Lubbock County, Texas, joins a group of other rural Texas counties that have voted to ban women from using their roads to seek abortions.
This comes after six cities and counties in Texas have passed abortion-related bans, out of nine that have considered them. However, this ordinance makes Lubbock the biggest jurisdiction yet to pass restrictions on abortion-related transportation.
During Monday’s meeting, the Lubbock County Commissioners Court passed an ordinance banning abortion, abortion-inducing drugs and travel for abortion in the unincorporated areas of Lubbock County, declaring Lubbock County a “Sanctuary County for the Unborn.”
The ordinance is part of a continued strategy by conservative activists to further restrict abortion since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade as the ordinances are meant to bolster Texas’ existing abortion ban, which allows private citizens to sue anyone who provides or “aids or abets” an abortion after six weeks of pregnancy.
The ordinance, which was introduced to the court last Wednesday, was passed by a vote of 3-0 with commissioners Terence Kovar, Jason Corley and Jordan Rackler, all Republicans, voting to pass the legislation while County Judge Curtis Parrish, Republican, and Commissioner Gilbert Flores, Democrat, abstained from the vote.
This is incredibly fucked up. Handmaid’s tale was a documentary.
Get ready for highway checkpoints for pregnant women, coming to a red state near you.
“I noticed your had a license plate light out, Ma’am. Please get out of the car and pee on this test strip.”
Complete with fences, barbed wire and “papers, please”
Atwood specifically called it speculative fiction, because everything written in there had happened already in some other form.
Removed by mod
Good thing we’re only talking about zygotes and embryos then huh?
Bro didn’t you see their username? They provide guru level insights. Probably a mod in Tate’s telegram channel that was about exploiting women
Same thing
Abortion is a sacrament
Everything else aside, that’s about as clear a violation of the Commerce Clause as you can get.
The inability of states to regulate interstate commerce was settled by the courts in 1824.
The same laws that allows firearms to be shipped through states where they’re illegal protects abortion-seekers on Texas roads
was settled by the courts in 1824.
Nothing is “settled” with the current Supreme Court.
Commerce Clause is about as settled as it can get, though. Especially with a Court so enamoured with Founders Intent. Gibbons v Ogden is probably only behind Marbury v Madison in sacred status to this Court.
It’s cute that you still have faith in conservatives doing anything consistently
Overturning Gibbons would do more harm to the conservative cause than good.
The entire West Coast is liberal-controlled states. They could legally tax or simply cut off any goods or services bound for conservative states originating from or passing through their states.
All to defend a law that’s essentially unenforceable from a practical standpoint.
Again, you’re assuming conservatives have any sort of consistency or logic. They’ll just make up some BS that keeps things moving the way they want.
Even they have limits they won’t pass because it would blow everything up.
I remember when I was this naive
“Sorry, but after the gutting of Roe, stare decisis only applies to things conservatives and/or billionaire overlords approve of” – SCOTUS
Conservatives and billionaires absolutely approve of the Commerce Clause.
Overturning Gibbons would allow California to tax all internet traffic coming through LA from the rest of the world, or allow liberal states to seize high-capacity magazines being shipped across state lines.
Imagine Facebook having to pay import/export taxes every time someone accessed their account.
It would be the most impactful SCOTUS decision of all time, and would be absolutely ruinous to the business interests of the wealthy.
SCOTUS allowed the abortion bounty law SB8 to stand before Roe was overturned. It was clearly unconstitutional. So, they’re just expanding on it to the next logical steps.
Something something it’s not commerce because reasons.
Nevermind that the Commerce Clause has been cited to give the federal government authority to prohibit activities that are neither commerce nor inter-state, such as growing cannabis for personal use on your own property.
Schroedinger’s commerce. It’s commerce only when it’s convenient for prohibitionists.
The federal government doesn’t outlaw abortion, so they can’t use the Commerce Clause to enforce abortion restrictions enacted by the states.
However, the issues you cite with them being bullies with the commerce clause are centered on authority granted through Gibbons.
Gibbons was specifically about states trying to enforce laws (specifically state-granted steamboat monopolies) within their borders that had a direct impact on commerce within another state. The Supreme Court declared that a violation of the commerce clause because only the Federal Government can regulate interstate commerce.
Texas passing laws prohibiting travel to another state to seek abortions (which are federally legal) could only be allowed by SCOTUS by overturning Gibbons, which would be absolutely devastating.
That would be by far the most-impactful reversal in the Court’s history, and it can’t be overstated how much of a grenade it would be. Everybody would lose, and the GOP’s owners more than anyone else.
If SCOTUS were insistent (and consistent) that only the federal government had the power to regulate interstate commerce, yet this Texas jurisdiction is trying to do just that, wouldn’t that logically be in violation of the Commerce Clause and SCOTUS would have to strike down?
