Alabama Lawmakers Vote to Effectively Ban Abortion in the State

  
Via:  Gordy327  •  4 months ago  •  26 comments

Alabama Lawmakers Vote to Effectively Ban Abortion in the State
 

To comment, please join group Religious and not News Chat

Religious and not News Chat

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T


MONTGOMERY, Ala. — The Alabama Senate approved a measure on Tuesday that would outlaw almost all abortions in the state, setting up a direct challenge to Roe v. Wade, the case that recognized a woman’s constitutional right to end a pregnancy. The legislation bans abortions at every stage of pregnancy and criminalizes the procedure for doctors, who could be charged with felonies and face up to 99 years in prison. It includes an exception for cases when the mother’s life is at serious risk, but not for cases of rape or incest — a subject of fierce debate among lawmakers in recent days.

The House approved the measure — the most far-reaching effort in the nation this year to curb abortion rights — last month. It now moves to the desk of Gov. Kay Ivey, a Republican. Although the governor has not publicly committed to signing the legislation, many Republican lawmakers expect her support. In an email on Tuesday night, a spokeswoman for the governor, Lori Davis Jhons, said Ms. Ivey would “withhold comment until she has had a chance to thoroughly review the final version of the bill that passed.”

Opponents have vowed to challenge the measure in federal court if it becomes law. Even the legislation’s supporters expect that a lower court will block the measure. But it was drafted with exactly that in mind. The ban’s architects, reflecting the rising confidence of abortion critics nationwide after the appointment of Brett M. Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court, hope that the justices will use the case to reconsider the central holding in Roe and allow the Alabama measure to take effect. “Until now, there was no prospect of reversing Roe,” said Eric Johnston, who founded the Alabama Pro-Life Coalition and serves as its president, and has spent more than 30 years trying to ban abortion.

Mr. Johnston, who drafted the Alabama bill and sees himself as a purist on the abortion issue, said he did not support the spate of restrictive legislation that other states have enacted in recent months, including so-called fetal heartbeat bills. These bills essentially ban abortions starting at six weeks after conception, a time when many women do not yet know they are pregnant.
Given the current leanings of the Supreme Court, Mr. Johnston said, making such a measure, which does not directly challenge Roe, the subject of the court’s next major abortion case would be a wasted opportunity. “Why not go all the way?” he asked.

The Senate gallery was full before the debate started on Tuesday afternoon. A long line of people waited to take seats when people left. Many in the audience were abortion rights activists, and at times they laughed when male lawmakers spoke about pregnancy and other female health issues. Senator Rodger Smitherman, a Democrat, told colleagues that during his wife’s pregnancy with their son, doctors had told him it was unlikely that the child would be born alive. Mr. Smitherman said that he and his wife had decided to have the child anyway, and that his son had been born with significant health problems. “The significance,” he said, “is I had the choice.”

Democrats and abortion-rights advocates say that the Alabama measure would drive the procedure underground, endangering the lives of women and girls and disproportionately affecting poor and minority Alabamians. “We want abortions to be safe, and we want them to be few, but it should be legal, because there will be abortions,” said Senator Linda Coleman-Madison, a Democrat and one of the four women in the 35-member Senate. “The people who have the wherewithal will fly out of state,” she added. “Not everyone can afford to do that.” The Senate took the bill up again on Tuesday after an earlier attempt to debate the measure last week descended into shouting and chaos. Tensions erupted, including some within the dominant Republican Party, over whether to include exceptions to the ban in cases of rape or incest. A Senate committee had amended the bill to include those exceptions, prompting a bitter dispute that postponed consideration of the bill for days.

