“This is a Moment”: Dobbs and the Realities of the Post-Roe World

Below is my column in USA Today on misleading claims made about the recent abortion ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization and the existing protections for women on issues ranging from travel to contraceptives. There are good-faith concerns over the reasoning and implications of the decision. There is no need to raise unfounded fears over issues like interstate travel or contraceptives. The President and the Court appear in agreement. The time is now for citizens to vote on the issue of abortion and any limitations placed on that state-based right.

Here is the column:

“Consider the challenge accepted, Court.” Those defiant words by President Joe Biden last week were meant to rally a possibly anemic political base to, in the words of the president, “vote, vote, vote, vote.”

Ironically, it was the only part of the president’s remarks that is consistent with what the court actually said in its decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. In overturning Roe v. Wade, the court ruled that millions of citizens, not nine justices, must now decide the question of abortion.

In its decision, the court said that in 1973 “Roe abruptly ended [a] political process” of states dealing with the issue of abortion. It now has returned the matter to the states and said basically “have at it.” The court did not outlaw abortion or favor any particular outcome beyond telling people to “vote, vote, vote, vote.”

There are good-faith objections to the court’s interpretation of the Constitution. Many believe that the Constitution implicitly does protect this right. What is striking, however, is how the president and other Democratic politicians and pundits have attacked the decision for positions that it expressly rejected or clearly did not support. Indeed, parts of the president’s abortion response plan are based on nonexistent threats to rights not imperiled by the decision.

Take travel. The president, political allies and law professors have stressed the need to “protect the right of women to travel.” The right to travel for medical procedures is unambiguously protected.

While a few legislators have suggested such laws, restricting travel has been tried before with consistently ruinous results before the court. The court, for example, unanimously struck down a California law in Edward v. California that attempted to keep indigent people from entering the state. Discriminating against nonresidents of a state has repeatedly been held as unconstitutional under the Privileges and Immunities Clause.

The right to travel also can be based on cases under the dormant Commerce Clause, which prevents states from discriminating against or unduly burdening interstate commerce. The court has long defended the“right of free ingress into other states, and egress from them.”

More importantly, the majority of justices in the Dobbs decision rejected this claim. In his concurrence, Justice Brett Kavanaugh called this claim “not especially difficult as a constitutional matter” and said that any such ban would fail “based on the constitutional right to interstate travel.”

With Chief Justice John Roberts, that means that five justices clearly view laws that ban travel as unconstitutional and the expectation is that a decision on any such law could be unanimous or nearly unanimous. Making this a focus of the federal response is about as significant as expressly prohibiting indentured servitude. The court is likely to say “been there, done that.”

Biden also continued to raise the specter of bans on contraception, which was also expressly and repeatedly rejected by the court. The court stated that, “Abortion is fundamentally different, as both Roe and Casey acknowledged.”

Nevertheless, the majority of justices said that some critics of the Dobbs decision would make this claim and noted that “perhaps this is designed to stoke unfounded fear that our decision will imperil those other rights.”

Even Justice Clarence Thomas, who called for a re-examination of the constitutional basis for rights like contraception, expressly stated, “I agree that ‘[n]othing in [the Court’s] opinion should be understood to cast doubt on precedents that do not concern abortion.’”

Biden is not alone in seeking to exploit a problem not created by the opinion. For example, Democratic politicians have claimed that the decision would make it difficult or impossible for women to get medical treatment for ectopic pregnancies.

Last week, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N,Y., argued that a supposed ban on the procedure was justification for harassing Justice Kavanaugh at a Washington, D.C., restaurant. She tweeted: “Poor guy. He left before his soufflé because he decided half the country should risk death if they have an ectopic pregnancy within the wrong state lines.”

And professors like Harvard Professor Laurence Tribe also have given credence to this claim.

It is utterly untrue.

When a pregnancy implants in the fallopian tube, it is not a viable pregnancy and its treatment is not an abortion subject to these bans. The procedures and medication are entirely different. Moreover, laws in OklahomaTexasLouisiana and other states restricting abortions expressly exempt such procedures.

Nevertheless, Biden announced that he is contemplating declaring a “national health emergency.” If he does, he would extend the use of a public health emergency beyond any prior invocation and beyond what his administration states is a measure to be used when “1) a disease or disorder presents a PHE, or 2) a PHE, including significant outbreaks of infectious diseases or bioterrorist attacks, otherwise exists.”

Jennifer Klein, director of the White House Gender Policy Council, admitted to reporters  that they looked at this option and did not see any material benefit from taking the unprecedented step since there were only “tens of thousands of dollars” in the government’s public health emergency fund, and declaring an emergency “doesn’t release a significant amount of legal authority.”  It would also unleash potential legal challenges.

However, the value of declaring a public health emergency is primarily meant to address a political emergency for Biden. Recent polling shows Biden‘s approval rating as low as 30%.  And 64% of Democrats, according to a New York Times poll, want someone other than Biden as their party’s candidate for president in 2024.

The Dobbs decision offers Democrats a glimmer of hope for the midterms and some leaders in the party believe they must “scare the crap out of [voters] and get them to come out.”

The president doesn’t need to defend unthreatened rights or invoke unsupported powers to campaign on abortion rights. The right to choose remains a powerful constitutional question without undermining that campaign with a parade of supposed horribles that disperses on closer examination.

The president’s call to “vote, vote, vote, vote” is the same as the court’s call. However, the result may not be clear as the president suggests in a country where only 34% support abortion in the second trimester and only 19% in the third trimester.

