RE: The Vagina Sniffers in Ohio Are Back At It....
December 8, 2016 at 12:17 pm
(This post was last modified: December 8, 2016 at 12:19 pm by TheRealJoeFish.)
From a legal perspective, there is absolutely no way this (currently) passes constitutional muster. Essentially, Ohio GOP is banking that Roe v. Wade will be overturned under a Trump presidency, and sooner rather than later. However, I believe that 5 of the current 8 justices are either pro-Roe v. Wade or, at very least, pro-some semblance of constitutional protection.
Essentially, the process that would need to happen for this to become a law is this:
1. Ohio legislature enacts it, governor signs it, it ostensibly goes into effect.
2. It's appealed the moment it's enacted.
3. Federal District Court says "This is unconstitutional under Roe v. Wade."
4. Federal Appeals Court says "This is unconstitutional under Roe v. Wade."
(4.5 At least 1 current pro-choice SC Justice dies or retires, and Trump appoints two staunchly anti-Roe v. Wade SC Justices to the two vacant spots)
5. Supreme Court certifies the case (agrees to take it up)
6. Supreme Court explicitly overrules Roe v. Wade, states that either a) there is no constitutional right to privacy at all (Thomas will probably write a concurring opinion espousing this wacky viewpoint), b) there is a constitutional right to privacy but it doesn't apply to abortions, or c) there is a constitutional right to privacy but it's overruled in the case of abortions by the constitutional rights of the fetus.
Essentially, the process that would need to happen for this to become a law is this:
1. Ohio legislature enacts it, governor signs it, it ostensibly goes into effect.
2. It's appealed the moment it's enacted.
3. Federal District Court says "This is unconstitutional under Roe v. Wade."
4. Federal Appeals Court says "This is unconstitutional under Roe v. Wade."
(4.5 At least 1 current pro-choice SC Justice dies or retires, and Trump appoints two staunchly anti-Roe v. Wade SC Justices to the two vacant spots)
5. Supreme Court certifies the case (agrees to take it up)
6. Supreme Court explicitly overrules Roe v. Wade, states that either a) there is no constitutional right to privacy at all (Thomas will probably write a concurring opinion espousing this wacky viewpoint), b) there is a constitutional right to privacy but it doesn't apply to abortions, or c) there is a constitutional right to privacy but it's overruled in the case of abortions by the constitutional rights of the fetus.
How will we know, when the morning comes, we are still human? - 2D
Don't worry, my friend. If this be the end, then so shall it be.
Don't worry, my friend. If this be the end, then so shall it be.
