Idaho is about to become the first state to restrict interstate travel for abortion

[Skill and Chance]

Once again, red avatars mischaracterize to score cheap points.  Transporting a minor across state boundaries for the purpose of receiving medical treatment w/o parental consent should be illegal.  Who disagrees? 

It's not always cut and dry because the parents could be refusing treatment to cover up child abuse, and in an emergency situation they could rightly lose custody of the child if they refuse treatment. 

That having been said, seeking an out-of-state abortion for a minor would more likely be an effort to cover up child abuse, as we saw with the tragic OH->IN case last year.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Once again, red avatars mischaracterize to score cheap points.  Transporting a minor across state boundaries for the purpose of receiving medical treatment w/o parental consent should be illegal.  Who disagrees? 

In some circumstances I would disagree, such as an abortion, chemotherapy, surgery to remove a foreign object, etc etc.

Yes but it’s not the same thing as the video you guys are claiming has come true .

[Pres Mike]

This isn't enforceable. That said, I wonder if it'll turn into a modern day witch trial. Petty women falesy accusing women they don't like of having abortions out of state

[Badger]

Once again, red avatars mischaracterize to score cheap points.  Transporting a minor across state boundaries for the purpose of receiving medical treatment w/o parental consent should be illegal.  Who disagrees? 

In some circumstances I would disagree, such as an abortion, chemotherapy, surgery to remove a foreign object, etc etc.

Yes but it’s not the same thing as the video you guys are claiming has come true .

Beep boop doubles down on his cluelessness, a day that ends in y

[Person Man]

Once again, red avatars mischaracterize to score cheap points.  Transporting a minor across state boundaries for the purpose of receiving medical treatment w/o parental consent should be illegal.  Who disagrees?  

It's not always cut and dry because the parents could be refusing treatment to cover up child abuse, and in an emergency situation they could rightly lose custody of the child if they refuse treatment.  

That having been said, seeking an out-of-state abortion for a minor would more likely be an effort to cover up child abuse, as we saw with the tragic OH->IN case last year.

Depends on the reason, I guess. And determining the reason can be messy and time consuming and is just unacceptable for people to risk destruction by the hands of the taxpayer because of that.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

All the folks defending this with "OMG just think of the childrenminors" are leaving out the chilling and likely intended impact on all medicated abortions. From the OP's article (emphasis mine):

The legislation would create a whole new crime — dubbed “abortion trafficking” — which is defined in the bill as an “adult who, with the intent to conceal an abortion from the parents or guardian of a pregnant, unemancipated minor, either procures an abortion … or obtains an abortion-inducing drug” for the minor.

Convince me ID MAGATs won't try to use this to target all access to RU-486.

[Del Tachi]

Once again, red avatars mischaracterize to score cheap points.  Transporting a minor across state boundaries for the purpose of receiving medical treatment w/o parental consent should be illegal.  Who disagrees? 

It's not always cut and dry because the parents could be refusing treatment to cover up child abuse, and in an emergency situation they could rightly lose custody of the child if they refuse treatment. 

That having been said, seeking an out-of-state abortion for a minor would more likely be an effort to cover up child abuse, as we saw with the tragic OH->IN case last year.

This is not a very convincing concern.  An adult could just as easily be transporting a minor out-of-state for an abortion in an attempt to cover up abuse. 

[Del Tachi]

This isn't enforceable. That said, I wonder if it'll turn into a modern day witch trial. Petty women falesy accusing women they don't like of having abortions out of state

The crime isn't having an abortion out-of-state.  The crime is transporting a minor child across state lines without the consent of her parents in order to have an abortion.  Big difference. 

[Del Tachi]

Once again, red avatars mischaracterize to score cheap points.  Transporting a minor across state boundaries for the purpose of receiving medical treatment w/o parental consent should be illegal.  Who disagrees? 

I definitely disagree. I don't want Christian Scientists or new-age hippie weirdos preventing their kids from receiving crucial medial treatment, and the people who assist those kids anyway are heroes.

Parents should not be able to withhold medically necessary treatment from their children, but that is not the same as empowering random adults to decide what care is in a child's best interest.  Judicial bypass is the appropriate channel for minors seeking abortions without their parents' consent. 

[OSR stands with Israel]

Once again, red avatars mischaracterize to score cheap points.  Transporting a minor across state boundaries for the purpose of receiving medical treatment w/o parental consent should be illegal.  Who disagrees? 

In some circumstances I would disagree, such as an abortion, chemotherapy, surgery to remove a foreign object, etc etc.

Yes but it’s not the same thing as the video you guys are claiming has come true .

Beep boop doubles down on his cluelessness, a day that ends in y

Hmmm I wonder why you go after me so much even though my views are probably shared by the vast majority of blue avatars/atlas conservatives.