As the president said, “this is a choice.  This is a moment.” In time, we will know what that choice will be and what this moment will mean for the country.

Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. Follow him on Twitter @JonathanTurley.

155 thoughts on ““This is a Moment”: Dobbs and the Realities of the Post-Roe World”

  1. Breaking news:

    the mother of the 10 year old child, who Biden has used as a political trophy, has defended the Guatemalan man, Gerson Fuentes, who had allegedly impregnated her daughter. DNA test is pending, though he has admitted to sexual relations with the girl.

    In the following Telemundo video in Spanish, the mother denies that Gerson Fuentes raped her daughter. She also states Gerson Fuentes provided them his home where the 3 lived together. She and her daughter presently still live in his residence. She also states she did not want to press charges of rape. She also states:

    “Todo lo que están diciendo en contra de él es mentir” (Everything that they are saying against him are lies)

    You have to understand Spanish to understand the following video since the Youtube closed captioning transcript, as always, is inaccurate.

    In summary: According to the mother, there was no rape, they live in his residence, the mother allowed the sexual acts (twice) to take place, and did not want to press charges. She is now defending him.

    It appears the actual story is:
    Biden has used this real life story for political scoring
    The Ohio girl’s medical privacy has likely been breached via HIPAA violations by the ProAbort Indiana Physician. Her employer, Indiana University, has filed against her a HIPAA Violation
    If anything the mother might be guilty of negligence or child abuse according to US laws.

    Either way, Joe Biden may have quite literally, in a Jill Biden move, tossed all of the Breakfast Tacos of America to Republicans because we tacos know Spanish.

    🌮💃🏽

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yDWpS18LWTw&t=39s

    Telemundo also has the video with their left leaning summary in Spanish. Telemundo and Univision are notoriously left leaning

    https://www.telemundo.com/noticias/noticias-telemundo/crimen-y-violencia/la-madre-de-la-nina-de-10-anos-violada-en-ohio-defiende-al-joven-que-c-rcna38236

    1. RE:”Either way, Joe Biden may have quite literally, in a Jill Biden move, tossed all of the Breakfast Tacos of America to Republicans because we tacos know Spanish.” Claro mi amigo! Y hay otros tambien. I literally jaw-dropped when I heard what she said. The Charmin continues to roll out of the stall and, unlike Biden, we’d best take care with respect to the conclusions we draw so as not to step in it. We yet but turn another page.

    2. You just cannot admit that the alt-right news you rely on LIED about the 10 year old rape victim who had to travel out of state for an abortion. Just like the alt-right news you rely on, somehow you have to turn an outright lie proven to be such, to an attack on Joe Biden and Democrats. That’s why people who aren’t feeble-minded disciples like you fear for the future of this country. Facts just don’t penetrate your consciousness, and you have been indoctrinated to hate and distrust. The truth is the truth, and Fox LIED about the matter being “too good to be true”. Turley used his credentials to help enable the lie by claiming there were “glaring questions”. But, of course, he used his usual weasel-wording to provide an out if the story turned out to be true. Fox never apologized. Instead, Fox put Theodore Rokita, Indiana’s AG, on air, who proudly said he was going after brave Dr. Bernard and her medical license, “investigating” her for allegedly failing to report the rape, and for violating HIPAA, both of which were lies. The reports had already been made, which Rokita knew or should have known, but he has higher political ambitions. The man was already under arrest. The mother had already reported it. But, somehow, Joe Biden has “manipulated” the story as a “political trophy”. And, so people like you attack “the Left”. You, sir, are an ignoramus.

      1. Natacha, indeed the mother did report her daughters pregnancy. However she reported it to social services and not to the police as a rape. You have posted several times that the mother reported the pregnancy but you leave out the part of her not reporting to the police that the rape of a nine year old girl had occurred. It seems very strange that the doctor who performed the abortion would be curious as to how this child became pregnant. The doctor is not curious and you are not curious about the rape of a child being reported to the police. I guess such curiosity would not fit with your talking points. I must recall that you said that a child can be estimated to be transgender from the time he or she begins to speak. You will simply use them for what you will.

        1. Idiot TlT, The only way that a 10 y.o. can become pregnant is through rape.

          10 y.o.’s cannot consent to sex.

          Both the doctor in OH and the doctor in IN appropriately reported the rape.

        2. Social services IS a mandatory reporter. The man was already in custody when Rokita went on Watters’ program and LIED about Dr. Bernard, called her an “abortion activist”, claimed she had failed to properly file rape reports previously, and that she violated HIPAA. Rokita has higher political ambitions and uses any excuse to get his fat face on camera. He promised to aggressively go after Dr. Bernard for no reason other than she performed a legal abortion on a child who was impregnated at age 9. He had to lie to come up with reasons to attack Dr. Bernard. This tragedy constitutes a real-lfe example of how bad the Dobbs decision was. He was purely motivated by politics. Rokita is a disgrace to the State of Indiana.

          Here’s another angle to this story: Dr. Caitlin Bernard is a respected OB-GYN, a member of the faculty of Indiana University School of Medicine, which is a major medical teaching facility. She is so respected that her colleague in Ohio referred this girl to her care, even though there were closer Indiana hospitals to which the child could have been sent: for instance, Reid Hospital in Richmond, IN, which is right on the border between Indiana and Ohio and on Interstate 70, and which is a large medical complex. WHY would alt-right news choose to question Dr. Bernard’s veracity, OTHER THAN THE FACT THAT SHE IS A WOMAN, plus the fact that the story makes the rabid “pro-lifers” look bad? If she had been a male physician with the same credentials, her word would have been good enough. Here’s the sad truth about what Trumpism has done to America: anytime there is a person or story that counters the narrative, that person or story is attacked as being a lie or liar.

