This might surprise the hell out of any complacent supporters of choice

[Rose Siding]

-should there be any of those left.

snip>
But while in a post-Roe era a number of states would ban terminations outright, many would still allow them.....

Those women who currently have to travel to other states for a termination would continue to do so {,so the thinking goes}

However there are many supporters of abortion rights who find this stance naive, arguing that some states which end up banning the procedure might also stop such abortion tourism.

"If states can decree that life begins at conception, they might also be able to use state custody laws to curtail the movements of pregnant women," William Baude argued in a recent New York Times editorial.

"Once Roe has been overturned, a state may be able to place an unborn child into protective custody, forbidding their mothers to take them across state lines."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4743118.stm

[shoelace414]

1. not to mention the expense of going three states over

[in_cog_ni_to]

2. UNDERGROUND RAILROAD FOR PREGNANT WOMEN. n/t

[coalition_unwilling]

48. Thank you -- please understand that the true target of this law

is not all women, but only the poor (who cannot afford to travel to a "Blue State" for family planning services).

This is an issue worth going to prison for.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

3. Yes, the fundie police will be at your door 10 months after your

registered date of conception, for you to present your papers and your newborn.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

4. This is horrible!

But I'm thinking that these states would also have to ban those pregnancy test kits. I'm thinking that a lot of women and girls would travel to get an abortion before they checked with a local doctor, especially if the states decide on this draconian action-women would know that the docs would report pregnancy.

So unless they required all women to take a pregnancy test before leaving a state, how could they really put a pregnant woman in "protective custody"???

[KittyWampus]

52. Bingo, will pregnacy tests become illegal too?

[Goblinmonger]

5. Maybe I am one of the naive,

but it seems like a pretty damn big jump from one to the other. Not allowing a medical procedure, though fucking crazy--don't get me wrong, is far different than stopping the free movement of citizens.

[Crowdance]

13. Custodial parents are routinely prohibited from such travel

In cases of divorce with contested child custody, custodial parents are routinely prohibited from taking children out of state without permission of either the non-custodial parent or the courts. If a fetus is a person, as this law declares, the father of that fetus could, indeed enjoin the mother of the fetus (by necessity the custodial parent at that time) from taking the fetus across a state line. Similarly, courts could declare that the state has an interest in keeping fetuses from being brought across state lines, in order to protect the interests of the "child."

There've been many incidents of anti-choice organizations filing claims in court to stop a woman's abortion, claiming in the process that they represent the interests of the fetus. I've also recalled a few cases of men trying to enjoin the women they've impregnated from abortion. This law will be the catalyst for a lot of those kinds of suits, IMHO.

[Goblinmonger]

16. But there are already laws that treat the fetus as a person

If I get into an accident while drunk and kill a fetus, I will most likely be charged with some level of homicide. Ironically, even if the woman was on the way to get an abortion. My only point being that we treat the fetus as a person, legally, in a lot of instances right now. We could turn to estate law for examples, too.

Please understand, I am not saying that we are currently on the road to happy town. We are in for a shitstorm; one that the moderate wing of the right didn't even envision. This just seems like a little bit of a slippery slope argument. I am not saying it isn't possible, but A LOT has to happen to get from step one (which is heinous in its own right) to the final step of the editorial.

[Crowdance]

24. The script for making sure a lot happens was written long ago

by the anti-choice forces. If you doubt that, look at how ready they were in many states to introduce and pass anti-abortion legislation within weeks of the fulfillment of their "dream Supremes." Have no doubt that the legislation, briefs and suits are already written, and waiting to fall quickly like dominoes. You are, I'm sure correct, that there will be many steps taken. But I have no doubt that they're mapped and already in the works.

[Goblinmonger]

26. Of course

As was the choice legislation/briefs/suits. That is done all the time. I guess I am just thinking that the steps to the end result of the OP are steps that even the rank-and-file Republicans don't want to take (erosion of state's rights).

