[ExI] Abortion laws (Was: Re: Trump suggests letting Iran 'take out' Los Angeles and San Diego)

[spike at rainier66.com]

....> On Behalf Of Ben Zaiboc via extropy-chat
Cc: Ben Zaiboc <benzaiboc at proton.me>

>
> https://www.britannica.com/science/US-abortion-rights-by-state-2236312
>

>...Many states had 'trigger legislation', ready to be sprung as soon as Roe
vs. Wade was overturned, that immediately restricted the availability of
abortion, either directly or indirectly  (e.g. affecting the practicality
rather than the legality of abortions, things like making sure that clinics
can't get licences, doctors can't practice if they offer abortion services,
etc.)....

Agree.  But states already controlled who gets medical licenses and
malpractice suits.  None of that was done at the federal level.  Before
those states banned abortion, it was unlikely a patient could find a doctor
willing to perform it.

What the overturning of Roe was really about was that the federal government
does not have authority to tell states how they do medical licensing.
States outrank the fed on that.

>...The reason I brought up the overturning of Roe vs. Wade was not about
the constitution, but about the larger picture of creeping authoritarianism,
of which attacks on constitutional protections is just one part....

Sure I get that.  But it leads to a paradox.  The supreme court interpreted
to constitution which defines federal authority as it reads, with strict
attention to enumerated powers.  It found no authority to regulate how
states regulate abortion.  So... it recognized the federal government had no
authority, which is giving up power.  Somehow that translates into grabbing
new power.  So ceding power is grabbing power.  Orwell said it best: War is
peace, ignorance is strength, freedom is slavery.

>...You agree with me that women should be able to be in control of their
own bodies...

Ja.

>... as far as the law is concerned, for 50 years. Now it's very much less
the case....

Ja.

>...Roe v. Wade established that the U.S. Constitution protects a woman's
right to choose to have an abortion before the point of foetal viability. So
all the 50 states had that as a minimum. Some would be more permissive than
that, I don't know which ones or to what degree, but we can use that as a
baseline for the pre-January 2022 situation. Abortion was legal in all
states, up to foetal viability....

Agree to all.

>...Now it's not. 13 states have a full ban...

Sure, agree.  The effort to fix that must be made at the state level.  The
fed doesn't have the authority to help with it.  Ben, it really is that way:
the supreme court read the document which gives the federal government
authority and found nothing in there which gives them the authority to tell
the states how to handle abortion.  So... easy solution: work at the state
level.  States are governments.  They can be influenced, a lot more easily
than the federal government can, particularly in the low population states.
John likes to bring up the case of Wyoming with its paltry 600k residents.
Hell all ya need to do is get a billionaire to create a big city there.  It
wouldn't be that hard to take over that state's government.  Three free
electoral college votes, abortion on demand, what's not to like?

>... Without the anti-choice people, the case wouldn't have happened....

And without the constitution limiting federal authority.  

>...There does seem to be a puzzling, and hopeful, statistic about actual
numbers of abortions carried out before and after January 2022 Apparently
the numbers are about the same...

Ja, and why is that?  

>...I presume that's due to more women breaking the law. I can't see how
else to interpret it...

I can: doctors who did abortions didn't set up camp in places where it was
generally disapproved.  They didn't then, and still don't.  Doctors can go
anywhere they want.  Everywhere wants them.  That must feel good if one is a
doctor.  It's one of the cool benefits to surviving the grind of medical
school: one is free to go anywhere.  OK.  They do.  They make enough money
at that game to afford to live in expensive areas.  I note there are
pleeeeenty of doctors who choose to live near here.  Life in the fast lane,
surely make you lose your mind.  But it is really a lotta fun while one is
doing so.

>...(unless the states are (implausibly) completely failing to enforce the
relevant laws, and everyone who wants an abortion knows they won't be
prosecuted)....

It isn't the patient who faces prosecution, but rather the doctor who faces
loss of his medical license.  You have never heard of a patient being
prosecuted for having an abortion.  In places where abortion is illegal, it
is not illegal to get one, only illegal to perform one.

>...So you're right in saying "Women can still get an abortion", in two
ways:
1) They can get an abortion if they happen to live in one of the states
where abortion in their individual circumstance is still legal (which is
considerably fewer than prior to 2022), and 2) if not, they can break the
law.... Ben

Or 3) travel to an abortion state.  Compare the cost of an abortion to the
cost of a plane ticket or a bus ticket to get to California where not only
is abortion legal, it is free.  Oregon, likewise.  To get free medical care
in California, one need not be a resident of the state, or even a US
citizen.  California has become the world's hospital.  Plane tickets are
cheap. 

spike
--