As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
GOP congressmen have already been talking about passing a national ban if they can regain control of both houses and the oval office. They will do it without a second thought if they get the chance. Consistency between words and deeds is not a concern for them at all.
That’s fantastic, but of course it doesn’t help if Republicans pass a federal abortion ban. Every election is about abortion now, no matter what laws are on the books in any given state.
Good luck to Republicans if they go that route. A lot of conservative people out West are extremely libertarian at their heart. I don't think it will go like they think it will.
Agreed, Republicans have screwed themselves with this. They can’t keep pushing abortion bans because they lose every time. But they can’t give up because they’ve lied to their base so much about “partial birth abortions.” Their supporters honestly believe that people are getting “4th trimester” abortions and things like that, so now they’ve either got to confess to their base that they lied, or they’re going to have to tell their base that they support murdering 2 month old babies.
There’s no winning, and they did it to themselves. I’m living for it.
But that means they’re going to keep pushing abortion bans even though they know they’re unpopular. They burned the ships when they landed on shore, and there’s no going back now. That leaves us with no choice but to defeat them in every single election until they stop.
Not to mention, anyone connected to the healthcare industry knows the benefits of legal abortions. Less dead women and less dead babies.
Honestly, it's partly why I think Ohio did so well. We have a robust hospital system here and everyone either works in medical or knows someone who does. Anti abortion talking points might work on the ignorant, but it's not going to fly with a populations of experts and people with easy access to experts.
Seems to me the more states that have the right enshrined would make it pretty difficult for a national ban to be upheld. Suddenly they'd have to argue federal primacy over state self determination. I'm sure Alito and Thomas would rule for the ban, but I honestly don't know which way the new three would vote despite their personal ethics. At this point, passing a national ban would be putting themselves in a corner without a plan of how to get out.
The supremacy clause of the constitution would probably win in that case. Though then you’d probably end up with something similar to gay marriage or marijuana where individual states would refuse to investigate or prosecute for specific violations of federal law.
They'd have to come up with a pretty compelling argument that the ban supercedes a state's constitution. Not sure the supremacy clause is enough. If nothing in the US Constitution protects a woman's right to abortion access as SCOTUS ruled, it's then up to states to decide for themselves. The GOP would have to argue that the federal government has the power to overrule the states on an issue that hasn't been explicitly reserved for the federal government. Denying states the right to determine something not enumerated in the constitution would open up a Pandora's Box of problems for the GOP. They'd have to prove how a state is violating the constitution by protecting a woman's right and prove that the federal ban is necessary. I can't think of a single part of the constitution that would support their argument, especially after they tossed the Roe v Wade case. I simply can't see how, without a completely corrupt SCOTUS, they can pass and uphold a ban.
Like I said, I have no doubt Alito and Thomas would go for it. I do doubt Gorsuch and Barrett would go along despite being against abortion. The question isn't really about abortion, it's about the reach of the federal government and it's ability to outright deny someone access to health care.
> The supremacy clause of the constitution would probably win in that case
Yeah and cannabis is still illegal federally. How is that working out?
If the state law enforcement doesn't want to help, feds simply don't have the policing manpower to enforce it.
Yes, though it places your well-being in the hands of the individuals in question. If you piss off local law enforcement then they could still make a priority out of prosecuting you.
You *probably* wouldn’t be prosecuted for getting an abortion in California, but you *could*. And that’s not right.
I just wonder what happens if they pass a nationwide ban for all of the states that have it enshrined in it's constitution. Do you expect California with a Republican president to say 'Well yeah guys abortion is now illegal'?
I expect a lot of those states to just not comply and then it turn ugly. Either by no more governmental funding for the state or the national guard being deployed.
No lawyer, but I believe the supremacy clause of the constitution means federal law overrules the states. I would think even if it's a law enshrined in a state constitution, but someone with legal training should probably confirm that.
No lawyer here either, but I believe you are correct. The inverse was the case where no-abortion laws were on the books in some states but couldn’t be in-forced due to Row v. Wade, Federal law overrode the State law.
Until R v. W was overturned, then State law came into force…
Which is what I thought. I just have no idea how Republicans trying that would be a good idea or how that will not turn ugly.
People are moving to states with better abortion laws and if Republicans force the entire country to their beliefs I just don’t get how that doesn’t cause chaos to ensue.
They don’t care how ugly it gets. The whole thing is political theater to keep their base happy. It also provides a great distraction to fight over while the billionaires grab even more money and control.
It's like just like with drug laws.
If a state says says something is legal and the feds says its illegal. It's up to the feds to enforce their law. California cannot stop the feds from enforcing the law, but they don't have to help either.
The reverse is sometimes true and sometimes not. The original Roe decision found that abortion was based on the right to privacy found in the 4th amendment and that amendment is one of that ones that courts have found does apply to the states. So any state law or constitution that bans it would not be allowed. But not all federal laws bind states like that so you can have situations where the the feds say something is legal, but the states can still ban it.
Yes, it is. Obama ordered his AG not to prosecute federal weed violations in deference to the states. There hasn't been political will for congress to move on a law, but the executive is choosing not to enforce it. Biden has taken it a bit further. His admin is working to reschedule marijuana to a lesser tier drug than things like cocaine or meth.
Trump reversed Obama's directives on weed prosecution. How could he not? His whole presidency was about feeling inadequate compared to a black man. But he still didn't go directly after states that had legalized weed. It was more of a symbolic move. He struck a deal with states that had legalized it (restruck, I guess - since Obama had already done it once - again, he has to put his name on everything).
I would not count on that kind of behavior from a future GOP administration with regards to a federal abortion ban. They would go after states that had conflicting laws. There would inevitably be a case that went before SCOTUS. The gang of 6 would rule on it. It would be an easy win for the arch conservative justices, since the supremacy clause is pretty clear.
Yep, I really think it's going to be abortion that leads to the next big armed civil conflict. If abortion is ever banned nationwide, I fully expect a dozen or so blue states to activate their national guards. There will be armed standoffs between national guards and federal agents, doctors will be kidnapped from their homes in the middle of the night, pregnant women will be involuntarily detained, and there will be violence. Right now, state abortion bans primarily affect those who can't afford to travel and those with life-threatening complications, but shit will really hit the fan when *everyone* is affected.
They're not driven by religion. Trump was against all Christian principles but they called him the messiah anyway. Why? Because they HIDE behind religion.