Is it cause you can’t stand the fact that a minority is a Republican/Conservative as you think you are entitled to our votes . It does seem like a pattern as the posters you seem to go after the most on here are Fhtagn , Deadprez and I and the one thing in common we all have is the fact that we are minorities.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Once again, red avatars mischaracterize to score cheap points.  Transporting a minor across state boundaries for the purpose of receiving medical treatment w/o parental consent should be illegal.  Who disagrees? 

In some circumstances I would disagree, such as an abortion, chemotherapy, surgery to remove a foreign object, etc etc.

Yes but it’s not the same thing as the video you guys are claiming has come true .

Beep boop doubles down on his cluelessness, a day that ends in y

You continually saying "beep boop" doesn't make something true.

Maybe you wouldn't care if someone took your child across state lines without your knowledge to avoid state laws, but some parents might, and it is not at all the same as the scenario being suggested in that  advertisement.

[I’m not Stu]

Kavanaugh and Roberts are likely to strike down an interstate travel ban.

[7,052,770]

It would be one thing if it were a traffic ticket-style offense, a small fine and that's it. But taking a friend or a sibling to a doctor visit should never result in years of jail time when the minor procedure performed in that visit is legal in that jurisdiction.

[Pres Mike]

This isn't enforceable. That said, I wonder if it'll turn into a modern day witch trial. Petty women falesy accusing women they don't like of having abortions out of state

The crime isn't having an abortion out-of-state.  The crime is transporting a minor child across state lines without the consent of her parents in order to have an abortion.  Big difference. 

That is actually a really resonable law

[Ferguson97]

https://twitter.com/AlannaVagianos/status/1643770222476767234

Bill signed, goes into effect 30 days from today

[Kahane's Grave Is A Gender-Neutral Bathroom]

Once again, red avatars mischaracterize to score cheap points.  Transporting a minor across state boundaries for the purpose of receiving medical treatment w/o parental consent should be illegal.  Who disagrees? 

Me. Any expenses incurred by said person should also be covered by the state.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

Once again, red avatars mischaracterize to score cheap points.  Transporting a minor across state boundaries for the purpose of receiving medical treatment w/o parental consent should be illegal.  Who disagrees? 

Seventeen states do. And the "across state lines" part is largely a stalking horse.

https://www.krem.com/article/news/local/idaho/idaho-abortion-trafficking-bill-signed-into-law/293-7f9737b4-e106-46ae-9d74-729ee7241a35

HB 242 also makes it illegal for someone to obtain abortion pills for a minor without parental consent; it also prohibits “recruiting, harboring, or transporting the pregnant minor" without parental permission. If someone is convicted of "abortion trafficking," they face two to five years in prison, according to the bill text. The bill also allows prosecutors to bring forth charges within four years after the action. No other state has enacted this type of legislation, and would make Idaho the most restricted state for any abortion access.

If local prosecutors refuse to try a case like this due to lack of evidence or any other reason, there are provisions within the bill to allow Idaho Attorney General Raúl Labrador to prosecute instead.

In his legal analysis of the bill, Labrador told the lawmaker that Idaho's criminal statute on abortion includes providing abortion pills and that law prohibits a medical provider from even referring a patient to travel across state lines to get an abortion or prescribing abortion medication for the pregnant person to pick up elsewhere.

The actual purpose of the bill is to have a chilling effect on all access to reproductive health care and control for women in Idaho.

[Person Man]

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna78225

It looks like Oregon and Washington are responding in kind by refusing to work with Idaho authorities.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Once again, red avatars mischaracterize to score cheap points.  Transporting a minor across state boundaries for the purpose of receiving medical treatment w/o parental consent should be illegal.  Who disagrees? 

In some circumstances I would disagree, such as an abortion, chemotherapy, surgery to remove a foreign object, etc etc.

Yes but it’s not the same thing as the video you guys are claiming has come true .

Allowing people to transport minors across state lines for medical treatment their parents know nothing of and/or do not approve of is a frontal assault on the institution of the family. 

I can see parents being forced, against their will, to consent to (and even pay for) needed medical treatment for a child that they are withholding for stupid reasons.  An abortion is not one of those. 

[DaleCooper]

The real argument conservatives are making here is that adolescent minors are the property of their parents. The fact that parents can force their children to give birth is arguably more disturbing than a regular abortion travel ban would be.

[GoTfan]

Once again, red avatars mischaracterize to score cheap points.  Transporting a minor across state boundaries for the purpose of receiving medical treatment w/o parental consent should be illegal.  Who disagrees? 

In some circumstances I would disagree, such as an abortion, chemotherapy, surgery to remove a foreign object, etc etc.

Yes but it’s not the same thing as the video you guys are claiming has come true .