      2. You just cannot admit that the alt-right news you rely on LIED about the 10 year old rape victim

        The media accurately quoted named sources, often with video and audio recordings. State officials with access to the information. Much more accurate than reporting on the Jan 6 fiasco. Too often quoting unnamed sources close to the committee.

    3. You keep suggesting that the IN doctor violated HIPAA. She did not. HIPAA does not prevent doctors from discussing patients. It prevents doctors from sharing info **linked to the patient’s identity** (e.g., by name, birth date, SSN).

      “Her employer, Indiana University, has filed against her a HIPAA Violation”

      Nope. They investigated and cleared her: “As part of IU Health’s commitment to patient privacy and compliance with privacy laws, IU Health routinely initiates reviews, including the matters in the news concerning Dr. Caitlin Bernard,” IU Health officials said in an email. “IU Health conducted an investigation with the full cooperation of Dr. Bernard and other IU Health team members. IU Health’s investigation found Dr. Bernard in compliance with privacy laws.”

      If the woman in the video is indeed the girl’s mother, then she has legally (but sadly) outed her daughter by announcing that they lived with Fuentes, whose address is a public record.

      “According to the mother, there was no rape”

      We all know that a 10 y.o. cannot consent to sex. If she was pregnant, then she was raped.

      “the mother allowed the sexual acts (twice) to take place”

      Then the mother should be charged with child abuse and the daughter should be removed from her care.

  2. Face it. There’s no good solution. The legislature is not the proper branch of government for issues involving fundamental rights. Such matters belong in the Judicial branch. The Judicial branch is not the proper venue for issues where there is widespread dispute about the facts. Such matters belong in the Legislative branch. It’s an issue which defies other issues.
    This isn’t a modern issue. It’s been around since the founding. And we’re stuck with it indefinitely.
    I suspect prohibition in this area will be the same as prohibition in other areas — an avenue for criminals to make money while good and decent citizens get hassled in the process due to unintended consequences.

    1. What’s the “widespread dispute about the facts”? Is it the question of when human life begins? Or is it the question of whether abortion is a constitutionally protected right? If the latter, I’m going to need more convincing – IANAL, but the “penumbras and emanations” rationale had never been convincing to me or dispositive even to Bader Ginsburg, I understand. Stronger reasoning is in order. If the former, when else?

      Please note – I (reluctantly) support legal abortion on demand up to some time limit like 14 weeks or so, though I am strongly against the use of abortion as contraception. But there’s no real question that human life can only result from the fertilization of human ovum by human sperm, implantation of the resulting zygote, and successful gestation. (I’m eliding cloning for the moment.) No other two kinds of gametes can come together to bring about a human life. No other kind of life results from the joining of two human gametes. The question is only, at what point do we object to the ending of the process of gestation sufficiently to disallow it? Do we ever?

      Which gets into the notorious bioethics question of why birth is some magic boundary, since the newborn, though no longer “parasitic” on the mother’s internal body processes, is still 100% dependent on outside help to survive. If we can’t force someone to take on the burden of a fetus, how can we force someone to take on the burden of something that differs from a fetus in pretty much only two significant ways: the ability to walk away from it for a time, and the fact that it no longer is directly affected by what the mother ingests?

      1. You have the right to make medical decisions without government interference. The right is protected by the Courts. Except in this instance. Alito’s opinion says there is the termination of a human life to consider. In legal parlance Alito is introducing a balancing test, a subjective test with which a court weighs competing interests. Except he doesn’t want to admit it. Because he doesn’t want jurisdiction over this matter.

        1. You have the right to make medical decisions without government interference. The right is protected by the Courts.

          Exercising rights, until they interfere with rights of others

      2. Can someone take your blood without your consent to save another’s life? (No.)

        Why should women have less bodily autonomy?

  3. So let me get this straight. Biden now want’s the people to vote in the states to allow abortions but he doesn’t want people to be allowed to vote in the states to limit abortion. Joe want’s to allow you to vote for some things but not for others. He has no problem with a law that for fifty years took away the right of the people to vote for or against abortion but now all of a sudden he wants you to vote. How hard is it to see who this man really is? I keep looking for an ounce of moral fiber in the Biden family but nary a thread can be found. This guy is not a good folk.

  4. The left engages daily in lies meant to deceive the voting public, whether it be Roe vs Wade or gun control and Porter’s use of lies to defame a witness without permitting the witness to speak.
    —–
    Bombshells undercut the ‘Big Lie:’ 21 confirmed illegalities, irregularities from 2020 election
    There are now nearly two dozen credible confirmations of wrongdoing, irregularities and illegalities that undercut the claims of bureaucrats, journalists and Democrats that the November 2020 general election was flawless.

    https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/elections/bombshells-belie-big-lie-21-confirmed-illegalities-irregularities-2020?utm_source=daily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter
    —–
    Go Trump the liars are being exposed for what they are. 21 important revelations Proving the lies of the Democrats.

    1. Someone claimed that the November 2020 general election was “flawless.” Who’d be stupid enough to do that?

      1. We can list a lot of names, but I think we know who they are. However, I will attempt to educate a few by quoting one of the twenty-one things the left doesn’t want to know about.