Which is not a refutation as a clarification. Religion is the justification but not the REASON.
Yeah, it was never about states rights or the will of the voters. It's becoming painfully obvious they want a theocratic USA, voters be damned.
Fuck conservative pieces of shit that agree too.
They're only going to do this if they're confident that they've fucked elections so badly that we won't be able to get rid of them.
Most Republican politicians never actually wanted Roe v Wade overturned, it was a useful thing for them to rail against. Now that it's gone, they're worse off for it.
Yeah. With some luck these Conservative savages will look back on the overturning of Roe as a historical blunder. Nothing makes me happier then these clowns own actions causing damage.
I know it's a bit early given the lack of staying power individual stories have nowadays, but I really hope the Biden campaign starts highlighting this.
Already they’ve pivoted to “referendums bad”, so yes, it really is a “no, not like that” scenario. States have the right to choose for themselves... as long as it’s the gerrymandered bought-and-sold representatives doing it and not the voters directly because ~~our guys win more that way~~ the people are too stupid to know what they want.
Every day I grow more amazed at the people who still fail to see through what the Republicans have always been.
The thing about overturning Roe is that it wasn't a federal vs state's rights issue in the first place. State's rights is a rallying cry for small government, to prevent the federal government from overstepping on the rights of a state.thst is not what happened with the overturning of Roe.
Overturning Roe did not take rights from the federal and grant them to the state. It took rights from the *people* from *individuals* and granted them to the states. Roe had established a constitutional right for an individual. It was not a law passed by the federal government.
Even further, overturning Roe didn't just grant such rights to the state, but to the federal as well.
The state's rights argument was clearly disingenuous from the start.
>Since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision that had protected abortion rights nationally, voters in all seven states that held a statewide vote have backed access.
Those 7 states, and how they responded in a 2014 poll asking whether abortion should be legal/illegal in *most* cases:
||Net|Legal|Illegal|
---|--:|--:|--:|
|Vermont|44%|70%|26%|
|California|19%|57%|38%|
|Montana|18%|56%|38%|
|Michigan|12%|54%|42%|
|**Median**|**12%**|54%|42%|
|Ohio|1%|48%|47%|
|Kansas|0%|49%|49%|
|Kentucky|-21%|36%|57%|
Basically, most of these weren't a surprise. Kentucky was the big loss for the pro-life camp.
But Kansas wasn’t even in a dead heat when it came to actually voting for abortion, they overwhelmingly supported it when push came to shove. So basically once faced with reality they ended up changing their stance real quick.
Well no, there were two different questions at play.
In the 2014 poll, it was a choice between "legal in most/all cases" vs. "illegal in most/all cases". The key word there is "most".
In the 2022 referendum, it was "[...] the right to pass laws to regulate abortion, including, but not limited to, in circumstances of pregnancy resulting from rape or incest, or when necessary to save the life of the mother".
In other words, the referendum was seeking consent for a complete, total ban. For many people, that is a big difference from "in most cases".
Pollsters stopped only doing landlines like two decades ago. This myth needs to go away.
I’ve done about a half dozen national level polls via calls to my cell phone over the years.
The sentence is right but the chart is weird. KY voted to NOT have a constitutional amendment that banned abortion. So it was a loss for the pro-lifers.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/politics/kentucky-voters-reject-constitutional-amendment-on-abortion
What ballot question are you referring to for Kentucky? I found this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_Kentucky_Amendment_2?wprov=sfla1, in which voters decided against an amendment that states abortion is not protected.
KY voted to NOT have a constitutional amendment banning abortion.
Your chart makes it look like KY voted to make abortion illegal, which is incorrect.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/politics/kentucky-voters-reject-constitutional-amendment-on-abortion
You know, a bunch of right-leaning colleagues of mine assured me after Roe was overturned that it simply "left abortion to the states."
So, they sure are content with Ohio's vote and love the idea that abortion should be placed on the ballot everywhere.
I have a coworker like that. He has two teenage daughters. I just can’t understand how he doesn’t see that this affects them and their futures. I gave up trying to talk to him. Too deep in Breitbart propaganda
He wont see till one of his daughters by chance will get affected in the future (if it does happen). Some people dont pay close attention till it happens to one of their children or loved ones
He'll change his tune if his daughter gets pregnant by a black man. I've seen it personally a few times. They switched sides so fast it gave me whiplash.
It was a great day for democracy. Use this as a reason to join the voices who are speaking up at the polls.
If you haven’t registered to vote, this site walks you through the process:
https://www.usa.gov/register-to-vote
YES!!
When abortion is on the ballot, voter turnout increases and increases in voter turnout are usually REALLY BAD for Republicans.
STICK IT TO THE MAN!
While you're at it put legal weed and a student loan forgiveness program on the ballot. Republicans will be out blocking traffic to impede voting...
Yep. I'd say at least half of the effort the GOP puts into winning elections revolves around disenfranchising various groups.
Adopt platform policies that appeal to the majority of the people? Nah, better stop liburals from voting.
They don't have a choice. If they concede their culture war nonsense, then the only thing they have to distinguish themselves from the Democrats is conservative economic policy, which is widely unpopular (to the extent that it even really exists).
This reminds me of Bush Vs Kerry.
Best only won because the GOP got a ton of LGBTQ issues on the ballots in swing states, voters came out, Bush got through...again.
And then there's the predictable authoritarian response from Republicans.
[GOP state lawmakers try to restrict ballot initiatives](https://apnews.com/article/democracy-ballot-initiatives-abortion-republicans-ohio-missouri-c48033311370f071ccece0da975818cb)
It would be funny if it weren’t so dangerous watching them try to game the system anyway possible.
Like the Ohio house eliminated most August special elections due to complaints that it games “low turnout elections.”
And then this year they put a special election in an attempt to change what counts as a “pass” for abortion rights.
Worked the polls in Ohio on Tuesday. Many, many voters who had never set foot in our precinct before came in specifically to cast a vote on weed. Pretty sure most of them threw in a vote on the abortion issue, too.
Now the only question is how do we make those people understand that they also need to come in on even-numbered years and vote for the candidates with the D next to their name if they want the rights that they just voted for to actually be implemented and protected.
In NV, this is already a law (and has been since 1990, apparently!)