I was arguing that SCOTUS isn’t consistent on this, but pretend they were.
They’d have trouble ignoring this one. This is isn’t tangentially related to interstate commerce.
The law is explicitly about preventing people from passing through a territory to engage in legal commerce in another state. Violation of the Commerce Clause isn’t a byproduct of the law - it’s the sole intent.
IANAL: how exactly is this going to get overturned? The courts have already gotten rid of offender observer standing so the only way would be if this is actually enforced at which point the Supreme Court could simply allow the appeals court ruling stand.
Why does Texas hate freedom so much?
Texans are some of the most delusional people on the planet.
For some reason, even the democrats there think it’s better than states like Florida. It isn’t.
The only state that is objectively worse than Texas is Louisiana, and that’s saying something.
You clearly don’t know what you’re talking about since you skipped Mississippi, land of waffle House and sadness.
Nah. I skipped Mississippi on purpose. Cheap housing, decent geography, and that’s about it.
More than Texas can say, though.
Hmmm
It’s bad when Oklahoma has advantages over texas.
Yep. It’s that bad.
Mississippi is also a strong contender
At least Mississippi doesn’t pretend to be god’s gift to humanity and the greatest nation to ever exist. Texas is high as shit on the smell of its own farts.
That is a fair point.
I agree, but I’d rather live in Mississippi than Texas.
At least they have cheap housing.
Texas has some pretty cheap housing. A friend just bought a 3000 sqft single outside of Austin for ~300k.
I bought a 2000 sqft single detached in my city for $1.2mil so… Texas definitely wins on that front. But then you have to live in Texas =/.
That’s not cheap at all compared to Mississippi, lol.
Doesn’t really seem like it? A quick lookup of single detached prices in and around Jackson seems to suggest that the prices range from 600-700k with some outliers breaking $1mil+.
Are you talking about the middle of butt fuck nowhere, because then you’re comparing apples to oranges. Middle of nowhere Texas is also dirt cheap but I specified Austin.
Housing is way cheaper in rural Mississippi than rural Texas.
You may be able to find similarly priced houses in Texas, but they will often be dilapidated compared to what you’ll find in Mississippi.
You seem like the kind of person who thinks life outside of major cities doesn’t matter, so I don’t expect you to care about the price of homes outside of major cities.
Their property taxes also suck more than people know but there’s no denying California real estate prices suck.
Idk, Florida is prettttty bad
For real, at least everything in FL is cheap af.
Not anymore. Rent has almost doubled where I’m at and South Florida seems to be worse
Not the housing.
Idk, Florida is prettttty bad
Not nearly as bad as Texas. They have nice beaches, and decent cities.
Shame about the whole swamp and going into the water thing, but it’s still a pretty nice place to be. And of course their politics suck, mostly driven by old people, rich people, and idiots who succumb to them at their own expense.
Doesn’t this run afoul of the commerce clause?
A random ass County can’t ban travel on any roads or highway for any reason, right? That’s strictly the job of congress.
Also I’d like to add:
How about this worthless board look into why there is so much crime in the county before Talibaning travel for women?
Board: “that’s almost where we want things, let’s see if we can pump up those chances”
My first thought as well. There is NO way this doesn’t get struck down in a court case. If you can’t even ban guns on streets near schools (US v. Lopez) then you definitely can’t ban a person from driving on a road to get to a medical procedure in a different state.
Have you seen the other decisions made by SCOTUS?
They don’t give a shit about consistency or law or precedent. They are politicians put there to deliver specific outcomes.
They do care about precedent, usually too much in my opinion. There have been many cases in the last few years brought to SCOTUS seeking the overturning of the doctrine of Qualified Immunity, but SCOTUS has in all cases either not taken them up or not ruled on that issue. They basically keep saying, “we’ve already ruled on this, we won’t touch it unless Congress changes the law in some way.” Dobbs was like the one issue SCOTUS has actually overturned a previous opinion on in recent years.
It’s not a ban, per se, it “just” opens people up to civil liability. The reason they do it that way is to skirt the Constitution.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Next up they will advise women to carry a note from thier husband or father detailing where they are going so they can avoid suspicion. The cops will pull them over and ask for thier papers.
Dude shut up! They do not need new ideas!!!
Gilead has entered the chat
Removed by mod
Honestly, yes. The nominal reason we give states federal money for highways that there’s a benefit to other states from one state having highways passing through it. If you’re not going to non-selectively give use of your highways, you’re not universally benefiting your neighboring states, so you shouldn’t get the money.