        Illegal ballot drop boxes. The Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled earlier this month that the 570 drop boxes used during the 2020 election were unlawfully approved by the Wisconsin Election Commission, “Only the legislature may permit absentee voting via ballot drop boxes,” the court declared. “WEC cannot. Ballot drop boxes appear nowhere in the detailed statutory system for absentee voting. WEC’s authorization of ballot drop boxes was unlawful.” State Rep. Janel Brandtjen told Just the News that hundreds of thousands of votes were cast in the illegal boxes in the 2020 race when Biden and Donald Trump were separated by less than 21,000 votes.

        https://justthenews.com/sites/default/files/2022-07/WISupremeCourtDecisionBallotDropBoxes.pdf

          1. It was lawless.

            3. The Laptop Lie: More than 50 national security experts, countless news organizations and large social media firms falsely told American voters in fall 2020 that the Hunter Biden laptop with damning revelations about Biden family corruption was Russian disinformation. In fact, it was a legitimate laptop already in the FBI’s possession, and Hunter Biden was already under criminal investigation before voters cast their 2020 ballots. The false narrative had significant impact: polling shows a majority of American voters believe the pre-election censorship of the story amounted to election interference,

            https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/elections/bombshells-belie-big-lie-21-confirmed-illegalities-irregularities-2020

    2. Why don’t you take a look at “Lost Not Stolen”, written by CONSERVATIVE Republicans? They refute every single basis for the Big Lie.

      1. The reason you refer me elsewhere is because you cannot make the argument. You fail before you even start.

        Make one or two of your best arguments with evidence. You can’t. You fire blanks while thinking you have something to say. You don’t.

  5. Context matters here. Many (not all) conservatives are simply not trustworthy. Voters for Obama were denied about 100 federal judge picks and a Supreme Court pick plus many conservative Supreme Court justices misled Congress at their confirmation hearing by overturning Roe.

    Why would Biden trust this group?

  6. You know I have very high regard for the Professor. And I’m seeing some silliness in the comments section that he is a shill for Fox News. He has always struck me as a classic liberal progressive — which means he tends to have an idealistic view of a piece of legislation or law based on how it looks on paper — not how it will be applied by actual institutions.

    1. TURLEY: a Post-Modern Liberalist with a Conservative twist swimming in a Neoliberal Society.
      Oh … and a James Madison accolade – of The Federalist Papers, and the “Father of the Constitution.” 🇺🇸

  7. The Democrat gerontocracy, led by a senile president, know their failed extremist policies will bring disaster in the midterms. They are desperately trying to change the subject so they’re not held to account. Their lies and distortions about the Roe decision, to say nothing of Biden’s shameful attacks on SCOTUS, are obvious signs of that desperation. Are American stupid enough to believe them? Undoubtedly at least part of the population is.

  8. Jonathan Turley, You’ve accurately parsed the legal, medical-technical & government side of ‘reproduction’ with all the main-stage actors, but what of our gorgeous young people & ‘community’ (Latin ‘com’ = ‘together’ + ‘munus’ = ‘gift-or-service’), our future & culture?
    IS COMMUNITY SOLIDARITY (vs endless state & government lobbying, protesting & tears or perhaps to make these more effective) AN OPTION TODAY?
    Americans & Canadians really haven’t come a long way since fleeing as refugees from the economic & ecological disasters & perpetual wars of ‘exogenous’ (Latin ‘other-generated’) oligarch owned & commanded Europe. Of course the same suspects organized & financed the ships to colonize & export this failed centralized system abroad to Turtle-Island/North-America & worldwide as a way of capturing false ‘economy’ (Greek ‘oikos’ = ‘home’ + ‘namein’ = ‘care-&-nurture’). Only a few who became half-blood, Metis & Mestizo joined with 1st Nation peoples here. Even under great threat by colonial authorities & racist exclusion by colonial settlements, chose to be part of First Nation, indigenous economically inclusive, welcoming abundant productive sovereign societies here.
    BUT WAIT THIS IS NOT WHAT WE’VE BEEN TOLD!
    Those who chose to become Half-bloods had some memory or inkling of their own ancient ‘indigenous’ (Latin ‘self-generating’) Celtic & Slavic Longhouse heritage. https://sites.google.com/site/indigenecommunity/e-history/3-celtic-europe These brave few were attracted by First Nation fidelity to the same loving, intimate, intergenerational, female-male, interdisciplinary, critical-mass, economies-of-scale, previously empire conquered & institutionally displaced in Europe. Indigenous culture was rent asunder here & in each previous Roman, Greek, Assyrian etc empire since Babylon. The indigenous ~100 (50-150 person ‘Multihome-Dwelling-Complex’ (eg Longhouse-apartment, Pueblo-townhouse & Kanata-village) ‘FRACTAL’ (‘fraction, multiplier, building-block, where-the-part-contains-the-whole’) livelihood way of 1st Nations & of indigenous Europe & all humanity’s ancestors, welcomed & economically included young people & all others. 70% of people here & worldwide today live in Multihomes with an average of 32 dwelling-units or ~100 people. 20% of Multihome-dwellers are extended-families living intentionally in intergenerational proximity for social & economic collaboration. On Turtle-Island multihome-extended families contribute more than one trillion dollars of the most efficiently organized & caring essential goods & services per year to close-by family members per year as one of our society’s largest (albeit unrecognized) economic sectors.
    SO-CALLED ‘FREEDOM OF CHOICE’
    What choice do young people today in our institutionalized detached societies, really have when their submissive elders, families, relatives & neighbours are so dependently fixated upon disposable consumerism in obedience to oligarch product & thrill advertising? Young people might wait into their 40s when they may be financially stable & reproductively barren, only to find the same unwelcoming institutionalized drive to institutional child car.e facilities & schools from their isolated detached suburban sprawl bungalow. Elders with life & technical experience warehoused in old-folk homes, handicapped in residential & group-home facilities, sick & injured in hospitals, youth & others in perpetual classroom so-called ‘learning’ all staffed in divided facilities. Care & residential units with 8 staff (6 shift & 2 specialists) per day amount to 2922 changes of the guard per year, perfect for disease transmission as well as the meaningless unconnected life of being on a state schedule.
    Without cultural fractal indigenous organization, where all people are valued & empowered, young men & women with their mysterious sense of knowing-attraction are left ‘out-in-the-cold’, by a finance-media-religion-education-military-industrial-legislative-judicial-complex oligarch programmed conspicuous consumption society.

