3 ms·

I cannot answer that. It is obviously bipartisan, however, because conservative state legislatures are attempting to regulate abortion access in other states.

s1artibartfast 4y ago
I know there are periodic federal bills, but how are state legislatures regulating access across state lines? Is this issue of local residents that travel for it?
- everforward 4y ago
  They're regulating local citizens that travel, which still has jurisdictional issues afaik. E.g. a state can't generally file charges against a citizen for possession of marijuana if the possession occurred in another state. I'm not sure what happens in the case of an abortion provider from a legal state visiting an illegal state. My suspicion is that they might try and be rebuked on jurisdictional grounds. It's an even weaker case than local citizen travel, since no part of the acts occurred inside the jurisdiction.
  - rayiner 4y ago
    I assume the theory is that the fetus is a Texan and the state has an interest in protecting them.
rayiner 4y ago
No they’re not. A few are trying to regulate their citizens traveling to other states to get abortions. Meanwhile the mainstream position on the left is imposing a standard that under 30% of Americans support (elective abortions to 24 weeks) in every single state.
- InefficientRed 4y ago
  > No they’re not. A few are trying to regulate their citizens traveling to other states to get abortions. Impressive gymnastics.
  - rayiner 4y ago
    A US citizen in Egypt can be prosecuted under the FCPA for paying a business related bribe in Egypt. Would you say that’s closer to “trying to regulate business practices in other countries” or “trying to regulate the conduct of their own citizens?”
    - InefficientRed 4y ago
      US states are not sovereign nations, and the US constitution speaks very specifically to both interstate travel and interstate commerce.
      - rayiner 4y ago
        That goes to whether the regulation is permissible or not. We are talking about how to characterize the regulation. Regulating one’s own citizens while they are traveling elsewhere is different than trying to regulate a different state.
        InefficientRed 4y ago
        > That goes to whether the regulation is permissible or not. We are talking about how to characterize the regulation. I don't know what hair you're trying to split here, but the gymnastics are getting even more imporessive. > Regulating one’s own citizens while they are traveling elsewhere is different than trying to regulate a different state. Missouri's law, for example, would allow Missouri citizens to sue out-of-state physicians who perform an abortion on a Missourian but have never lived, set foot in, or done business in Missouri. Looking forward to the incoming sequence of twists and flips.
        4y ago

s1artibartfast 4y ago

I know there are periodic federal bills, but how are state legislatures regulating access across state lines? Is this issue of local residents that travel for it?

everforward 4y ago
They're regulating local citizens that travel, which still has jurisdictional issues afaik. E.g. a state can't generally file charges against a citizen for possession of marijuana if the possession occurred in another state. I'm not sure what happens in the case of an abortion provider from a legal state visiting an illegal state. My suspicion is that they might try and be rebuked on jurisdictional grounds. It's an even weaker case than local citizen travel, since no part of the acts occurred inside the jurisdiction.
- rayiner 4y ago
  I assume the theory is that the fetus is a Texan and the state has an interest in protecting them.

rayiner 4y ago

No they’re not. A few are trying to regulate their citizens traveling to other states to get abortions. Meanwhile the mainstream position on the left is imposing a standard that under 30% of Americans support (elective abortions to 24 weeks) in every single state.

InefficientRed 4y ago
> No they’re not. A few are trying to regulate their citizens traveling to other states to get abortions. Impressive gymnastics.
- rayiner 4y ago
  A US citizen in Egypt can be prosecuted under the FCPA for paying a business related bribe in Egypt. Would you say that’s closer to “trying to regulate business practices in other countries” or “trying to regulate the conduct of their own citizens?”
  - InefficientRed 4y ago
    US states are not sovereign nations, and the US constitution speaks very specifically to both interstate travel and interstate commerce.
    - rayiner 4y ago
      That goes to whether the regulation is permissible or not. We are talking about how to characterize the regulation. Regulating one’s own citizens while they are traveling elsewhere is different than trying to regulate a different state.
      - InefficientRed 4y ago
        > That goes to whether the regulation is permissible or not. We are talking about how to characterize the regulation. I don't know what hair you're trying to split here, but the gymnastics are getting even more imporessive. > Regulating one’s own citizens while they are traveling elsewhere is different than trying to regulate a different state. Missouri's law, for example, would allow Missouri citizens to sue out-of-state physicians who perform an abortion on a Missourian but have never lived, set foot in, or done business in Missouri. Looking forward to the incoming sequence of twists and flips.
        4y ago