In ads, debates and public statements, the opposition campaign and top Republicans have increasingly been referencing “partial-birth abortions” as an imminent threat if voters approve the constitutional amendment on Nov. 7. “Partial-birth abortion” is a non-medical term for a procedure known as dilation and extraction, or D&X, which is already federally prohibited.

“It would allow a partial-birth abortion,” Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine told reporters recently as he explained his opposition to the constitutional amendment, known as Issue 1.

“For many years, in Ohio and in this country, we’ve had a law that said a partial-birth abortion — where the child is partially delivered and then killed and then finally delivered — was illegal in Ohio,” the governor continued. “This constitutional amendment would override that.”

Constitutional scholars say that is not true and that the amendment would not override the existing federal ban if Ohio voters approve it.

“So changing our constitution will not affect in the slightest way the applicability of the federal partial-birth abortion ban,” said Dan Kobil, a law professor at Capital University in Columbus, who supports abortion rights. “It would be a federal crime for a doctor to violate that ban.”

That’s because the supremacy clause of the U.S. Constitution calls for federal laws to trump state laws, said Jonathan Entin, professor emeritus of law at Case Western State University.

  • argo_yamato@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    43
    ·
    1 year ago

    Because republicans only speak in terms that evoke fear from their voters. Doesn’t matter if what they say is actually true or not, they have no moral compass.

      • worldwidewave@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Oh that’s certainly true. Why does the “migrant caravan” arrive every four years, and mysteriously disappear from rage bait news after the election?

        When you can’t win actual arguments, you make up things the other side doesn’t believe in, and then you simply debate your own straw-men. This has been the leading Republican debate strategy for the last decade(s).

    • dhtseany@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      I mean it’s easier to just say “they make shit up scare voters to vote in their favor”

  • Serinus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    This isn’t the first or only completely made up line of attack.

    They’ll also go on about gender surgeries and “protect the children” as though any of that is related.

  • Baron Von J@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    1 year ago

    The ban itself is just another Cruelty Is The Point dog whistle. There are alternative procedures to use in the same situations, such as when they basically dismember the fetus in utero and extract the pieces, but they’re more dangerous to the patient. So the ban doesn’t actually prevent an abortion from taking place, just more likely to have complications.

  • Ejh3k@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Wait. So the Republicans want to bring back a method of federally banned abortion just to ban it again?

    • TheRealKuni@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      If I understand correctly, there is going to be a constitutional amendment in the Ohio election to protect abortion rights (Michigan did the same last year).

      Republicans are lying about the amendment (just like what happened in Michigan) to make it sound worse than it is to fire up their base and to make any idiots sitting on the fence think it’s extreme and evil. They’re hoping to defeat it by lying about it.

  • Rusticus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    1 year ago

    Technically it’s not a federal ban. The Supreme Court decision made it a state decision.