    TIME-BASED (UNIVERSAL ECONOMIC COMMON DENOMINATOR) EQUIVALENCY ACCOUNTING upon the worldwide indigenous String-shell Value system was called Wampum on Turtle-Island, Quipu in South America, Cowrie-shell in Europe, Asia, Africa, Australia & all of the world’s islands. String-shell as a universal system of empowerment & employment of capacities, creates a Circular economy within the Multihome for domestic economy with subset industrial & commercial economy. String-shell issued from the bottom up in Multihomes & specialized Production-Society-Guilds, is a true ‘money’ (Greek ‘mnemosis’ = ‘memory’) of all collective economic contributions as opposite to the oligarch top-down metal-coin (read mine, extract & exploit) system of designed ‘amnesia’. String-shell (eg. Wampum on Turtle-Island/North-America, Quipu in S. America & Cowrie-shell in indigenous Europe, Asia, Africa, Australia & all world islands) integrates: a. ‘Capital’ (L ‘cap’ = ‘head’ = ‘collective-intelligence’), b. ‘Currency’ (‘flow’ aka ‘money’), c. ‘Condolence’ (social-security for injury, illness, handicap, death etc), d. Collegial mentored-apprenticeship educational Credit, e. time-math Communication, f) professional Costume & more. https://sites.google.com/site/indigenecommunity/relational-economy Imagine food, shelter, clothing, warmth & health organized as much as possible within the proximal economies-of-scale of our multihomes, neighbourhoods as ‘fractals’ (‘fraction, multiplier, building-block, where-the-part-contains-the-whole’). Let’s re-engage locally, so we aren’t institutionalizing our young, old, injured, sick, handicapped etc. but engaging them & ourselves for all strengths. When we organize our local multi-million dollar Multihome human, Community-Health & material resource economies as Africa & all humanity’s indigenous ancestors, then we develop ‘indigenous’ economic sovereignty & government will take their lead from us.
    DO-WE-KNOW-WHO-WE-ARE-? an open-source, public-domain web-based Community-Economy software. Indigenous society worldwide started /c intimate, intergenerational, female-male, interdisciplinary critical-mass, economies of scale Multihome Fractal. Within each multihome ‘Do-we-know-?’ web-software facilitates residents & neighbours to easily: 1) CATALOGUE our individual & business talents, goods, services, resources & dreams as complementary-talents, 2) MAP collaborative relationships, 3) ACCOUNT for transactions & contributions, 4) COMMUNICATE locally /c record keeping, agreement/contract development, bridge building & conflict resolution among family, friends & neighbours. Indigene Community’s Web-Software programmers have developed Do-we-know? so each person’s specialized gift becomes an expert capable asset/value for the Multihome community & society at large. When communities show their strengths & leadership, then governments have active contributing partners to collaborate for essential goods & services from the bottom-up. sites.google.com/site/indigenecommunity/structure/9-do-we-know-who-we-are

    1. douglasjack,

      You might not be aware, but this web blog only permits two hyperlinks per comment. I edited your comment to remove the protocol on the last link so that it would post. If in the future you would like the readership to review more than two links, this may be accomplished by using multiple comments of two or fewer hyperlinks each.

  9. Who is harmed by the truth? Fact actually.
    The real harm to everyone is an ideology in which the adherents wear their politics like a hyper sensitive second skin ready to fight in an instant.
    And, in a time of great Constitutional division only the text will do.

  10. Professor Turley’s explanation is spot on from a medical point of view. Every state has an exception to protect the mother’s life and treatment of an ectopic pregnancy is not abortion. Usually the child dies and it is perfectly legal to remove. Most cases are considered medical emergencies when they are diagnosed. Ectopic pregnancies do not appear with a sign on the women saying “this is an ectopic pregnancy, operate now”. They present generally as acute abdominal pain and you have to consider appendicitis, ectopic pregnancy, meckle’s diverticulum, diverticulitis (even in the young), ulcerative colitis, possible perforation and other diagnosis. In a women of child bearing age, you have specific tests to rule in or rule out pregnancy. It is not always clear and this will Sometimes lead to delay. Even in the UK and Europe with their somewhat lenient laws on abortion, they still have significant ectopic pregnancies similar in rate to the US. I am quite confident that even if a state were to try to impose a travel ban or lawsuit against out of state providers it would be immediately suspended in Federal Court until it was litigated. The crackpots on both sides are engaged in “what aboutism’s” and there is hysteria all around. It will take some time for the dust to clear, but it will clear. Of course midterm elections just make the fires burn hotter. Of course some people are already adjusting their behavior as vasectomy rates have soared, increased use of bc pills and a very legitimate movement towards making bc pills available without prescription. Some people are responding rationally while others run amok with their hair on fire.