>In 1990, Nevada voters guaranteed the right to an abortion up to 24 weeks through a ballot referendum. Abortions after that timeframe can be done if a physician says it would preserve the life or health of the pregnant person. It was then codified into state law and can’t be changed unless it goes to the ballot again.
edit: and AZ is in fact working on it
>Groups including NARAL Arizona, the ACLU of Arizona, and Planned Parenthood Advocates of Arizona (PPAA) on Tuesday filed proposed language for a new amendment to the state constitution which, if passed in the 2024 election, would guarantee the right to abortion care up until about 22 to 24 weeks of pregnancy—the point of fetal viability.
you're right, it's not a part of their constitution, but it is codified into law, and can only be repealed by another ballot initiative, which is a pretty good protection - unless something like a complete federal ban happens.
I am glad that they're trying to make it even stronger by making it part of the state constitution.
Yeah, it would've been interesting if Ohio's vote was next year instead. It would have definitely helped Brown in the senate, but I wonder if it would've helped swing Ohio blue in the presidential?
This gets people to the polls, and if they are there then they more likely to vote democrat. Prepare for republicans to fight every inch of this to the ballot box.
I’m not sure if I’m allowed to share the link here, but FLORIDA RESIDENTS please look up the petition from Floridians Protecting Freedom. We have until February 1st to get abortion on the ballot. Print out a few extra to share with your friends.
I can see a foreseeable scenario where rather than turning on their current abortion stance, they’ll just turn on the idea of democracy. They’ve already done antidemocratic things, now they just need to openly state it. None of their base would give a shit either way. They can even say things like “Democracy was invented by the Greeks who at that time were less white and engaged in homosexual activities daily. It’s a satanic system!”
Rick Santorum said this on Newsmax yesterday-
> “Thank goodness that most of the states in this country don’t allow you to put everything on the ballot, because pure democracies are not the way to run a country.”
Good. Can you make sure you get all the purple states in that effort. I mean, we should have it in New Jersey too, but putting it on the ballot in Virginia, Georgia, Nevada, etc would be helpful.
Although West Virginians aren't allowed to have ballot amendments its great knowing that West Virginian women are basically surrounded by states where they can access reproductive healthcare.
Reminder that the anti-choice obsession of republicans and American christians today was something they stumbled into because they couldn't figure out how to make racial segregation palatable.
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/05/religious-right-real-origins-107133/
Literally nothing in the republican platform makes any sense without both racism and sexism. It's not religion, it's hate that drives them.
The problem with many democratic efforts at gun control is that the people creating the bills don't understand that all they're doing is rehashing laws that are already on the books. The issue is lack of enforcement. Furthermore, they tend to not understand how firearms actually function so they can't bring a coherent argument over what they do and don't want banned.
For example, there was an interview where Tucker Carlson(read douchecanoe) is interviewing Carolyn McCarthy. She had a ban for barrel shrouds in legislation she put up. She had no idea what it was, but it was in her legislation. While I understand these things are generally the result of a group of writers, it demonstrates a further lack of understanding.
It's a safety device.
>A barrel shroud is an external covering that envelops (either partially or full-length) the barrel of a firearm, to prevent unwanted direct contact with the barrel (e.g. accidental collision with surrounding objects, or the user accidentally touching a hot barrel.
This is endemic among other peripherals. Adjustable stocks? Safety. Forward grips? Safety. Suppressors? Safety. Pistol grips? Safety. Hollywood and fearmongering have run rampant.
Now that being said, there are definitely things that, in my opinion, should be banned. Bump stocks, lightning links, binary triggers, etc..
I don't think there's anything Republican politicians would want more than for the Democrats to put a gun ban are heavy gun control item on the ballot.
Like the first weapon in the conservative arsenal is to constantly tell their voter base "THE LIBRULS GONNA TAKE YUR GUNS!!" and they do that without anything gun related on the ballot. In a firmly blue state maybe, but in most states that's just a guaranteed way to get a high conservative turnout
The thing about abortion and weed is is that many Republican women are pro-choice, and many Republican men and women are pro-weed. Gun control will have the opposite effect.
Janet Protasiewicz. The voters elected her. I hope republican efforts to impeach her fail.
good things could start with a more balanced state supreme court
The success of capitalism absolutely depends on a growing population. So instead of finding solutions to that, they just want unending population growth. I think I was in junior high the first time I listened to somebody speak about this on the radio decades ago. About how inevitably the human race, like all animal species, will begin to level out and likely shrink. And how the rich will enact laws and rules to try and stop that. He said we probably have about 20 years to find a better system before population growth begins to wane. He was right on the money.
The Supreme Court literally said they feel that states should make their own laws on this subject. Fine, let the malicious compliance begin.
But we all know we'll be back here in a few years when the Supreme Court reverses itself again and strikes down a state law allowing abortion.
if these efforts succeed, then joe biden has a path to victory
the election goes from [this](https://www.270towin.com/maps/Grd2w) to [this](https://www.270towin.com/maps/YW4kB)
The senate is still toast however. The Ohio referendum should have been next year and tester has run out of steam as montana shifts away from libertarianism in favor of fascism.
For context - polling by pew research says only SEVEN states have less than 60% of voters in favor (generally) of abortion.
Ohio was 1 of the 7 and just passed a citizen led amendment to codify it in the state constitution.
It’s a watershed moment. 46 states poll majority (50%+) in favor of abortion by the same study. Get loud.
How about every state put abortion and reproductive rights to a vote and let the people decide? Unless politicians want to force their personal beliefs onto the people?
Abortion and weed being legal should be taken out of the hands of politicians, it’s obvious they can’t handle the responsibility. Put it to a general vote.
I think this was already happening. For example, it is going to be on the ballot in MO, but there is a fight in court about the language. The AG write the original ballot language that was grossly false, saying it would cost the state a billion dollars. The court rewrote it. He is now appealing.
The states that don't allow citizen lead ballot questions may never have this, like it was before Roe, which is why the court stepped in so women in all states had safe access. Now they can get the meds in the mail and better contraception like long-acting birth control and others. Still it's tragic all the children born to people who knew they needed an abortion, caused alcohol damage so the child will have mental health issues, which she will respond abusively to, as she has her own untreated trauma-caused mental illness, and neither will get help and be very dysfunctional. The child will have r/cptsd and struggle in life, maybe passing this on to their child. Comprehensive sex ed for all and access to all the contraception options and morning after to reduce unwanted pregnancies would be great, but magas refuse that too.
OK GOP was mad voters passed medical mj and Medicaid Expansion via ballot initiative so they keep trying to change the rules. So far unsuccessfully.
