On 5/23/2024 8:48 AM, Lee wrote:
> NoBody wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 22 May 2024 14:48:05 +0000, "Lee" <cleetis@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> NoBody wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 21 May 2024 14:55:29 +0000, "Lee" <cleetis@gmail.com>
>> wrote: >>
>>>>> NoBody wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, 20 May 2024 17:35:56 +0000, "Lee" <cleetis@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote: >>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Red state abortion bans headed
>>>>>>> for clash with blue state shield
>>>>>>> laws
>>>>>>> 05/20/24
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> More than a dozen states have
>>>>>>> laws shielding medical providers
>>>>>>> and others from out-of-state
>>>>>>> investigations and prosecutions
>>>>>>> regarding abortions and gender
>>>>>>> affirming care. But six states —
>>>>>>> Colorado, Massachusetts, New
>>>>>>> York, California, Vermont and
>>>>>>> Washington — have gone even
>>>>>>> further.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Those shield laws offer
>>>>>>> protection for doctors, nurses
>>>>>>> and other practitioners who
>>>>>>> prescribe and send abortion
>>>>>>> pills to people living in
>>>>>>> states that ban or severely
>>>>>>> restrict abortion.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Abortion opponents see them as
>>>>>>> blatant infringement on states’
>>>>>>> rights
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Which it is. The named states are meddling in matters that
>> don't >> >> affect them. This is typical liberalism trying to control
>>>> everything. >>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Meddling, like Arkansas prosecuting
>>>>> someone in Colorado for getting an
>>>>> abortion in Colorado? That sort of
>>>>> "liberalism"?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Citation required. Bet you're going to reference a Arkansas
>> citizen >> who skirted the law by going to another state.
>>>
>>>
>>> Show us the authority of states to
>>> prohibit law abiding residents from
>>> traveling to other states.
>>>
>>
>> You forgot "to commit a crime".
>
>
> Getting an abortion in Colorado
> is not a crime.
>
>
>
>> The courts will tell us if the law is
>> Constitutional.
>
>
> What the Constituion says:
>
> In all criminal prosecutions,
> the accused shall enjoy the
> right to a speedy and public
> trial, by an impartial jury
> ----> of the State and district
> wherein the crime shall have
> been committed <-----
>
> Sixth Amendment, US Constitution

That originally applied only to the federal government. In Gideon v. Wainwright,
the Supreme Court incorporated the part of the sixth amendment regarding right
to counsel into the 14th amendment and thus making it binding on the states, but
it is not clear if they also incorporated the section about trial venue.

Note, however, that a prosecution under a state law making it a crime to travel
out of state to commit what would be a *separate* crime in the red shithole
state enacting such a travel ban would not violate the sixth amendment. Suppose
a pregnant woman, Becky Easyscore, boards a plane in Little Rock to fly to
Denver to obtain an abortion. The violation of shithole Arkansas's law against
traveling out of state to obtain an abortion would occur in Little Rock, and the
state could prosecute Ms. Easyscore in Little Rock, thus complying with the
sixth amendment regarding trial venue.

This whole thing is going to blow away like powdered dogshit in a strong breeze.
The enforcement of the law would entail an utterly intolerable state intrusion
into women's private lives, not to mention their thinking. How would the state
even know that Ms. Easyscore was pregnant, unless it had unconstitutionally
demanded patient records from doctors. Nope — this red state shithole law, if
enacted, will be struck down.