    1. “EVERY STATE” with draconian anti-abotion laws, especially “zygote personhood” laws, does NOT have specific exceptions for rape, incest, or ectopic pregnancy. And, as Theodore Rokita has proven conclusively, even when the doctor who performs an abortion does everything according to law, s/he may be the target for politicians who want to pander to the “save unborn babies” Evangelicals. It’s all political theater, not good medicine, and a disservice to women and girls who need this help. You may be “quite confident” that states with travel bans would eventually lose in federal court, but at what cost–after a doctor is sued or charged criminally, and/or has his/her license under investigation, like Rokita promised he’d do to Dr. Bernard, solely to score political points? Litigation, both criminal and civil, including licensure defense, is expensive. I myself have defended physicians, nurses and pharmacists before licensure boards. There’s no “whataboutism” involved in the case of Dr. Bernard: the Indiana Attorney General LIED about her on national television to further his political career. She just HAD to be wrong because the story was TRUE and outlets like Fox got caught in a lie. An Attorney General is supposed to uphold the law, not break it, and not use it for political theater.

  11. “It is utterly untrue.” Thus sayeth Jonathon

    He also said trump did not incite the mob on January 6. Those charged with violence in the Capitol Building disagree. They say trump did incite them.

    Jonathon also insinuated that the rape of a 10 year old girl did not happen. A man has been arrested for this rape.

    I appreciate Jonathons emphasis on free speech. But free speech comes at a cost sometimes. Sometimes you say something so idiotic that your employer looks at you as a liability and fires you. Sometimes you say something and others take criminal action based on your words. Own up to your words.

    Why can’t the repo (excuse me, the trump fascist) party leave people alone? Why do you have to impose your morality on others? Why does it matter if a man sleeps with a man? a woman with a woman? Abortion has been a common practice across the world for 10s of thousands of years. Making it illegal will only make it unobtainable for poor people. Wealthy people will find it easy to ship their daughter/mistress/wife/girl friend off to where ever they can to get an abortion. Poor people are left to fend for themselves.

    Sad, so sad.

    1. Baby Mind:

      “He also said trump did not incite the mob on January 6. Those charged with violence in the Capitol Building disagree. They say trump did incite them.”
      *********************************
      So criminals seeking favor from the prosecutor swear Trump made ’em do it! You wanna buy a bridge?

      1. Several times he said to walk to the capitol, he said he’d be there with them. He had 10 times more violent words than the one time he said “peacefully”. For 2 years he has been yelling about fraud in the election. Never once has any evidence been put forward, just words. Words that have been refuted by a host of other republicans, including the republicans that certified the election trump has called fraud.

        Dream on, your savior trump only cares for one person. He even threw his daughter under the bus, accused her of either being stupid or she committed perjury.

        1. Baby Mind:

          “Several times he said to walk to the capitol, he said he’d be there with them. He had 10 times more violent words than the one time he said “peacefully”.”
          **************
          And your Marxist arithmetic will result in no criminal charges, no recrimination and a nomination to run in 2024 for the Presidency with a Republican House and Senate just waiting. Suffer, it’s good for you. And when he wins, well the fun and investigations really start …

          1. Mespo says:

            “Suffer, it’s good for you. And when he wins, well the fun and investigations really start …”

            You do realize that Democrats are going to dismiss Republican “investigations” as “witch-hunts,” right? The Trumpists will have no moral standing to push back against such accusations.

            “Do not be deceived, God is not mocked; for whatever a man sows, that he will also reap.”

            Galatians 6:7-8

        2. “Several times he said to walk to the capitol, he said he’d be there with them. He had 10 times more violent words than the one time he said “peacefully””

          Even third graders recognize that the word walk is not violent.

      2. So criminals seeking favor from the prosecutor swear Trump made ’em do it! You wanna buy a bridge?

        Cheney wants to talk about witness tampering.

        Forcing a persons, that have pleaded guilty, or been convicted of Jan 6 crimes, to testify before their sentencing hearings, is a lot of witness tampering.

    2. To Baby Trump,
      Mother of the raped 10 yr old girl is saying that the charges of rape against Mr Fuentes are ‘a lie”. The plot thickens.
      Poor people were getting abortions all the time. Just because an abortion was legal does not mean it was paid for. Sanger set up planned parenthood in poor neighborhoods because she felt they were “undesirables” and she was also an outright racist.

      1. The mere fact that she is 10 and pregnant proves rape. Actually, the two acts of intercourse happened when she was just 9, right before she turned 10. A child of that age cannot consent to sex with anyone, especially an adult man. Even if two 10 year olds engage in sex, it’s still rape–each is raping the other. Doesn’t make sense knowing how kids are vulnerable and curious and probably don’t really understand the full implications of their conduct, but that’s how the law reads. I am aware of cases in which overzealous prosecutors want to require both underage parties to register as sex offenders. That’s just stupid. No need to stigmatize people who aren’t a threat to others.

  12. “ There is no need to raise unfounded fears over issues like interstate travel or contraceptives.”