[Crowdance]

28. I sure hope you're right! It'd be great if they'd stop the insanity. n/t

[Goblinmonger]

31. Some days I am sure I am wrong given the crazy shit Bush gets away with.

[Greyhound]

25. No, it isn't. It is no leap at all. If you can, in essence, make a woman's

womb State Property, How is it any more authoritarian to restrict interstate travel?

[Goblinmonger]

27. Well for a couple of reasons

1. Restriction of interstate travel is a dead-on, "originalist" violation of the commerce clause.
2. It would take federal legislation which is something the rank-and-file Republican is firmly against.
3. A state saying they will not allow a medical procedure (though fucking insane--don't get me wrong) is not the same as making a woman's womb the property of the FEDERAL government (which is what it would take for the end result of the OP).

[Greyhound]

33. Well a couple of things. What could possibly be more 'private'

(4th) than control of one's own body?
I said property of the State, not just the Federal State, and a lack of federal law makes the State law paramount.
I haven't noticed the rank-and-file republicans objecting to increased government power at all.

[Goblinmonger]

34. Well, we don't have that now.

I don't have complete control over my body.

1. I cannot ingest certain substances.
2. I cannot cut off a limb and sell it to someone to consume
3. I cannot kill myself.

None of that has resulted in a restriction of interstate travel. I can still go to Amsterdam and eat some hash.

Perhaps I am overly optimistic, but I think that even the random Joe Republican would see the problem with saying "Yeah, abortion is illegal in SD because state's have rights. Let's take away state's rights because that is a good thing." Again, maybe I am overly optimistic.

[Greyhound]

37. You make my point. You and I are commodities to be bought and sold

and controlled in any way they see fit. I'm pretty sure that is not what they had in mind when they were setting up the country.

[Goblinmonger]

41. If that's your point, then I agree.

But the problem I have is with the slippery slope argument. It is a fallacy we need to be careful of, and I am leary whenever I hear it. Do I think things are going to suck because of Alito? Hell, yeah. Do I think it will lead to restricted interstate travel? No.

[TAPat]

6. The Handmaid's Tale anyone?

I love the sound of that. :grr:

[Solly Mack]

7. they will use the commerce laws (they have tried already)

http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2000/cr040500.htm

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d106:HR03660:@@@L&summ2=m&

[Arkansas Granny]

8. Someone might think to register pregnant women and monitor

their medical records to make sure they actually delivered a baby or not. Wasn't there something several months back about requiring women to report miscarriages to the state?

[Lindsay]

15. This was a proposed law, in VA, I believe.

Fortunately the legislature thought better of it, so the bill went nowhere.

Doesn't mean, of course, that some other wingnut won't try again, there or elsewhere.

[underpants]

32. Va. HB 1677-never got anywhere but it was proposed

http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?051+sum+HB1677


Report of fetal death by mother; penalty. Provides that when a fetal death occurs without medical attendance, it shall be the woman's responsibility to report the death to the proper law-enforcement agency within 12 hours of the delivery. Violation of this section shall be punishable as a Class 1 misdemeanor.

[Jacobin]

9. Yep. That would be the next step

[Walt Starr]

10. Every miscarriage will require a coroner's inquest

I wonder how many fundies thought about that one?

[TechBear_Seattle]

11. It is already well-established federal law...

Not that it makes much difference to the Talibangelicals, but it is already well established federal law that a state may not make it a crime for citizens living within its borders to travel to another state to engage in an action that is legal there but not legal here. For example, Utah, with strict prohibitions against gambling, may not prosecute Utah citizens who go to Nevada and gamble. I would say (with much hope) that South Dakota can not make it a crime for South Dakota citizens to travel to Massachussetts to obtain a legal abortion. And if the abortion was not legal in Massachussetts... the crime (sic) was committed in Massachussetts, and South Dakota can not prosecute the matter.

