Quote:
Originally Posted by GirlySports
Possible. At least it would be a law and individual cases would have to be argued all the way up to the Supreme Court instead of having it blocked at state level.
So say, hypothetically, there was a law that allowed abortions in all cases up to 16 weeks. Would there be a case to prevent a woman to get a 'legal' abortion? Who would sue? Nobody is forcing women to get an abortion, if they want to keep the baby they just keep it, so who would sue? That's would be backwards, no? People sue to get abortions, not to prevent abortions. There are no forced abortions I can think of. Same with voting, who would sue to not vote? If you don't want to vote, just don't. And i don't think sue to prevent other people from this and that exists, does it?
Democrats need to codify laws, establish the precedents and go from there. They can't be scared of future scenarios of someone possibly suing to not have abortions or not vote, that seems weird.
|
What would happen is the state will pass a law contrary to the federal law and try to enforce it. Then the women seeking the abortion would go to court. Then the court would agree with the state because the federal government doesn’t control heath policy.
All the federal government can go is attach funding to health to induce states to to allow abortion. Essentially they would need to say if you don’t find abortions we don’t fund any heath care. But even that would be subject to significant law suits based around South Dakota bs Dole where the court limits the federal governments ability to interfere in states using money.