    Turley is either comically naive or just plain stupid. There have been countless legislative proposals for restricting travel to other states for an abortion. Even giving state residents the power to sue doctors in other states or individuals for violating another state’s abortion ban.

    Republican religious zealots have already said that 10 year old should have been forced to carry the pregnancy to term. In Indiana their AG is already promising to investigate the doctor who legally performed the abortion of the 10yr old. The AG claimed the doctor had a history of not reporting without any evidence. Clearly the AG wanted do prosecute the doctor to score political points despite the fact that everything was done legally and according to all laws in Indiana.

    Turley has already been lying about the Ohio law claiming the 10 year old could have had the procedure in Ohio. Every lawyer including those who know the law knew that was not true.

    Turley’s credibility is gone. It’s sadly a consequence of prostituting himself to Fox News for his “expertise” as a constitutional scholar. What a shame.

      1. Nope. Turley has been roundly criticized by lawyers and legal experts for being N idiot and naive. Some have gone as far as calling him a moron. They weren’t wrong.

        Turley never did a legal analysis of the Ohio law he wrongly claims had an exception for rape. Because he would quickly discover that there is no exception.

        1. And still Tutley turned out rigt way more times.
          Yet, you stiil value the words of the ‘other’ lawyers.
          Go figure, I thought when hitting your head to a rock you would not do it twice again?
          But then again: some people are mentally insane..

      2. “He’s neither. Jury still out on you.”

        Hmmm, svelaz’ rants read like a guilty plea to me

    1. This is by no means an attack on your right to label Turley as having lost credibility for prostituting himself to a news outlet, however Barack Hussein Obama was marketed to voters in 2007-2008 as a constitutional scholar and let’s just say that the jury is still out on that claim.

    2. “Turley is either comically naive or just plain stupid. “

      The stupid one is calling another stupid when he himself is unable to define a consistent opinion on any subject.

  13. “The time is now for citizens to vote on the issue of abortion and any limitations placed on that state-based right.”

    So any action or right *not* listed in the Constitution can be usurped by a state government?! That is not the principle of a constitutionally limited Republic. That is localized majority rule — i.e., gang warfare.

    There is no such thing as a “state-based right.” Governments do not have rights. Individuals do. Governments have police powers, authorized (or not) by the Constitution.

    1. Sam:
      “So any action or right *not* listed in the Constitution can be usurped by a state government?! That is not the principle of a constitutionally limited Republic. That is localized majority rule — i.e., gang warfare.”
      ***************************
      Or as we the sane folks call it, deomocracy. The elected state government is the people there, Sam. Kinda basic civics.

      1. “Or as we the sane folks call it, deomocracy. The elected state government is the people there . . .”

        With the religious Right as the Voice of the People — voting on who to cook and eat. If that’s “sane,” I prefer insanity.

      2. mespo, the elected state government is NOT the people, as should be absolutely clear from the 10th Amendment:
        The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

        Sam, don’t confuse state legislatures with majority rule. Given efforts to make it harder for people to vote and gerrymandering, state legislatures often do not represent the views of the majority of citizens. That’s why you end up with extreme anti-abortion legislation in states where a majority of voters prefer less extreme laws.

        1. Illegal ballot stuffing doesn’t represent the people. It represents Democrat lawlessness. Here is another tidbit for you to bite on.

          2. A Foreign Intrusion. Federal authorities have confirmed that two Iranian nationals successfully hacked into a state computer election system, stole 100,000 voter registrations and used the data to carry out a cyber-intimidation campaign that targeted GOP members of Congress, Trump campaign officials and Democratic voters in the November 2020 election in one of the largest foreign intrusions in U.S. election history. The defendants “were part of a coordinated conspiracy in which Iranian hackers sought to undermine faith and confidence in the U.S. presidential election,” U.S. Attorney Damian Williams declared in an indictment.

          https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/elections/bombshells-belie-big-lie-21-confirmed-illegalities-irregularities-2020?utm_source=daily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter#article

      1. “I suggest you reread the 10th Amendment.”

        I suggest you understand the nature and function of “rights” — and the function of the Constitution with respect to private versus government action.

    1. Is one more of a traitor for pointing out the Constitution’s flaws or for refusing to recognize them? Let’s pick misogyny, is there any doubt the Constitution was intentionally unfair to women? Seems like SCOTUS recently found support in the Constitution allowing states to control women’s bodies? That sounds misogynistic to me. Of course, if enough men say, “no, it isn’t,” that will mean it isn’t true.

      1. Let’s pick misogyny, is there any doubt the Constitution Biden Family was intentionally unfair to women?

        FTFY

        Have you been unfair to women? your adult children? your family? your sphere of influence?

        A wise man would reflect on the following timeless prayer and a fool would not. Which are you?

        Peace Prayer of Saint Francis

        Lord, make me an instrument of your peace:
        where there is hatred, let me sow love;
        where there is injury, pardon;
        where there is doubt, faith;
        where there is despair, hope;
        where there is darkness, light;
        where there is sadness, joy.

        O divine Master, grant that I may not so much seek
        to be consoled as to console,
        to be understood as to understand,
        to be loved as to love.
        For it is in giving that we receive,
        it is in pardoning that we are pardoned,
        and it is in dying that we are born to eternal life.
        Amen.