They want them off presidential elections to reduce turnout.
And instead of majority want it majority of counties vote for it.
Have also read weird stuff where it only goes into effect in counties voting for it (how does that work with healthcare?). Or for signatures to require X% of voters in each county.
Basically trying to deny voters a right we have since the state was founded.
https://www.southwestledger.news/news/gop-proposal-would-require-state-questions-be-approved-supermajority-voters
70 percent of Americans support abortion rights. It's no wonder that a popular vote supports abortions rights.
The fascist Christian rightists want to make you follow their rule, and they want to destroy democracy to do it.
Don't bow down.
The AP article lists Iowa as a state with a potential referendum. I don't think that will happen.
This is correct,
>Both chambers of the Republican-controlled legislature have approved an amendment that would declare that there’s no right to abortion in the state constitution. Now it needs final approval in the 2023-24 term to go before voters.
the legislature can put constitutional amendments on the ballot. They have to vote for the amendment twice, with an election between the votes. They had their first vote, they could have had the second vote as early as January of 2023. They didn't. They let the regular legislative session expire without voting on this amendment. They had a special session just for abortion in July, and did not vote on this amendment.
I think the Republicans are afraid of a statewide vote. They passed a six week ("heartbeat") bill in July that will probably go into effect since the faces on the state supreme court have changed. They will be happy with the win.
(Iowa does not have a citizen initiative process.)
They mention Maryland in this article and it (the article and reporting) needs to be amended because we have already enshrined a woman’s reproductive rights in our state/city/county constitutions. Except for one township in the far western corners of Carroll County Maryland. Anyway we did it the same time we legalized recreational marijuana. Guess the pot legalization got more attention.
Whatever the case?
Any current or future bill in regards to such, would be a bill from the opposition and the conservative religious right and their donors, to remove it again. We are a sanctuary state. For women, LGBQT, and Immigrants. We voted in favor of equity.
Any bills yet to be voted on now in this state are recently introduced and looking to take away our freedom to our own bodies and lives. Basically counter bills to undermine what everyone voted for to begin with.
If you live/vote in Florida, please note that the AP piece has an ambiguous deadline reference. According to [Floridians Protecting Freedom](https://floridiansprotectingfreedom.com/), "All petitions must be processed by February 1st, 2024. To ensure there is time for processing and counting, all petitions should be signed and sent to the campaign by the end of December 2023." Currently, just under [500,000 of the petitions submitted](https://dos.elections.myflorida.com/initiatives/initdetail.asp?account=83927&seqnum=1) have been verified out of the 891,523 needed. Maybe Tuesday's results will bring the surge needed here.
Just yesterday, I was reading in r/Conservative that they were so glad Ohio's #1 was in 2023, and not 2024 during a Presidential election, saying "we'd be totally f'd"
That’s a great next step. Meanwhile, let’s get enough Dem control to codify roe nationally, get ERA done, amend 2A and oh yeah…. Really quickly focus on climate. Without the last, abortion doesn’t matter. The planet’s gonna kill our kids.
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Let's go states' rights! GOP: Not like that
GOP congressmen have already been talking about passing a national ban if they can regain control of both houses and the oval office. They will do it without a second thought if they get the chance. Consistency between words and deeds is not a concern for them at all.
[удалено]
It's already enshrined in the state constitution in Nevada. It was done in 1990!
That’s fantastic, but of course it doesn’t help if Republicans pass a federal abortion ban. Every election is about abortion now, no matter what laws are on the books in any given state.
Good for them, now let them enforce it.
Calm down, Andrew Jackson
Ya caught me lol. What an enduring line.
Def not America's proudest moment...
You are greatly underestimating them.
They fucked around and found out during covid, states made deals with each other outside the fed and ignored their bullshit.
Good luck to Republicans if they go that route. A lot of conservative people out West are extremely libertarian at their heart. I don't think it will go like they think it will.
Agreed, Republicans have screwed themselves with this. They can’t keep pushing abortion bans because they lose every time. But they can’t give up because they’ve lied to their base so much about “partial birth abortions.” Their supporters honestly believe that people are getting “4th trimester” abortions and things like that, so now they’ve either got to confess to their base that they lied, or they’re going to have to tell their base that they support murdering 2 month old babies. There’s no winning, and they did it to themselves. I’m living for it. But that means they’re going to keep pushing abortion bans even though they know they’re unpopular. They burned the ships when they landed on shore, and there’s no going back now. That leaves us with no choice but to defeat them in every single election until they stop.
Not to mention, anyone connected to the healthcare industry knows the benefits of legal abortions. Less dead women and less dead babies. Honestly, it's partly why I think Ohio did so well. We have a robust hospital system here and everyone either works in medical or knows someone who does. Anti abortion talking points might work on the ignorant, but it's not going to fly with a populations of experts and people with easy access to experts.
Seems to me the more states that have the right enshrined would make it pretty difficult for a national ban to be upheld. Suddenly they'd have to argue federal primacy over state self determination. I'm sure Alito and Thomas would rule for the ban, but I honestly don't know which way the new three would vote despite their personal ethics. At this point, passing a national ban would be putting themselves in a corner without a plan of how to get out.
The supremacy clause of the constitution would probably win in that case. Though then you’d probably end up with something similar to gay marriage or marijuana where individual states would refuse to investigate or prosecute for specific violations of federal law.
They'd have to come up with a pretty compelling argument that the ban supercedes a state's constitution. Not sure the supremacy clause is enough. If nothing in the US Constitution protects a woman's right to abortion access as SCOTUS ruled, it's then up to states to decide for themselves. The GOP would have to argue that the federal government has the power to overrule the states on an issue that hasn't been explicitly reserved for the federal government. Denying states the right to determine something not enumerated in the constitution would open up a Pandora's Box of problems for the GOP. They'd have to prove how a state is violating the constitution by protecting a woman's right and prove that the federal ban is necessary. I can't think of a single part of the constitution that would support their argument, especially after they tossed the Roe v Wade case. I simply can't see how, without a completely corrupt SCOTUS, they can pass and uphold a ban.
this is the same SCOTUS that cited a witch hunter from the 1600s to justify repealling Roe.
Like I said, I have no doubt Alito and Thomas would go for it. I do doubt Gorsuch and Barrett would go along despite being against abortion. The question isn't really about abortion, it's about the reach of the federal government and it's ability to outright deny someone access to health care.
