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.
Atwood specifically called it speculative fiction, because everything written in there had happened already in some other form.
How tf would they even enforce this?
“Are you traveling to get an abortion?” “No, I’m going to visit family”
How would they prove otherwise? Is there something I’m missing?
The correct answer is “I don’t want to talk about my day.”
"Go f*ck yourself" is also an acceptable answer.
Good luck and godspeed using that approach with a rural county sheriff's office in Texas. No, they cannot enforce this, and you should probably just politely deflect the question and gtfo
" Am I being detained or am I free to go?" If detained "then you shut the fuck up!"
You're missing the right to privacy in your phone. Make sure you didn't put the clinic into Google maps or make a call to them ahead of time. Governmental AI is on the way and it will be steered by the same people making these rules.
Just keep a strong password on your phone, and disable biometrics if you're travelling for abortion.
They can't compel the password out of you, but they can compel a finger print, or pointing it at your face unlock.
You should look up geofence warrants, that are now very, very common.
They can subpoena google or apple for anyone traveling through their jurisdiction to specific areas.
It basically gives them an excuse to detain any woman they want, which is the purpose.
LEAs have been shown to actively track women who use search engines or messaging services to seek information about abortion services. There's a non-zero chance that women who they suspect, and their friends and family, are tagged in their system when they search the plates of someone passing by.
It's not about lying to cops, particularly if they can already prove you were seeking those services in the first place. At that point they'll arrest you with probable cause.
They already use that kind of system with drug dealers. If they suspect you sell drugs, they will tag your name and plate and find a reason to pull you over if they spot you. Why would they hesitate to track women like that?
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.
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.
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?
Maybe women should just GTFO of Texas. Anything vag related and doctors won't want to do anything incase you're pregnant.
I think getting the fuck out of Texas is exactly what this legislation is attempting to prevent. If they get away with this, I'd doubt they'll stop there, either. Never mind abortion, this will set the precedent that they can legally "prevent" you from using public road infrastructure for any particular purpose they feel like.
It doesn't take a legal expert to see why the line of reasoning they're using to justify this is horseshit, nor to grasp just how dangerous this type of thing is.
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.
Cool... driving whilst pregnant is the latest thing to fear US police over then. Wait until the first pregnant woman is shot as part of a routine traffic stop checking for abortion plans.
I'm sorry but this makes Texas less than a third world country. This is just backwards and medieval.
this is the dumbest antifreedom thing I've seen in months. just how can anyone think this is a good idea.
I bet the cookers who dreamt up this scheme were against covid lockdowns aswell
The Party of Small Government, Ladies and Gentlemen. The most grotesque joke since The Aristocrats.
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.
Or more worryingly, used as an excuse by cops to stop any woman they want whenever they want on suspicion they're trying to get an abortion.
And then they can force women to take pregnancy tests on the spot, which will require stripping for giving urine samples, giving police plausible deniability to rape whoever they want.
Mark my words, it WILL happen.
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.
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?
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.
Conservatives are garbage.
Also Texas: "Why are we having so much trouble recruiting OB-gyns? Why do we have to close so many rural obstetrics departments?"
I didn't think Texans would be so easily convinced to give up their civil liberties, this doesn't sound like the "stand your ground" state. If this isn't reason enough for the people of Texas to make use of the second amendment's right to bare arms, intended exactly for situations like this - for citizens to protect themselves when their government oversteps, I don't know what is.
Conservatives know that the enforcement will be selective, and that's exactly what they want.
They will only change their minds when it directly affects them.
Everyone needs to start suing conservatives in Texas under this law. Make these conservatives fight their own defenses and raise defense funds. I don't get why lawsuits didn't fly against prominent GOP voters and members day 1. Make their lives hell with lawsuits.
Does this include highways that receive federal funding? That’s a good way to get this repealed. Threaten to pull funding.
Sure. Its all about controllino women. This is some Taliban shit. Fuck these guys.
If you think laws cannot get more ridiculous, Texas proves you wrong.
How are they going to enforce this? Police patrols on highways stopping each and every car with a female in it that is of "eglible age" and submit her to a mandatory pregnancy test before she is allowed to leave the state - only if test is negative? And put those who happen to be positive into a "pregnancy protection ward" or something?
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.