Even so, the fate of the bill was never in much doubt, and it did not take long for the proposal to return to the Senate floor. It passed after lawmakers rejected the amendment adding rape and incest exceptions. Senator Clyde Chambliss, a Republican and sponsor of the bill in the Senate, defended the omission of those exceptions. “When God creates the miracle of life inside a woman’s womb,” he said, “it is not our place as human beings to extinguish that life.” Other state measures to restrict abortion rights have advanced in the South and the Midwest this year and invited legal fights. Already, the governors of Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi and Ohio have signed fetal heartbeat bills. And Arkansas moved up the cutoff point for legal abortions to 18 weeks of pregnancy, from 20 weeks.

The Alabama measure, though, goes farther. In addition to the potential 99-year sentence for performing abortions, doctors face the threat of a 10-year term for attempting to perform one. Women who receive abortions would not be prosecuted.
The timing of any litigation over the bill is uncertain. Opponents of the measure intend to argue that Alabama will have unlawfully restricted a right that the courts have repeatedly reaffirmed since Roe. Alabama, a conservative state where Republicans control the Legislature, has repeatedly sought to enact limits on abortion. In 2018, voters overwhelmingly endorsed an amendment to the

Alabama Constitution declaring that the “public policy of this state is to recognize and support the sanctity of unborn life and the rights of unborn children, including the right to life.” In the past, state lawmakers imposed a 48-hour waiting period for abortions; mandated that women receive counseling before undergoing the procedure; and required minors to receive consent from a parent or legal guardian to have an abortion. Emboldened by the passage of the state constitutional amendment, lawmakers set out this year with a far more aggressive strategy in mind. Senator Greg Reed, a Republican who is the State Senate majority leader, said in a statement after Tuesday night’s vote that the measure “simply recognizes that an unborn baby is a child who deserves protection — and despite the best efforts of abortion proponents, this bill will become law because Alabamians stand firmly on the side of life.”

Supporters of abortion rights took a grimmer view. “Today is a dark day for women in Alabama and across this country,” said Staci Fox, the president and chief executive of Planned Parenthood Southeast Advocates. “Banning abortion is bad enough. Imprisoning doctors for providing care goes beyond the brink. Alabama politicians will forever live in infamy for this vote and we will make sure that every woman knows who to hold accountable.” Even as some states have moved to limit abortions, other states with Democratic-leaning governments have rushed this year to fortify legal protections for the procedure. Vermont recently took steps toward a state constitutional amendment enshrining a “right to personal reproductive autonomy.” And in January, Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo of New York signed a measure that guaranteed a “fundamental right” to abortion in the state.

Tags

jrGroupDiscuss - desc
smarty_function_ntUser_is_admin: user_id parameter required
Find text within the comments Find 
 
Gordy327
1  seeder  Gordy327    4 months ago

Next stop: the federal Courts for another strike down of an unconstitutional law. That's assuming the governor doesn't do the right thing by vetoing such a blatantly unconstitutional law.

 
 
 
Freefaller
1.1  Freefaller  replied to  Gordy327 @1    4 months ago

Lol what was that definition of insanity again?  Something about trying the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.

 
 
 
Gordy327
1.1.1  seeder  Gordy327  replied to  Freefaller @1.1    4 months ago
Lol what was that definition of insanity again? 

Alabama. jrSmiley_4_smiley_image.png

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
1.1.2  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Gordy327 @1.1.1    4 months ago

He must be in the coat hanger/ knitting needle business.

 
 
 
Gordy327
1.1.3  seeder  Gordy327  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @1.1.2    4 months ago
He must be in the coat hanger/ knitting needle business.

Hmm, perhaps I should invest in it and buy stock. Looks like it's poised to rise. jrSmiley_9_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Freefaller
1.2  Freefaller  replied to  Gordy327 @1    4 months ago
That's assuming the governor doesn't do the right thing by vetoing such a blatantly unconstitutional law.

He didn't do the right thing

 
 
 
Gordy327
1.2.1  seeder  Gordy327  replied to  Freefaller @1.2    4 months ago

Why am I not surprised?

 
 
 
lady in black
2  lady in black    4 months ago

The south's war on women marches on....face it they want women to be breeding machine with NO say.