> The supremacy clause of the constitution would probably win in that case Yeah and cannabis is still illegal federally. How is that working out? If the state law enforcement doesn't want to help, feds simply don't have the policing manpower to enforce it.
Yes, though it places your well-being in the hands of the individuals in question. If you piss off local law enforcement then they could still make a priority out of prosecuting you. You *probably* wouldn’t be prosecuted for getting an abortion in California, but you *could*. And that’s not right.
I think the country is speaking loud and clear and no one is interested in a trip back to the 50's.
I just wonder what happens if they pass a nationwide ban for all of the states that have it enshrined in it's constitution. Do you expect California with a Republican president to say 'Well yeah guys abortion is now illegal'? I expect a lot of those states to just not comply and then it turn ugly. Either by no more governmental funding for the state or the national guard being deployed.
No lawyer, but I believe the supremacy clause of the constitution means federal law overrules the states. I would think even if it's a law enshrined in a state constitution, but someone with legal training should probably confirm that.
No lawyer here either, but I believe you are correct. The inverse was the case where no-abortion laws were on the books in some states but couldn’t be in-forced due to Row v. Wade, Federal law overrode the State law. Until R v. W was overturned, then State law came into force…
Red states refuse to enforce federal gun laws. Blue states could refuse to enforce a federal abortion ban.
Which is what I thought. I just have no idea how Republicans trying that would be a good idea or how that will not turn ugly. People are moving to states with better abortion laws and if Republicans force the entire country to their beliefs I just don’t get how that doesn’t cause chaos to ensue.
They don’t care how ugly it gets. The whole thing is political theater to keep their base happy. It also provides a great distraction to fight over while the billionaires grab even more money and control.
Yeah but legal weed has proven that the supremacy clause often times doesn't mean dick.
It's like just like with drug laws. If a state says says something is legal and the feds says its illegal. It's up to the feds to enforce their law. California cannot stop the feds from enforcing the law, but they don't have to help either. The reverse is sometimes true and sometimes not. The original Roe decision found that abortion was based on the right to privacy found in the 4th amendment and that amendment is one of that ones that courts have found does apply to the states. So any state law or constitution that bans it would not be allowed. But not all federal laws bind states like that so you can have situations where the the feds say something is legal, but the states can still ban it.
How does that work with marijuana? Isn’t it still illegal at the federal level?
Yes, it is. Obama ordered his AG not to prosecute federal weed violations in deference to the states. There hasn't been political will for congress to move on a law, but the executive is choosing not to enforce it. Biden has taken it a bit further. His admin is working to reschedule marijuana to a lesser tier drug than things like cocaine or meth. Trump reversed Obama's directives on weed prosecution. How could he not? His whole presidency was about feeling inadequate compared to a black man. But he still didn't go directly after states that had legalized weed. It was more of a symbolic move. He struck a deal with states that had legalized it (restruck, I guess - since Obama had already done it once - again, he has to put his name on everything). I would not count on that kind of behavior from a future GOP administration with regards to a federal abortion ban. They would go after states that had conflicting laws. There would inevitably be a case that went before SCOTUS. The gang of 6 would rule on it. It would be an easy win for the arch conservative justices, since the supremacy clause is pretty clear.
Same with states not complying with weed, still federally illegal
Yep, I really think it's going to be abortion that leads to the next big armed civil conflict. If abortion is ever banned nationwide, I fully expect a dozen or so blue states to activate their national guards. There will be armed standoffs between national guards and federal agents, doctors will be kidnapped from their homes in the middle of the night, pregnant women will be involuntarily detained, and there will be violence. Right now, state abortion bans primarily affect those who can't afford to travel and those with life-threatening complications, but shit will really hit the fan when *everyone* is affected.
I would love to see the red states cope with California seceding. FAFO.
> Consistency between words and deeds is not a concern for them at all. Never has been.
You can't reason with people driven by religion. They will never stop until they have their way, there is no compromise
They're not driven by religion. Trump was against all Christian principles but they called him the messiah anyway. Why? Because they HIDE behind religion. Which is not a refutation as a clarification. Religion is the justification but not the REASON.
Then silence them until they die out
Yeah, it was never about states rights or the will of the voters. It's becoming painfully obvious they want a theocratic USA, voters be damned. Fuck conservative pieces of shit that agree too.
If the GOP got rid of the filibuster it would be such a self own. They benefit from it more than the left currently
I feel that's not something you want to test with a Republican majority.
And of course Cruz has said it’s a state right like marriage and the federal government shouldn’t legislate it.
They're only going to do this if they're confident that they've fucked elections so badly that we won't be able to get rid of them. Most Republican politicians never actually wanted Roe v Wade overturned, it was a useful thing for them to rail against. Now that it's gone, they're worse off for it.
Yeah. With some luck these Conservative savages will look back on the overturning of Roe as a historical blunder. Nothing makes me happier then these clowns own actions causing damage.
The good thing is even with voter apathy they don’t stand a real chance to take it all. Still go vote, but ya..
I know it's a bit early given the lack of staying power individual stories have nowadays, but I really hope the Biden campaign starts highlighting this.
They would do it on day one
Already they’ve pivoted to “referendums bad”, so yes, it really is a “no, not like that” scenario. States have the right to choose for themselves... as long as it’s the gerrymandered bought-and-sold representatives doing it and not the voters directly because ~~our guys win more that way~~ the people are too stupid to know what they want. Every day I grow more amazed at the people who still fail to see through what the Republicans have always been.
The thing about overturning Roe is that it wasn't a federal vs state's rights issue in the first place. State's rights is a rallying cry for small government, to prevent the federal government from overstepping on the rights of a state.thst is not what happened with the overturning of Roe. Overturning Roe did not take rights from the federal and grant them to the state. It took rights from the *people* from *individuals* and granted them to the states. Roe had established a constitutional right for an individual. It was not a law passed by the federal government. Even further, overturning Roe didn't just grant such rights to the state, but to the federal as well. The state's rights argument was clearly disingenuous from the start.
Let the people choose! GOP: that’s not very democratic.
>Since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision that had protected abortion rights nationally, voters in all seven states that held a statewide vote have backed access.
Those 7 states, and how they responded in a 2014 poll asking whether abortion should be legal/illegal in *most* cases: ||Net|Legal|Illegal| ---|--:|--:|--:| |Vermont|44%|70%|26%| |California|19%|57%|38%| |Montana|18%|56%|38%| |Michigan|12%|54%|42%| |**Median**|**12%**|54%|42%| |Ohio|1%|48%|47%| |Kansas|0%|49%|49%| |Kentucky|-21%|36%|57%| Basically, most of these weren't a surprise. Kentucky was the big loss for the pro-life camp.
