on whom an abortion is performed or induced or attempted to be performed or induced.
https://webservices.sos.state.tx.us/legbills/files/RS87/SB8.pdf

(d) Under no circumstance may the mother of the unborn child that has been aborted, or the pregnant woman who seeks to abort her unborn child, be subject to prosecution or penalty under this section.
https://lubbockcounty.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=F&ID=12383968&GUID=C39FA88F-8B4F-4827-9437-4DCC40375C23

[–] pinkdrunkenelephants@lemmy.cafe 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

No means yes and yes means harder.

Abusers will just lie and tell the judge they gave notice and the courts never listen when defendants claim they never got any. It's always assumed to be a lie, hence bench warrants.

Or just threaten her or otherwise stop her from showing up. Bonus points if he slips opiates into her drink, she passes out and misses the court date, and he then accuses her of being a drug addict.

You really don't know anything about how abuse works if you're seriously questioning this.

[–] trash80@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 year ago

Both the Texas Heartbeat Act and Lubbock County's ordnance specifically prohibit cause of action and/or prosecution of the woman seeking the abortion.

Section 171.206 (Page 5): This subchapter may not be construed to authorize the initiation of a cause of action against or the prosecution of a woman on whom an abortion is performed or induced or attempted to be performed or induced.
https://webservices.sos.state.tx.us/legbills/files/RS87/SB8.pdf

(d) Under no circumstance may the mother of the unborn child that has been aborted, or the pregnant woman who seeks to abort her unborn child, be subject to prosecution or penalty under this section.
https://lubbockcounty.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=F&ID=12383968&GUID=C39FA88F-8B4F-4827-9437-4DCC40375C23

Why do you think these laws can be weaponized by an abusive spouse in a manner that is different from other laws?


Abusers will just lie and tell the judge they gave notice

If you file a civil suit, you have to show the court that you have given the respondent legal notice. If you wanted to give legal notice via mail, you would have to send it registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, and the respondent must sign the receipt.
There are a couple of other ways to give legal notice. I don't understand how you imagine someone could convince the court that they have given legal notice when they have not.
https://youtu.be/mQYVkhNoOxI?si=p7Pc5XklHb1Tk-ye

IF you managed to dupe the court about notice, you would then have to go through discovery and send the evidence that supports your case to the respondent without them learning that you are suing them.


Cackle maniacally as the judge signs a bench warrant for his victim’s arrest she doesn’t know about

They don't issue bench warrants for failure to appear in civil lawsuits.

[–] KelsonV@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

"the private enforcement mechanism" -- which is essentially an end run around restrictions on what the government is technically not allowed to do itself, by heavily implying that they want something done instead of explicitly hiring someone to do it. "Will no one rid me of this meddlesome priest?"

[–] trash80@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 year ago

which is essentially an end run around restrictions on what the government is technically not allowed to do itself

Right. I don't see that the purpose is truly different than a poll tax or a literacy test in any meaningful way.

[–] nybble41@programming.dev 1 points 1 year ago

Except it's not even that indirect. The government of Texas invented this novel class of private liability, and their courts are the ones enforcing it. That's the same as banning it themselves, and blatantly unconstitutional.

I'm a bit surprised they didn't implement this as a tax. That would be just as bad, but the federal government has a long history of imposing punitive taxes on things they aren't allowed to ban; it would have been harder to fight it that way without forcing an overhaul of the entire tax system… and politicians are so very fond of special-purpose taxes and credits.