      2. “Is one more of a traitor for pointing out the Constitution’s flaws or for refusing to recognize them? Let’s pick misogyny, is there any doubt the Constitution was intentionally unfair to women?”
        ************************
        No, one’s a traitor, in the colloquial sense, for hating the foundational organizing document of the country. They aren’t merely “pointing out flaws.” They’re hating on the whole thing. That makes the Dims the functional equivalent to Hirohito, the Kaiser and that guy with the funny looking mustache. We in the law, those in the military, those in public service and the police all swear an oath to preserve, protect and defend the constitution – not just the parts we like. The Dims have made themselves the enemy here.

        1. I can’t speak for all in any group, but I personally appreciate much of the constitution, though I recognize the intent of several parts of it and will continue to critique it. I don’t know of anyone who hates “the whole thing.”
          Those in the law, military, and policemen do swear to uphold the constitution which doesn’t mean they don’t constantly violate it. Isn’t that the exact target audience (minus lawyers) for the Oath Keepers who regularly violate the constitution?

  14. Turley somehow hasn’t noticed that some Republicans are working to draft legislation that would block interstate travel for abortion and target anyone “aiding and abetting” Saying there are no bans while ignoring what’s coming down the pipeline is totally disingenuous. There was an attempt in Congress to preemptively block any such bans but Sen Lankford (R-OK) blocked it.

    https://patrioticalert.com/breaking-news/republican-states-look-to-ban-interstate-travel-for-abortion/

    There is nothing to keep Republicans passing such laws which will take years to get to the Supreme Court. Despite their claims of what they might do, they have no credibility as most of those who struck down Roe said it was “settled law.”

    https://patrioticalert.com/breaking-news/republican-states-look-to-ban-interstate-travel-for-abortion/

      1. And during the years inbetween passing and SCOTUS review, women are SOL. This is how the voter suppression laws work as well, Pass a law, restrict voters for years, and maybe have the law rejected so they can go back and pass another law.

        1. “And during the years inbetween passing and SCOTUS review, women are SOL. This is how the voter suppression laws work as well, Pass a law, restrict voters for years, and maybe have the law rejected so they can go back and pass another law.”
          ************************
          No, they can vote with their feet or merely follow the law. Or godforbid, keep their legs together! Of course, Cali or New York will accomodate them. And it has the grace of an an added benefit of relieving Red States of one more whiny liberal.

          1. Cali and New York can’t accomodate them if Republicans ban interstate travel. Some of those women did their best to keep their legs together but some states don’t want any exceptions for rape or incest. Many of the women are married, do you really want them to keep their legs together?

            1. enigmainblackcom –Are you being naive or just plain stupid? No one is going to “ban interstate travel.” If the only way you can get people to read your idiotic comments is to lie, save it — we get enough of that from the MSM.

              1. “enigmainblackcom –Are you being naive or just plain stupid? No one is going to “ban interstate travel.”
                ***************************
                We all know that. enimga is just trying to have something to say. He thinks good people think like the Dims. Let him rant.

            2. Enigma, you are going about this all wrong. The Supreme Court didn’t deny women the ability to have an abortion.

        2. It is likely in one night in one state there was more illegal ballot harvesting then the sum-total of voter suppression over the entire election.

    1. “Republicans are working to draft legislation that would block interstate travel for abortion . . .”

      And up next: “Fugitive Abortion” laws. If a state owns a woman’s body, it owns that body lock, stock, and barrel.

    2. “Turley somehow hasn’t noticed that some Republicans are working to draft legislation that would block interstate travel for abortion and target anyone “aiding and abetting””

      Enigma, many others on the right will oppose that for Constitutional reasons. That non-problem provides you the ability to talk some more without advancing the discussion.

  15. Professor Turley, none of the fears raised with regard to the impact of the overturning of Roe are unfounded! Women will die. Isn’t that enough for you. Women and girls will be denied treatment for diseases, illness and injuries because they are seen as possible abortive treatments. Right wingers and theocrats like to down play the sweep of the decision but in private they rejoice at its reach. Traveling to another state is not an option for many women and traveling to another state when a women is in medical danger may not be an option and add to that that some states will allow law suits or prosecution when a women returns makes travel a hollow option.

    Medical journals in the UK are discussing the very real danger that patients suffering from immune related conditions will not be able to access certain medications because they are considered possibly abortion related. This concern is not just a fear it is already happening. I realize that for many in the theocracy crowd women have never been viewed as worthy of respect, dignity, protection or even the vote but I would have hope that you would different. Clearly I was wrong.

      1. Be careful Mark, Justice Holmes appears emotionally fragile. Who know what he will do if you state the truth.

  16. “What is striking, however, is how the president and other Democratic politicians and pundits have attacked the decision for positions that it expressly rejected or clearly did not support. Indeed, parts of the president’s abortion response plan are based on nonexistent threats to rights not imperiled by the decision.”
    ****************************
    To finish the thought I might add: “Which, in conjunction with their other false statements about issues they disagree with, would lead any sane person to conclude that the President and an overwhelming number of Democratic politicians are consummate liars and unworthy of holding public office in the greatest country in the world.”

    1. “the President and an overwhelming number of Democratic politicians are consummate liars and unworthy of holding public office in the greatest country in the world.”

      Mespo says with a tongue in his cheek knowing full well that for every lie Biden has told, Trump told 10x.

      1. Stop drinking or smoking whatever you are, for it has caused giant holes in your brain.

  17. I think relying on the Constitution to outlaw state laws burdening the right to travel for an abortion is uncertain and unwise. Federal legislation preempting state laws that have this effect would be a more complete source of protection. I would hope that at least 10 Republican Senators could agree to a narrow bill that did just this.

Leave a Reply