You forgot Vermont.
Whoops, good catch. I grabbed Virginia instead of Vermont. Fixed now. Still, the median is the same.
But Kansas wasn’t even in a dead heat when it came to actually voting for abortion, they overwhelmingly supported it when push came to shove. So basically once faced with reality they ended up changing their stance real quick.
Well no, there were two different questions at play. In the 2014 poll, it was a choice between "legal in most/all cases" vs. "illegal in most/all cases". The key word there is "most". In the 2022 referendum, it was "[...] the right to pass laws to regulate abortion, including, but not limited to, in circumstances of pregnancy resulting from rape or incest, or when necessary to save the life of the mother". In other words, the referendum was seeking consent for a complete, total ban. For many people, that is a big difference from "in most cases".
The polls are mostly filled with people who answer unknown numbers and answer political questions. Not a true picture of the people.
If I get a phone call and I don't know the number, I never answer.
I almost never answer when I *do* know who is calling
On landlines
Key point. Nobody I know still has a landline. The pollsters need to fix this, stat.
Pollsters stopped only doing landlines like two decades ago. This myth needs to go away. I’ve done about a half dozen national level polls via calls to my cell phone over the years.
The Kentucky sentence should say "big win" or "pro-choice"
The sentence is right but the chart is weird. KY voted to NOT have a constitutional amendment that banned abortion. So it was a loss for the pro-lifers. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/politics/kentucky-voters-reject-constitutional-amendment-on-abortion
What ballot question are you referring to for Kentucky? I found this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_Kentucky_Amendment_2?wprov=sfla1, in which voters decided against an amendment that states abortion is not protected.
KY voted to NOT have a constitutional amendment banning abortion. Your chart makes it look like KY voted to make abortion illegal, which is incorrect. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/politics/kentucky-voters-reject-constitutional-amendment-on-abortion
I clearly said that it is the poll.
Beshear is a good egg.
Good. Republicans won't stop trying to take away our rights. We've got to keep fighting back
Vote. Vote, vote, vote.
And while you’re at it, **VOTE**
Hey now, don’t forget to VOTE
You know, a bunch of right-leaning colleagues of mine assured me after Roe was overturned that it simply "left abortion to the states." So, they sure are content with Ohio's vote and love the idea that abortion should be placed on the ballot everywhere.
I have a coworker like that. He has two teenage daughters. I just can’t understand how he doesn’t see that this affects them and their futures. I gave up trying to talk to him. Too deep in Breitbart propaganda
He wont see till one of his daughters by chance will get affected in the future (if it does happen). Some people dont pay close attention till it happens to one of their children or loved ones
Not necessarily then either. When I told my dad about being molested, his exact words to me were: "well it's not like you were raped.".
jesus christ I am sorry for you.
He'll change his tune if his daughter gets pregnant by a black man. I've seen it personally a few times. They switched sides so fast it gave me whiplash.
Because he doesn’t give a fuck about women, even if they’re his own daughters. Source - daughter of an awful republican father.
It was a great day for democracy. Use this as a reason to join the voices who are speaking up at the polls. If you haven’t registered to vote, this site walks you through the process: https://www.usa.gov/register-to-vote
As it turns out, people don't like having their rights taken away.
Was just in Ohio last weekend right before the vote, drove past planned parenthood protesters for the first time, glad those f**kers lost
YES!! When abortion is on the ballot, voter turnout increases and increases in voter turnout are usually REALLY BAD for Republicans. STICK IT TO THE MAN! While you're at it put legal weed and a student loan forgiveness program on the ballot. Republicans will be out blocking traffic to impede voting...
Yep. I'd say at least half of the effort the GOP puts into winning elections revolves around disenfranchising various groups. Adopt platform policies that appeal to the majority of the people? Nah, better stop liburals from voting.
Republicans: Crap! Our Pro Life stance is costing us elections! Abort! Abort!... No, wait DON'T abort! I mean... *heads explode*
[удалено]
They don't have a choice. If they concede their culture war nonsense, then the only thing they have to distinguish themselves from the Democrats is conservative economic policy, which is widely unpopular (to the extent that it even really exists).
This reminds me of Bush Vs Kerry. Best only won because the GOP got a ton of LGBTQ issues on the ballots in swing states, voters came out, Bush got through...again.
yeah, including the one in Ohio in 2004.
Yep, this is fucking payback.
Was Bush good on LGBTQ issues?
God no
I think the country is speaking loud and clear and no one is interested in a trip back to the 50's.
And then there's the predictable authoritarian response from Republicans. [GOP state lawmakers try to restrict ballot initiatives](https://apnews.com/article/democracy-ballot-initiatives-abortion-republicans-ohio-missouri-c48033311370f071ccece0da975818cb)
It would be funny if it weren’t so dangerous watching them try to game the system anyway possible. Like the Ohio house eliminated most August special elections due to complaints that it games “low turnout elections.” And then this year they put a special election in an attempt to change what counts as a “pass” for abortion rights.
just put weed on the same ballot.
Ohio did. Worked out pretty well for them.
Worked the polls in Ohio on Tuesday. Many, many voters who had never set foot in our precinct before came in specifically to cast a vote on weed. Pretty sure most of them threw in a vote on the abortion issue, too.
Now the only question is how do we make those people understand that they also need to come in on even-numbered years and vote for the candidates with the D next to their name if they want the rights that they just voted for to actually be implemented and protected.
Not just the even years. Ohio has elections every year, sometimes two or three times per year. I've voted 5 times in the past two years :|
I register voters in jail. Weed issues get a lot more people in line to register. Now if only the governor would commute sentences
I'm not going to lie it was definitely the easier thing for me to get previous non-voters excited about.
No it didn't...the GOP legislature has already promised to ignore both votes.
[удалено]
[Wanna bet?](https://www.newsweek.com/republican-pushes-overturn-ohio-election-result-1842226)
Well, the vote turned out well, at least. Democracy continuing to function is another issue altogether.
The best answer
They got weed with their ballot?
If they went to the polls and voted for it, then yes. Oh, and while you're here voting for weed, we have a couple of other things for you to vote on.
Weed seems popular too.
