Positive
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Good news on the abortion front

In Alabama, it's a felony to provide or attempt an abortion except in a "medical emergency." This has led women in Alabama to travel to other states for their abortions. In response to this, Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall said that he would prosecute anyone who assisted a woman from Alabama to have an abortion in another state where abortion is legal, for example, by driving her there.

Several pro-choice organizations sued, and yesterday, U.S. District Judge Myron Thompson ruled in the plaintiffs' favor, stating that a state cannot punish its citizens or others who engage in conduct in other states where that conduct is legal. Another example of this would be if California, where gambling is illegal, were to prosecute citizens who traveled to Las Vegas to gamble. This ruling is based on the "right to travel" found in the Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article IV of the Constitution. No other than Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh cited the right to travel in the Dobbs decision (which allowed individual states to outlaw abortion) because someone from a state where abortion is illegal should be able to travel to a state where it's legal if they need one. Even President Trump has said that abortion should be "up to the states." If it's legal for a Californian to gamble in Nevada, it should be legal for an Alabamian to get an abortion in Illinois.

This ruling has implications for states like Texas and Louisiana, which are attempting to prosecute doctors in other states who prescribe abortion medication online.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/apr/01/alabama-out-of-state-abortion-ruling
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
tobynshorty · 51-55, F
It should be up to the Individual.
Midlifemale · 61-69, M
@tobynshorty its a human life, not a choice
tobynshorty · 51-55, F
@Midlifemale you cannot impose your beliefs on others.
@Midlifemale Are you also against warfare and self-defense? Or the only "human life" you care about are fetuses?

No one, "human life" or not, has a right to use another person's body against their will. If you disagree, I'm sure a dialysis patient would be happy to take one of your kidneys.
missyann · 56-60
@Midlifemale Agreed. It should never be legal to intentionally and deliberately end another human being life. I believe it is against the law across the country to intentionally and deliberately end another human being’s life.
Midlifemale · 61-69, M
@Midlifemale its against the law and common decency to protect and save a human life..and a baby at that !
luckranger71 · 51-55, M
@Midlifemale it’s not a “baby” until it’s born.
@missyann However, self-defense is legal. You keep forgetting that there is another human involved in pregnancy besides the ZEF.
@Midlifemale The new abortion restrictions are increasing the rates of maternal and infant mortality in the states where they were imposed - the opposite of "pro-life."
missyann · 56-60
@LeopoldBloom The difference is the baby is not intentionally and deliberately threatening the mothers life. If her life is truly being threatened, a doctor can legally provide medical care
This comment is hidden. Show Comment