 
 
 
Gordy327
2.1  seeder  Gordy327  replied to  lady in black @2    4 months ago
The south's war on women marches on....face it they want women to be breeding machine with NO say.

It would seem so.

 
 
 
lady in black
3  lady in black    4 months ago

25 Men voted on this....MEN that want to subjugate women, keep them bare foot, pregnant, give a fetus rights over the woman.  Sick fuckers!!!

 
 
 
Gordy327
3.1  seeder  Gordy327  replied to  lady in black @3    4 months ago
25 Men voted on this....MEN that want to subjugate women, keep them bare foot, pregnant, give a fetus rights over the woman.  Sick fuckers!!!

What does that say about those that voted them in office? Or continue to support them?

 
 
 
MrFrost
3.2  MrFrost  replied to  lady in black @3    4 months ago

Exactly what I was saying the other day, it's all about control. If these useless bastards really did care about the life of a child, they wouldn't constantly vote against funding for anything and everything that a child needs to grow into a healthy functioning and productive member of society. 

 
 
 
Gordy327
3.2.1  seeder  Gordy327  replied to  MrFrost @3.2    4 months ago
Exactly what I was saying the other day, it's all about control.

I'm sure that's part of it.

If these useless bastards really did care about the life of a child, they wouldn't constantly vote against funding for anything and everything that a child needs to grow into a healthy functioning and productive member of society. 

I'm reminded of a George Carlin segment:

 
 
 
lady in black
3.2.2  lady in black  replied to  Gordy327 @3.2.1    4 months ago

Transcript of George Carlin....

Why, why, why, why is it that most of the people who are against abortion are people you wouldn't wanna fuck in the first place? Boy, these conservatives are really something, aren't they? They're all in favor of the unborn. They will do anything for the unborn. But once you're born, you're on your own. Pro-life conservatives are obsessed with the fetus from conception to nine months. After that, they don't want to know about you. They don't want to hear from you. No nothing. No neonatal care, no day care, no head start, no school lunch, no food stamps, no welfare, no nothing. If you're preborn, you're fine; if you're preschool, you're fucked. Conservatives don't give a shit about you until you reach military age. Then they think you're just fine. Just what they've been looking for. Conservatives want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers. Pro-life... pro-life... These people aren't pro-life, they're killing doctors! What kind of pro-life is that? What, they'll do anything they can to save a fetus but if it grows up to be a doctor they just might have to kill it? They're not pro-life. You know what they are? They're anti-woman. Simple as it gets, anti-woman. They don't like them. They don't like women. They believe a woman's primary role is to function as a brood mare for the state.

 
 
 
Gordy327
3.2.3  seeder  Gordy327  replied to  lady in black @3.2.2    4 months ago
Transcript of George Carlin..

I found that clip here:

 
 
 
MrFrost
3.2.4  MrFrost  replied to  lady in black @3.2.2    4 months ago
Why, why, why, why is it that most of the people who are against abortion are people you wouldn't wanna fuck in the first place?

I remember it well, probably one of the funniest lines in history and oh so true. 

 
 
 
Gordy327
3.2.5  seeder  Gordy327  replied to  MrFrost @3.2.4    4 months ago
probably one of the funniest lines in history and oh so true.

George Carlin was a comedic genius. Funny, yet profound. And always with a good point too.

 
 
 
MrFrost
3.2.6  MrFrost  replied to  Gordy327 @3.2.5    4 months ago

One of the rare ocaitions that I will give thanks to the Abyss for Youtube. 

 
 
 
MrFrost
4  MrFrost    4 months ago

I know this article states that women wouldn't be persecuted for getting an abortion, but I think there was a provision that would punish the woman with potential time in prison time? Gordy? 

Pardon my language but, that's fucking sick. 

.