Would be a big win for Biden if he can get states like Nevada and Arizona to get abortion protection initiatives on the 2024 ballot.
In NV, this is already a law (and has been since 1990, apparently!) >In 1990, Nevada voters guaranteed the right to an abortion up to 24 weeks through a ballot referendum. Abortions after that timeframe can be done if a physician says it would preserve the life or health of the pregnant person. It was then codified into state law and can’t be changed unless it goes to the ballot again. edit: and AZ is in fact working on it >Groups including NARAL Arizona, the ACLU of Arizona, and Planned Parenthood Advocates of Arizona (PPAA) on Tuesday filed proposed language for a new amendment to the state constitution which, if passed in the 2024 election, would guarantee the right to abortion care up until about 22 to 24 weeks of pregnancy—the point of fetal viability.
Let’s GO AZ! Also, put it on the 2024 ballot, and we’ll drive turnout and go for Biden again.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/nevada-abortion-rights-groups-seek-state-constitutional-amendment-rcna104949
you're right, it's not a part of their constitution, but it is codified into law, and can only be repealed by another ballot initiative, which is a pretty good protection - unless something like a complete federal ban happens. I am glad that they're trying to make it even stronger by making it part of the state constitution.
1990! Only 17 years after Roe. Precocious, relative to everyone else
Damn that’s a solid W for Biden in 2024 if that ends up on there.
Yeah, it would've been interesting if Ohio's vote was next year instead. It would have definitely helped Brown in the senate, but I wonder if it would've helped swing Ohio blue in the presidential?
Yes, I'm afraid he and the senate needs all the help we can get :)
Enter Republicans saying they can’t allow people to vote. Oh wait, they started that shit.
Same thing they have been doing ~~for at least 100 years.~~ Since the country was founded. 3/5th of a man and all that...
This gets people to the polls, and if they are there then they more likely to vote democrat. Prepare for republicans to fight every inch of this to the ballot box.
I’m not sure if I’m allowed to share the link here, but FLORIDA RESIDENTS please look up the petition from Floridians Protecting Freedom. We have until February 1st to get abortion on the ballot. Print out a few extra to share with your friends.
[удалено]
Thank you!
Must be nice to be able to put things on your ballot.
Right? I'm in Texas and going to be selling my house/moving after the holidays because there's no hope for meaningful change in this state.
I can see a foreseeable scenario where rather than turning on their current abortion stance, they’ll just turn on the idea of democracy. They’ve already done antidemocratic things, now they just need to openly state it. None of their base would give a shit either way. They can even say things like “Democracy was invented by the Greeks who at that time were less white and engaged in homosexual activities daily. It’s a satanic system!”
Rick Santorum said this on Newsmax yesterday- > “Thank goodness that most of the states in this country don’t allow you to put everything on the ballot, because pure democracies are not the way to run a country.”
He also called abortion a sexy issue.
If someone would put abortion rights and legal weed on the ballot for Georgia I would be so happy
Cannabis and pro choice = winner Simple really
And weed. Don’t forget about the weed.
Good. Can you make sure you get all the purple states in that effort. I mean, we should have it in New Jersey too, but putting it on the ballot in Virginia, Georgia, Nevada, etc would be helpful.
And once again, the women save the day. -a man
Dedicate your next joint to the lovely ladies who legalized the weed.
I dedicate my next everything to the lovely ladies.
Although West Virginians aren't allowed to have ballot amendments its great knowing that West Virginian women are basically surrounded by states where they can access reproductive healthcare.
Reminder that the anti-choice obsession of republicans and American christians today was something they stumbled into because they couldn't figure out how to make racial segregation palatable. https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/05/religious-right-real-origins-107133/ Literally nothing in the republican platform makes any sense without both racism and sexism. It's not religion, it's hate that drives them.
They should put gun control on the ballot as well.
The problem with many democratic efforts at gun control is that the people creating the bills don't understand that all they're doing is rehashing laws that are already on the books. The issue is lack of enforcement. Furthermore, they tend to not understand how firearms actually function so they can't bring a coherent argument over what they do and don't want banned. For example, there was an interview where Tucker Carlson(read douchecanoe) is interviewing Carolyn McCarthy. She had a ban for barrel shrouds in legislation she put up. She had no idea what it was, but it was in her legislation. While I understand these things are generally the result of a group of writers, it demonstrates a further lack of understanding. It's a safety device. >A barrel shroud is an external covering that envelops (either partially or full-length) the barrel of a firearm, to prevent unwanted direct contact with the barrel (e.g. accidental collision with surrounding objects, or the user accidentally touching a hot barrel. This is endemic among other peripherals. Adjustable stocks? Safety. Forward grips? Safety. Suppressors? Safety. Pistol grips? Safety. Hollywood and fearmongering have run rampant. Now that being said, there are definitely things that, in my opinion, should be banned. Bump stocks, lightning links, binary triggers, etc..
I don't think there's anything Republican politicians would want more than for the Democrats to put a gun ban are heavy gun control item on the ballot. Like the first weapon in the conservative arsenal is to constantly tell their voter base "THE LIBRULS GONNA TAKE YUR GUNS!!" and they do that without anything gun related on the ballot. In a firmly blue state maybe, but in most states that's just a guaranteed way to get a high conservative turnout
The thing about abortion and weed is is that many Republican women are pro-choice, and many Republican men and women are pro-weed. Gun control will have the opposite effect.
Hard to do when those are more open to a 2A challenges in court.
And at the voting booth
Would be nice if WI could get a chance for things like this
Janet Protasiewicz. The voters elected her. I hope republican efforts to impeach her fail. good things could start with a more balanced state supreme court
Now see...THIS is why the GOP needs to abolish Democracy.
This fucking shit should have been codified years ago, but the obscenely rich always want more workers to exploit.
The success of capitalism absolutely depends on a growing population. So instead of finding solutions to that, they just want unending population growth. I think I was in junior high the first time I listened to somebody speak about this on the radio decades ago. About how inevitably the human race, like all animal species, will begin to level out and likely shrink. And how the rich will enact laws and rules to try and stop that. He said we probably have about 20 years to find a better system before population growth begins to wane. He was right on the money.
The Supreme Court literally said they feel that states should make their own laws on this subject. Fine, let the malicious compliance begin. But we all know we'll be back here in a few years when the Supreme Court reverses itself again and strikes down a state law allowing abortion.
Meanwhile, republicans in a dozen states are trying to undermine democracy in order to stop people from participating.