[Walt Starr]

12. That's where Federal Legislation comes in

Don't think they'll make it a Federal crime? Watch and see what happens.

[TechBear_Seattle]

14. I'm sure they will try

Hopefully, such an assault against state's rights will raise very harsh criticism from the GOP rank-and-file.

[Walt Starr]

17. Harsh criticism from the GOP rank and file over access to abortion?

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Surely you jest!

[TechBear_Seattle]

23. Harsh criticism over an assault on states' sovereign rights

I am (overly?) optimistic that rank-and-file Republicans would see a frontal assault on states' rights as the last straw. Assuming that the last straw doesn't come sooner.

[Goblinmonger]

18. That would be a pretty hard sell, even for BushCo

The argument for the law in SD is that old line of "framer's intent" and "state's rights." Isn't it a pretty hard sell to then say we need to take away state's rights? Not saying the argument might not be made, but just that it would not be received well by Republicans.

[Walt Starr]

19. It won't stop them,

Believe me, there will be no stopping them once the first domino falls. There will be pregnancy registrations and even if a woman travels to a state where abortion is illegal she'll end up subject to prosecution.

Tell me honestly, will a court that overturns Roe honestly give a damn about state's rights WRT abortion?

There will be federal legislation once Roe is overturned. In fact, I figure abortion will end up as a federal crime within a five year span.

[Goblinmonger]

21. I'm not saying

they won't try.

But that level of legislation would allow a state like Utah to say, and prosecute if people violated it, that you can't travel to Nevada to gamble. Exact some argument. The commerce clause would protect the travel from one state to the next.

[bobbieinok]

47. some states may make it illegal for their residents to use stem cell

research even if they travel to a state/country where stem cell research and its results are legal

heard this on a TON Science Friday discussion of stem cell research...it was in the context that many states have laws making stem cell research illegal while some have much more lenient laws

[Goblinmonger]

56. In the absence of a federal law

how do that get around the commerce clause?

[RazzleDazzle]

44. Excellent, excellent information. Thanks. Hope it stands.

[autorank]

20. Watch for "Promise Keeper" legislation.l...you nailed it. n/t

[lectrobyte]

22. What's Promise Keeper Legislation? Thanks.

[mom cat]

29. I had the same question.

[lectrobyte]

35. Did some googling, turned up this.

I'm not familiar with this particular group, but found this. Sounds creepy:

Promise Keepers, Inc. was founded in 1990 by former Colorado University football coach, Bill McCartney. McCartney has been associated with such right-wing extremists as the violent anti-abortion group, Operation Rescue and Colorado for Family Values, a group that fought for legislation to deprive lesbian and gays of their civil rights in Colorado. The top leadership behind McCartney reads like a who's who of the political religious right, such as Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson and James Dobson -- people who consider the Republican Party too moderate.

The Promise Keepers call on men to take more responsibility in their families, and who can argue with that? However, they define responsibility as taking control and women taking a back seat. They extol the "God-given" right of men to lead and repeatedly call on wives to "submit" to their husbands.

from:

http://www.now.org/issues/right/promise/letter.html

[mom cat]

43. Zowiee! Restoration of the inquisition is their wet dream. All

oppression is rooted in the oppression of women. Fundies everywhere yearn for it. I guess that we have to keep fighting the battles that we thought we had won.

[autorank]

45. Check these guys out...

http://www.promisekeepers.org/
"Who we are"
7 Promises (they're very big on honoring women but
making clear that men RUN - as in control - the family)

1.

A Promise Keeper is committed to honoring Jesus Christ through worship, prayer and obedience to God's Word in the power of the Holy Spirit.

2.

A Promise Keeper is committed to pursuing vital relationships with a few other men, understanding that he needs brothers to help him keep his promises.

3.

A Promise Keeper is committed to practicing spiritual, moral, ethical, and sexual purity.

4.

A Promise Keeper is committed to building strong marriages and families through love, protection and biblical values.

5.