I don't get the impression that this "legislation" was meant  to be taken seriously, (hear me out), it's so outlandish that it will undoubtedly head for the SCOTUS, which exactly what they want. Do I think Roe V. Wade will be over turned? Possible, but unlikely. It's fairly rare, (almost unheard of), that the SCOTUS will over turn one of their own decisions. 

If Roe V Wade is over turned? Republicans will take an epic beating in 2020 for their support of this whack job law. 

 
 
 
Gordy327
4.1  seeder  Gordy327  replied to  MrFrost @4    4 months ago
Pardon my language but, that's fucking sick

Nothing to pardon. you are spot on!

I don't get the impression that this "legislation" was meant to be taken seriously,

I'm not so sure. This is Alabama after all.

it's so outlandish that it will undoubtedly head for the SCOTUS, which exactly what they want.

They even said they wanted abortion to go before the SCOTUS.

Do I think Roe V. Wade will be over turned? Possible, but unlikely. It's fairly rare, (almost unheard of), that the SCOTUS will over turn one of their own decisions.

I highly doubt it's likely. But consider: overturning Roe would mean the court has withdrawn a right that has previously been recognized. Never in the entire history of the court has a right been withdrawn once recognized. To do so would set a very dangerous precedent.

If Roe V Wade is over turned? Republicans will take an epic beating in 2020 for their support of this whack job law.

Not before they and their supporters give thunderous applause for the revocation of individual rights.

 
 
 
MrFrost
4.1.1  MrFrost  replied to  Gordy327 @4.1    4 months ago
I'm not so sure. This is Alabama after all.

True. Some of my distant relatives are from Alabama... Promise you won't tell anyone, some of us did escape the shallow end of the gene pool. 

They even said they wanted abortion to go before the SCOTUS.

It's a big issue, there are damn few, "on the fence" with regards to abortion and now that the Orange Menace has stacked the courts? Yep. I am firmly in the pro-choice crowd, (obviously). 

To do so would set a very dangerous precedent.

Also true, and to a lesser degree, it would discredit the SCOTUS as a whole since over turning Roe V. Wade would be an obvious political decision. 

Not before they and their supporters give thunderous applause for the revocation of individual rights.

Sadly, yes, and I REALLY hesitate to stray from the topic but we need to remember that these are the same people who cheered trump welcoming Oban into the WH, (and praising him). 

Thanks for the article Gordy. 

 
 
 
Gordy327
4.1.2  seeder  Gordy327  replied to  MrFrost @4.1.1    4 months ago
Thanks for the article Gordy. 

You're welcome. Thank you for your thoughtful input.

 
 
 
lady in black
5  lady in black    4 months ago

And you know damn well that these 25 asswipes would tell their mistresses to abort if they became pregnant

 
 
 
MrFrost
5.1  MrFrost  replied to  lady in black @5    4 months ago
Not before they and their supporters give thunderous applause for the revocation of individual rights.

It has happened far more than you or I realize. 

 
 
 
Tacos!
6  Tacos!    4 months ago

Obviously it will end up in federal court. I see no reason why district and circuit judges would do anything other than follow well-established Supreme Court precedent. There is no split of authority on this issue and it's not a new issue. So, assuming they take this to the Supreme Court, I kind of doubt the Court - even as it is currently populated - would grant certiorari unless Alabama has a novel argument they haven't considered before. Being conservative, I think most of the justices have more respect for precedent than the legislators of Alabama realize.

The tactic that is more likely to succeed are the various laws we see that aim to control or restrict abortion instead of banning it outright with no exceptions. Even then, they have to overcome the burden of not unduly burdening the person seeking an abortion.

 
 
 
Tacos!
7  Tacos!    4 months ago
 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online

It Is ME
Vic Eldred
Freedom Warrior
jungkonservativ111
Dulay
Tacos!
Just Jim NC TttH
Dean Moriarty
JaneDoe
arkpdx





Old Hermit


46 visitors