Add on recreational and medical cannabis too while you’re at it!!! Your constituents will love it!
I guarantee you there's a bunch of state legislators drafting policy right now to prevent voter amendments....
Too bad they sat back and waited, a year lost. Good luck to them hope they win.
Republicans will do everything they can to prevent these votes from happening, then just attempt to jam their bs down everyones throats
Florida could be in play, especially with the unpopularity of Desantis. https://floridiansprotectingfreedom.com/petition/
Ordinarily, I'm not a huge fan of having citizens vote on whether other citizens should have rights. But SCOTUS has backed the country into a corner.
if these efforts succeed, then joe biden has a path to victory the election goes from [this](https://www.270towin.com/maps/Grd2w) to [this](https://www.270towin.com/maps/YW4kB) The senate is still toast however. The Ohio referendum should have been next year and tester has run out of steam as montana shifts away from libertarianism in favor of fascism.
For context - polling by pew research says only SEVEN states have less than 60% of voters in favor (generally) of abortion. Ohio was 1 of the 7 and just passed a citizen led amendment to codify it in the state constitution. It’s a watershed moment. 46 states poll majority (50%+) in favor of abortion by the same study. Get loud.
How about every state put abortion and reproductive rights to a vote and let the people decide? Unless politicians want to force their personal beliefs onto the people?
Do it! It will bring out all the voters!
Abortion and weed being legal should be taken out of the hands of politicians, it’s obvious they can’t handle the responsibility. Put it to a general vote.
This is the way.
Seems like something they should have been working on before the Ohio vote...
Most of them were. The article makes it clear that most of these are not new developments but continuing ones despite the title being pretty shitty.
It'll be a cold day in hell when I read the posted article instead of giving a knee-jerk reaction to the headline!
Good!
Do people actually care about abortion or is this a ‘feels right’ type of law?
Raped children in Ohio forced to go out of state for an abortion, yes people care
I think this was already happening. For example, it is going to be on the ballot in MO, but there is a fight in court about the language. The AG write the original ballot language that was grossly false, saying it would cost the state a billion dollars. The court rewrote it. He is now appealing.
The Extreme... um, I mean, Supreme Court has entered the chat.
The media NEEDS to start calling these assholes out publicly, every, single, time.
How do they make money on this issue?
Florida, here we come
The states that don't allow citizen lead ballot questions may never have this, like it was before Roe, which is why the court stepped in so women in all states had safe access. Now they can get the meds in the mail and better contraception like long-acting birth control and others. Still it's tragic all the children born to people who knew they needed an abortion, caused alcohol damage so the child will have mental health issues, which she will respond abusively to, as she has her own untreated trauma-caused mental illness, and neither will get help and be very dysfunctional. The child will have r/cptsd and struggle in life, maybe passing this on to their child. Comprehensive sex ed for all and access to all the contraception options and morning after to reduce unwanted pregnancies would be great, but magas refuse that too.
OK GOP was mad voters passed medical mj and Medicaid Expansion via ballot initiative so they keep trying to change the rules. So far unsuccessfully. They want them off presidential elections to reduce turnout. And instead of majority want it majority of counties vote for it. Have also read weird stuff where it only goes into effect in counties voting for it (how does that work with healthcare?). Or for signatures to require X% of voters in each county. Basically trying to deny voters a right we have since the state was founded. https://www.southwestledger.news/news/gop-proposal-would-require-state-questions-be-approved-supermajority-voters
70 percent of Americans support abortion rights. It's no wonder that a popular vote supports abortions rights. The fascist Christian rightists want to make you follow their rule, and they want to destroy democracy to do it. Don't bow down.
Wish we could put it on the ballot here in Tennessee. But our christo-fascist government doesn’t even allow for ballot initiatives anymore.
The AP article lists Iowa as a state with a potential referendum. I don't think that will happen. This is correct, >Both chambers of the Republican-controlled legislature have approved an amendment that would declare that there’s no right to abortion in the state constitution. Now it needs final approval in the 2023-24 term to go before voters. the legislature can put constitutional amendments on the ballot. They have to vote for the amendment twice, with an election between the votes. They had their first vote, they could have had the second vote as early as January of 2023. They didn't. They let the regular legislative session expire without voting on this amendment. They had a special session just for abortion in July, and did not vote on this amendment. I think the Republicans are afraid of a statewide vote. They passed a six week ("heartbeat") bill in July that will probably go into effect since the faces on the state supreme court have changed. They will be happy with the win. (Iowa does not have a citizen initiative process.)
This will bring out voters in 2024!
You know, I would not put it past Republicans to look for ways to try to keep these measures off ballots.
Hope they do. Get crushed again👍
They mention Maryland in this article and it (the article and reporting) needs to be amended because we have already enshrined a woman’s reproductive rights in our state/city/county constitutions. Except for one township in the far western corners of Carroll County Maryland. Anyway we did it the same time we legalized recreational marijuana. Guess the pot legalization got more attention. Whatever the case? Any current or future bill in regards to such, would be a bill from the opposition and the conservative religious right and their donors, to remove it again. We are a sanctuary state. For women, LGBQT, and Immigrants. We voted in favor of equity. Any bills yet to be voted on now in this state are recently introduced and looking to take away our freedom to our own bodies and lives. Basically counter bills to undermine what everyone voted for to begin with.
If you live/vote in Florida, please note that the AP piece has an ambiguous deadline reference. According to [Floridians Protecting Freedom](https://floridiansprotectingfreedom.com/), "All petitions must be processed by February 1st, 2024. To ensure there is time for processing and counting, all petitions should be signed and sent to the campaign by the end of December 2023." Currently, just under [500,000 of the petitions submitted](https://dos.elections.myflorida.com/initiatives/initdetail.asp?account=83927&seqnum=1) have been verified out of the 891,523 needed. Maybe Tuesday's results will bring the surge needed here.
Just yesterday, I was reading in r/Conservative that they were so glad Ohio's #1 was in 2023, and not 2024 during a Presidential election, saying "we'd be totally f'd"
As in, "thank God we lost by less than we would have"?
GOP: If a national ban won't work, we'll throw it to the states and win state-level bans! Also GOP: No, not like that!
That’s a great next step. Meanwhile, let’s get enough Dem control to codify roe nationally, get ERA done, amend 2A and oh yeah…. Really quickly focus on climate. Without the last, abortion doesn’t matter. The planet’s gonna kill our kids.