This is not a Poe.

Yesterday the Oklahoma legislature passed a bill that would make it a felony for doctors to perform any abortion, except to save the woman's life. Doctors who perform an abortion would also be denied medical licenses.

The bill 'passed 33-12 Thursday with no discussion or debate; a handful of Republicans joined with Democrats in voting against the bill sponsored by Republican Sen. Nathan Dahm.

Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin, an anti-abortion Republican, has until Wednesday to sign the bill into law or veto it. Spokesman Michael McNutt said she also could also allow the bill to become law "without approval" after the five-day period has elapsed. He also said she will withhold comment until her staff has time to review it.

Dahm made it clear that he hopes his bill could lead to overturning Roe v. Wade.' (AP)

This comes after the Oklahoma Supreme Court ruled against an initiative effort that would have outlawed abortion as homicide. 'The Oklahoma court said [in March] that a proposed initiative petition was in contradiction to their understanding of U.S. Supreme Court rulings, such as Roe v. Wade, and would therefore not be allowed to go to the voters of Oklahoma in the Fall. The court said it “is not free to impose its own view of the law” — an obvious reference to its deference to the U.S. Supreme Court.' (The New American)

'The governor has a strong track record of restricting access to abortion in Oklahoma. The state currently has only two operating abortion clinics, placing it on par with other conservative states where the accessibility of reproductive health care has dwindled to virtually null.

Still, as the New York Times Editorial Board points out, at least Oklahoma is effectively banning abortion “without offering any pretense of trying to protect women’s health.” Conservative legislatures across the United States consistently chip away at the protections afforded by Roe v. Wade under the guise of protecting women. Forty-three states prohibit abortions generally [sic], imposing restrictions including gestation limits, physician and hospital requirements, and state-mandated counseling.

So at least Oklahoma is being honest about its intentions....' (Alternet)

(image source)

(read the entire Alternet article)

Views: 91

Replies to This Discussion

I know; I caught articles about it on several of my news feeds.  Sadly, it's going to take a couple of years to make it to the Supreme Court.  The lower courts will shut the law down, but the attorney general of Oklahoma will push it to the Supreme Court, if he can.

If we had the current court, it would be a 5/3 decision.  If Scalia got replaced by a Trump (or another real conservative, if the Republican attempts to block him are successful) appointee, it would still be 5/4.  While Kennedy errs on the side of religious privilege, overturning Roe v. Wade would be just a bit too far for him.  We would have to lose Ginsberg to have the slightest chance of an overturning.

Well, as of this moment, we're talking about a wet firecracker.  Oklahoma's governor vetoed the bill.  Whether their congress will attempt to override it or not is not yet determined.  What I worry about is whether SCOTUS is willing to recognize that Roe v. Wade is established law, stare decisis.  As political as it's become lately and with the current state of the court, a lot of tied decisions could let through a lot of LOUSY law.

Personally, I don't like where this is going, and it makes it all the more mandatory to keep the GOP OUT of the White House.

It would get handed up to SCOTUS with a judgement against the state, striking down the law.  In that situation, a 4-4 would leave the ruling of the lower court in place.

This one wouldn't be a 4-4, though; it would be a 5-3, as the court stands now.  It would be a 5-4 if a conservative president got to replace Scalia.  The only way Roe v. Wade could be overturned would be if we lost Ginsberg before the case got to SCOTUS.

It's nice to know that the governor isn't that insane, even if she is against all sorts of insane restrictions.  I think we'll probably be looking at a veto override, given how quickly they passed the thing, without any debate.

Fortunately, a veto override is unlikely, according to KOSU's Rachel Hubbard:

"It really didn't have a lot of support in the House of Representatives initially. Some 30 lawmakers abstained from the first vote. And the Oklahoma Legislature is winding down anyway. It ends a week from today. There's still no budget. They're likely headed to a special session. So we'll have to wait and see if this bill makes a return appearance."

As for Gov. Fallin's veto, "The governor ... didn't disagree with the principle of making abortion illegal. In her carefully worded message, she said two things. One - the definition of a felony was so vague that it couldn't withstand a constitutional legal challenge."

(That's not the issue; Roe v. Wade is!)

"And second was that she does support a reexamination of ... Roe versus Wade ... but she conceded that this legislation just couldn't accomplish that, saying only the appointment of a conservative pro-life justice to the U.S. Supreme Court could get that done."

("Oklahoma Governor Vetoes Bill That Would Criminalize Performing Abortions", NPR)

The CNN article Loren linked to mentioned that Gov. Fallin is considered a possibility for Trump's running mate.

"Trump in the past has said women who get abortions if the practice should face 'some form of punishment,' though he later walked it back and said it was the doctor -- not the woman -- who should be punished if the procedure were to be outlawed."

So by anti-choice logic, someone who shoots an actual, living, breathing person should go free, but the gun dealer should be imprisoned and have their license revoked? Maybe abortion isn't "murder" after all, and the pro-forced-birth advocates are simply trying to punish women for having sex!

I completely agree with Loren:

Vote Democratic - The future of the Supreme Court depends on it

RSS

About

line

Update Your Membership :

Membership

line

line

Nexus on Social Media:

line

© 2018   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service