A Promise Keeper is committed to supporting the mission of his church by honoring and praying for his pastor, and by actively giving his time and resources.

6.

A Promise Keeper is committed to reaching beyond any racial and denominational barriers to demonstrate the power of biblical unity.

7.

A Promise Keeper is committed to influencing his world, being obedient to the Great Commandment (see Mark 12:30-31) and the Great Commission (see Matthew 28:19-20).

[leeroysphitz]

30. Handmaid's Tale. It looks like these bastards feel like they

are finally going to get their way. We have to fight this. Take it to the f@cking STREETS if necessary.
I can't imagine that many of todays educated, empowered and independant women are going to just take this, but the neanderthals trying to push back the clock don't seem very worried.

We(yes WE) are being PUSHED. It's time to work to elect people WILLING to push BACK and work against those who are not.

[savemefromdumbya]

36. Are they going to have fetus detectors

maybe they should concentrate on home security not chasing pregnant women around?

[DrGonzoLives]

38. Wouldn't that mean they'd have to pay for the health care?

If they're under protective custody.

[BoneDaddy]

39. Time ....

to rise up people!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Nikki Stone 1]

40. With REAL ID, pregnant women would be traced easity

...

[lonestarnot]

42. So that will now be a part of homeland security - preboarding

prego tests? Piss on the patch ladies!

[pitohui]

46. so no fat women under 50 can cross state lines?

c'mon, this is not going to be anything that can be enforced

the state police is not going to be able to tell that the 6 weeks pregnant woman is pregnant and seeking an abortion rather than just going to vegas for the weekend

the way they stop women from crossing state lines is economic, poor women can't afford to travel, married women and teen girls can't afford the time to disappear unexplained for an entire day or two

[coalition_unwilling]

49. Appearance vs. Reality -- the real target of the law

is not abortion in general, but poor women's access to family planning services.

This SD law will hardly inconvenience your average suburban SUV-drivin' Repuke family whose debutante gets "in trouble". They'll just send the kids over the state line to a "Blue State" for family planning services.

Therefore, resistance to the legislation must not be solely gender-based, but rather, class-based.

[Cleita]

50. Even if they don't imprison women in a state for being pregnant,

poor women who can't afford to travel will try many inventive ways to induce miscarriages, which can endanger their lives.

[KittyWampus]

51. Oh my, that's extreme. And it makes it clear, this isn't about the fetus

[0rganism]

53. the tourism assumption presumes a simple overturning, as well

A sufficiently anti-choice court could ban all abortions at a federal level, e.g. by applying 14th amendment protection to blastocysts. It all depends on what kind of decision they hand down.

[Rose Siding]

54. This article cites a study that found only 13% of US counties have access

to the procedure already, which I found shocking as well.

An universal ban is clearly their goal, but increments could still be involved. Some of the things that are happening right now seemed far fetched just a few years ago, that who knows what crazy path things will take?

[Turn CO Blue]

55. Questions:

How would anyone know that the woman is pregnant?

Most women who learn they are pregnant and also choose to terminate do so before they are 12 weeks along (so they are not "showing"). I would not think that those women who are going to cross state lines after scheduling an abortion procedure would go around announcing their "conception" to their doctors, family, unsupportive lover, or to the state "border abortion patrol" (if such a thing existed).

How would anybody control all the state borders? It's impossible. We cannot even control the Mexico-US border or scan more than 5% of cargo in this country!

[0rganism]

57. Are you ready to see the answers?

The DEA has been completely incapable of shutting down the drug trade, but that hasn't stopped them from doing whatever the hell they want along the way to failure.

The PEA (Pregnancy Enforcement Agency) will be no different. It will be a federal boondoggle of tremendous proportions, another way for republicans to funnel tax revenues to croneys, and regardless of its effectiveness, after a few years of multi-level propaganda no one will dare challenge its behavior.

Get ready for the New World Order to hit home with a vengeance.