America needs to ban Texas. ASAP.
this post was submitted on 03 Jan 2024
75 points (100.0% liked)
U.S. News
2244 readers
1 users here now
News about and pertaining to the United States and its people.
Please read what's functionally the mission statement before posting for the first time. We have a narrower definition of news than you might be accustomed to.
Guidelines for submissions:
- Post the original source of information as the link.
- If there is a paywall, provide an archive link in the body.
- Post using the original headline; edits for clarity (as in providing crucial info a clickbait hed omits) are fine.
- Social media is not a news source.
For World News, see the News community.
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Also the Supreme Court judges
How can anyone with a straight face call these things pro-life? It has become a death cult fueled by hatred against women.
State-sanctioned femicide
What a bizarre hill to die on, how the hell is this such a hot issue? I would dropkick a living baby into a volcano if it would prevent my partner from dying…
🤖 I'm a bot that provides automatic summaries for articles:
Click here to see the summary
The Texas Supreme Court ruled last month against a woman who asked for permission to abort a fetus with a fatal diagnosis.
The same court heard arguments in November on behalf of women who were denied abortions despite serious risks to their health if they continued their pregnancies; the justices have not ruled on that case.
In Texas, the state joined abortion opponents in a lawsuit to stop the guidance from taking effect and won at the district court level.
The California-based 9th Circuit has allowed use of the guidance to continue in an Idaho case, which is pending at the U.S. Supreme Court.
The opinion said language in the 1986 emergency care law requires hospitals to stabilize the pregnant woman and her fetus.
In the appellate hearing last November, a U.S. Justice Department attorney arguing for the administration said the guidance provides needed safeguards for women, and that the district court order blocking the use of the guidance was an error with “potentially devastating consequences for pregnant women within the state of Texas.”
Saved 66% of original text.
I don't support their decision, but this needs to be solved on the state level. So, don't complain to the Fed, write to your congressman.
Sorry, no, absolutely not.
This should be a federal thing. No reasonable person should be debating if a person should receive life saving care or not.
Reasonable people can disagree with little things, like how high a fence can be in your front yard, not if someone should die because other people don’t have a modest grasp of high school biology.
People's basic right to self determination is not a state level issue.
Nah, there needs to be a federal law to prevent exactly this sort of idiocy.
I'm not sure I understand what you mean. If at the state level, do you mean the State Level Senator or Rep? As it reads, your congressman (i.e., your Federal Rep in DC) wouldn't have much legislative authority in Texas, even if they represent Texas.
Texas at a state level won't do anything, it's gerrymandered into Banana Republic territory. So you can fix gerrymandering (not likely) or bring the federal justice hammer down on the assholes empowering this crap (also not likely).
This is an issue akin to, but not a mirror of, the Jim Crow South, and I mean that administratively. Texas and other states have created three classes of citizen, divided by their ability to give birth (m or f by Texas interpretation) and, unlike Jim Crow, divided again by if they are pregnant or not. This, like Jim Crow, is effecting lives of course, but also commerce, travel, and other systems in ways I can't fathom. Let alone the mental health and health tolls on anyone carrying a baby, as you're immediately guilty until you give a healthy birth or proven innocent if anything happened to go wrong.
Jim Crow suffered blows from federal power via the federal government pursuing commerce clause arguments. Wait. What? Really? Yes, see Heart of Atlanta Motel Inc. v. United States and Katzenbach v. McClung.
That's what it'll take to stop this insanity. But, I fear, the current political climate is not there yet. So much needs to get fixed to get us back to the point where a supreme Court won't cite a pre-USA constitution legal argument as grounds to intervene in a woman's personal health. Crazy people out of politics, gerrymandering addressed, hate and anti democratic speech reinterpreted under the 1st amendment, etc.
It's a long battle but Jim Crow's ultimate destruction, and even Roe v Wades success while it lasted, proves we can do it but we need to learn from the shortcomings and solidify basic human rights in our national identity moving forward.
Imagine if slavery were left up to the states...