Posted on 04/08/2023 9:14:16 AM PDT by Morgana
Legal limits on abortion-related travel are the focus of a new law in Idaho, with Gov. Brad Little signing a bill Wednesday that makes it a crime, punishable with up to five years in prison, for an adult to help a minor get an abortion without parental consent.
In response, two doctors and a regional Planned Parenthood affiliate have filed a lawsuit over the state's newly released interpretation of a separate anti-abortion law because the attorney general says it prohibits physicians from even referring patients to out-of-state abortion providers.
This 'abortion trafficking' law is the first of its kind in the US. It makes it illegal to either obtain abortion pills for a minor or to help them leave the state for an abortion without their parents' knowledge and consent.
Gov. Little said in a letter that the new law does not prohibit adults from traveling across state lines in order to get an abortion but rather seeks to stop minors from traveling for the procedure without their parents or guardian's knowledge.
'We've seen how fast harmful legislation can catch on and spread across the country. Here in Idaho, we're going to do everything in our power to stop it,' said Mistie DelliCarpini-Tolman, the Idaho State Director of Planned Parenthood, in a statement.
Idaho is one of 13 states that already effectively banned abortion in all stages of pregnancy, and is one of a handful of states that already have laws penalizing those who help people of any age obtain abortions.
State leaders in blue states such as Washington, Oregon and California have promoted the West Coast as a safe haven for abortions, and lawmakers in Oregon and Washington are considering bills to shield abortion providers and patients from criminal liability.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
Well Idaho goes blue in 2024.
Geez, the first paragraph of the story destroyed the headline.
Brrrrp.
You didn’t read the article or or also being deliberately disihonest.
One reason why I suspect that all the no exception and restriction of movement abortion legislation is being somehow ginned up by lefties hoping to push their entire agenda through in one go (while the GOP is toxic) is because these activists keep moving the goalposts, which is what the left is known for.
State’s Rights are State’s Rights.
What we are talking about here are under 16-who are considered children by all state agencies. They can’t drink, do credit, or go into a bar.
I disagree. The point of Roe was that abortion is somehow an inalienable right beyond legislative prohibition. Dobbs point (rightly) was that Roe was wrong about that, and that abortion is appropriately a state policy matter.
I agree. My only beef in the aftermath is when states think they have jurisdiction over what takes place outside their borders, which is what the headline disingenuously said.
Unfortunately, too many of these agencies will allow these children to mutilate themselves with the gender-realignment evil.
A, “Didn’t read the article”’er.
The law applies to minors and parental consent.
Reading is your friend.
*A, “Didn’t read the article”’er./The law applies to minors and parental consent.
Reading is your friend.*
You didn’t read me. “It doesn’t matter what the article says or infers. Idaho(and Linda Graham) is guilty of self destructing our movement.
*Note the false misleading headline.* Tell that to Tacrolimus.
*My only beef in the aftermath is when states think they have jurisdiction over what takes place outside their borders, which is what the headline disingenuously said.*
Please read ‘between’ the lines.
The Idaho law is NOT about “If a woman is entitled to an abortion in one state Idaho has no say.”
The law is about people taking YOUNG GIRLS across state lines for abortions AGAINST THEIR PARENT’S WILL.
Well done, Idaho!
Look you two(last2). Idaho shoda’ kept their traps shut in the aftermath of Roe being overturned. Linda couldn’t and it cost us last November. Something tells me the Idaho legislators and Governor are Manchurian Kamikazes.
Young folk are going to have it drilled into them that we’re out to get them. Where’s our followup been? If this + Linda are it then we’re screwed. We’re asleep at the switch in Wisconsin-never mind.
Think Todd Akin.
Big points for Idaho!!!
“You didn’t read the article or or also being deliberately disihonest.”
When Roe was put aside, what it did was get the questionability of abortion out of the hands of the federal government. It made their opinions and control of the interpretation and manner of the action mute. Basically, it put it back in the hands of the people at the local level.
But creating a bill that limits the decision making process of a medical determination is no different than what the feds were interpreting in Roe. In Idaho, it is legal for a minor to make determinations concerning their medical care of which abortion falls within, under TITLE 39, HEALTH AND SAFETY, CHAPTER 45, THE MEDICAL CONSENT AND NATURAL DEATH ACT. Starting the description within that law are the words “Any person” and never refers to age.
The law even gives the attorney general the ability to prosecute someone for alleged violations of the law, even if the county prosecutor — who would normally be responsible for filing a criminal case — declines to prosecute.
So what they are doing is taking the decisionary process out of the hands of the people, again, and pushing it right back into the government and the courts. The new bill does not apply to adults in its efforts to restrict the decisions of the patient they already say can make the decision with literal kidnapping thus violating the rights of a person as they previously defined them by title 39.
So, if Roe refused the right to stop a decided abortion of the person they had previously declared within their rights, isn’t the state doing the same thing? So the government takes control of a medical determination again at the state level while taking it away from the feds. It’s still government. And the addition of threatening medical personnel with even recommending a physician to perform the procedure with up to five years in prison is jumping into medical care they previously did not have the right to observe.
Wy69
“My only beef in the aftermath is when states think they have jurisdiction over what takes place outside their borders, which is what the headline disingenuously said.”
Which was a major point in my entry. But it also forces the decision of the medical procedure with that back into the courts thus redirecting the decision away from the people just like the feds did. And using the courts was the only way the feds could justify getting into personal medical decisions as it was not in the US Constitution.
wy69
“My only beef in the aftermath is when states think they have jurisdiction over what takes place outside their borders, which is what the headline disingenuously said.”
Which was a major point in my entry. But it also forces the decision of the medical procedure with that back into the courts thus redirecting the decision away from the people just like the feds did. And using the courts was the only way the feds could justify getting into personal medical decisions as it was not in the US Constitution.
wy69
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.