Allowing people to transport minors across state lines for medical treatment their parents know nothing of and/or do not approve of is a frontal assault on the institution of the family. 

I can see parents being forced, against their will, to consent to (and even pay for) needed medical treatment for a child that they are withholding for stupid reasons.  An abortion is not one of those. 

You are literally advocating for a woman's freedom of movement to be suspended because she might want to get an abortion.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Once again, red avatars mischaracterize to score cheap points.  Transporting a minor across state boundaries for the purpose of receiving medical treatment w/o parental consent should be illegal.  Who disagrees? 

In some circumstances I would disagree, such as an abortion, chemotherapy, surgery to remove a foreign object, etc etc.

Yes but it’s not the same thing as the video you guys are claiming has come true .

Allowing people to transport minors across state lines for medical treatment their parents know nothing of and/or do not approve of is a frontal assault on the institution of the family. 

I can see parents being forced, against their will, to consent to (and even pay for) needed medical treatment for a child that they are withholding for stupid reasons.  An abortion is not one of those. 

The "freedom for any one individual to do whatever they want" crusade continues, despite societal decay it has left in its wake.

In practice, individuals generally realize less freedom, not more, when institutions that organize them and enable their ability to push their pursuits and furnish their needs, decay.

[Skill and Chance]

Once again, red avatars mischaracterize to score cheap points.  Transporting a minor across state boundaries for the purpose of receiving medical treatment w/o parental consent should be illegal.  Who disagrees? 

In some circumstances I would disagree, such as an abortion, chemotherapy, surgery to remove a foreign object, etc etc.

Yes but it’s not the same thing as the video you guys are claiming has come true .

Allowing people to transport minors across state lines for medical treatment their parents know nothing of and/or do not approve of is a frontal assault on the institution of the family. 

I can see parents being forced, against their will, to consent to (and even pay for) needed medical treatment for a child that they are withholding for stupid reasons.  An abortion is not one of those. 

The "freedom for any one individual to do whatever they want" crusade continues, despite societal decay it has left in its wake.

In practice, individuals generally realize less freedom, not more, when institutions that organize them and enable their ability to push their pursuits and furnish their needs, decay.

Agreed.  Also, it's not like it's only going to be devout Christian homeschool parents who would have a problem with their child secretly being in a different state.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Once again, red avatars mischaracterize to score cheap points.  Transporting a minor across state boundaries for the purpose of receiving medical treatment w/o parental consent should be illegal.  Who disagrees? 

In some circumstances I would disagree, such as an abortion, chemotherapy, surgery to remove a foreign object, etc etc.

Yes but it’s not the same thing as the video you guys are claiming has come true .

Allowing people to transport minors across state lines for medical treatment their parents know nothing of and/or do not approve of is a frontal assault on the institution of the family. 

I can see parents being forced, against their will, to consent to (and even pay for) needed medical treatment for a child that they are withholding for stupid reasons.  An abortion is not one of those. 

You are literally advocating for a woman's freedom of movement to be suspended because she might want to get an abortion.

My grandchild who was aborted would be 20 now.  If that grandchild were now an alive adult, he/she could have weighed in on that.

I'm advocating for the lives of unborn children who are at a stage of human life you and I were once at.  Innocent children whose blood is innocent blood.

[MarkD]

The Supreme Court is going to uphold this. Same five justices too.

Kavanaugh explicitly called this unconstitutional in his Dobbs concurrence, so if they do that would be an all-time flip-flop.

Conservatives are no stranger to hypocrisy.

Neither are liberals.

Example #1: Justice William O. Douglas was the most liberal Justice of all time. He wrote the Court's opinion in the case of Olsen v. Nebraska (1941), in which he said the Court would no longer infer unenumerated, libertarian ideas from the Fourteenth Amendment. But if you compare what he said and did some 24 years later in Griswold v. Connecticut (1965), you'll see blatant hypocrisy. Prof. David P. Currie (of Univ. of Chicago Law School) said Douglas's Griswold opinion is "one of the most hypocritical opinions in the history of the [Supreme] Court." ("The Constitution in the Supreme Court; The Second Century, 1888-1986," page 455.)

Example #2: I worked for TWA for over twelve years, starting in 1989 until the company declared bankruptcy in 2001. As of 1990, I transferred to the Rate Department, calculating the price of complicated passenger tickets. One of the first desks I sat at in that department was right next to a liberal Democrat by the name of Liz. One day, I mentioned to her I was a Republican (which I was until 2002); she then said that the Republicans are a party of greed. She said that was all the Republicans stand for: GREED. But a week or two later, Liz said, "I want to marry a rich man." "So, you want to marry a Republican?" I asked. "I don't care what his politics are, as long as he's rich."