Now, the actual reason we take tax money from people in one state, give it to the federal government, just to have the it dish the money back out to the states is so the federal government gets a bunch of leverage over the states. It’s not actually efficient to collect a bunch of money, which costs money, and then give most of it back, which also costs money. It’s about control.
“Texas wants to imprison women.” FTFY
Texas hates women ftfy
Need more slaves for the private prison industry.
This won’t be directly enforced. It will be used to add more punishment to those caught trying to get an abortion.
Not just those getting an abortion, but anyone helping them. It’s designed to isolate pregnant women so that they have no one to turn to if they need help.
Very true
How the fuck do you even enforce this?
The ordinance is enforceable through the private enforcement mechanism which has proven its success in both the Lubbock City Ordinance and the Texas Heartbeat Act. This is how the ordinance is enforced,
So: snitching.
And they’re damn slick about it, too. They start by asking a woman who they think might be pregnant how far along they are, if they have a name picked out, all innocent and normal questions to ask an expecting mother, right? Like, they do it at rest stops and gas stations. And because the woman seeking an abortion isn’t being questioned by someone who outwardly looks like a cop, they let their guard down. So, basically if you’re a pregnant woman in Texas and you are seeking to leave the state for an abortion, trust NOBODY. Keep your guard up, don’t answer any questions, and don’t stop anywhere unless absolutely necessary.
So close… Just don’t answer questions in Texas. Regardless of your gender, natal status, sexual orientation, or religious beliefs, someone is trying to fuck you with something. Even being a cisgender heterosexual white male is not safe if your lacking a confederate flag or maga hat.
In all seriousness, the only correct response to someone in Texas randomly asking a woman questions about a pregnancy is very appalled and indignant “No I’m not doing insert activity here. I’m not pregnant. Are you calling me fat?”
Like I said, they’re slick about it. They hit ya with that folksy charm and try to get you gabbin about your business so they can later call someone and say “This person ain’t like us! Let’s git em!”
Yeah, I wonder how they would react if you responded to the “names” line with “Oh, if it’s a boy we were thinking either Azezal or Baphomet, and for a girl we absolutely have to use Lilith. It is always prudent to have a backup so maybe Lamia? What do you think?”
By stopping all cars with pregnant women and telling them they aren’t allowed to leave the county. I imagine that’s what they might end up doing.
I’d say that’d wind up in front of the Supreme Court really fucking quickly…
Except, I think that’s what they’re counting on…
They’re also counting on people without means not being able to take it to court to begin with. A quick look at a map tells me there’s an airport in Lubbock county, I bet there hasn’t been a law introduced to keep pregnant women off of an airplane…
No, they do it through the same mechanism that made the Texas Heartbeat Bill possible. Private reporting and investigation, AKA snitching. Remember in Texas you can get $10k for reporting a woman seeking an abortion.
Selectively
I’m sorry but this makes Texas less than a third world country. This is just backwards and medieval.
And then they scream “freedom” and wave flags like it means something.
The Party of Small Government, Ladies and Gentlemen. The most grotesque joke since The Aristocrats.
Who was the comedian that said “The party of government so small you can shove it up your vagina” or something to that effect.
This shouldn’t be a problem based on how they think abortions work…the woman didn’t go out FOR an abortion, she was out shopping and decided to get one, like picking up a snack on your way out of the market!
Seriously it’s deranged. If they behaved generally like they care about the ‘children’ and the women, I could accept they’re at least acting in good faith according to their dumbass beliefs, but they don’t seem to care except for outlawing and restricting women’s activities, so it’s clear that those who say the point is just to subjugate women are right.
Texan Taliban impose driving ban
Well, they are ok with Tex-Mex, so Tex-Queida is probably ok. Same with Tex-ria law, obviously.
Texiban?
No, that is what they are trying to do with abortions.
If Lubbock county is a “sanctuary for the unborn” then they’ll be glad to help pregnant women and then adopt any unwanted children, right? Right?
Surely they have a model foster care system!
It’s a sanctuary for the unborn, not the already born. The already born can (and will) get fucked.
People always say this, but it’s not as strong of an argument as they think it is. Religious conservative people, especially Christians, give to charity quite a lot, actually. They just hear that argument and think, “this person doesn’t know what they’re talking about, we obvious do care about the already born, I can comfortably dismiss everything they say now.”
Does that include donating to churches that condone child molestation?
That’s also not the strong argument some people might think it is, in the eyes of these Christians.
Texas is where freedom goes to die
Brain Cheney tells me that we should give them the one freedom they truly want, and un-annex them.
But that, of course, is needlessly cruel and would only punish innocent folks trying to survive in what is already a hellscape.
I’d take refugee status in the US if it meant Texas (and Florida) were annexed out of the US.
Though, that’d suck for any future generations who are born with half a brain.
