Texas Pro-Life Law Stands, Left Begins Meltdown
Texas Pro-Life Law Stands, Left Begins Meltdown
If you listen to the left this morning, via Twitter or other media, the end of the world has come, and Armageddon began in Texas.
What happened, you may ask? The Texas heartbeat law, which says that no abortions will be allowed once a heartbeat can be detected – which is around 6 weeks – went into effect. If you worship at the altar of abortion, this the moment of DOOM.
So, what does the law actually say? The AP, which most news sites use for copy, explained it this way:
What makes the Texas law different is its unusual enforcement scheme. Rather than have officials responsible for enforcing the law, private citizens are authorized to sue abortion providers and anyone involved in facilitating abortions. Among other situations, that would include anyone who drives a woman to a clinic to get an abortion. Under the law, anyone who successfully sues another person would be entitled to at least $10,000.”
Abortion opponents who wrote the law also made it difficult to challenge the law in court, in part because it’s hard to know whom to sue.”
I am not a lawyer, so I turned to better legal minds in order to get a sense of what this law means. I understand that the law bans abortion once a heartbeat is detected, but what is this part about lawsuits and enforcement? Legal Insurrection provided a helpful explanation:
The law forbids a physician from knowingly performing or inducing “an abortion or a pregnant woman.”
The physician can perform or induce an abortion if “the physician has determined, in accordance with this section, whether the woman’s unborn child has a detectable fetal heartbeat.”
So the abortion can only happen in a medical emergency. Rape and incest do not count. The person who impregnated the woman “through rape or incest could not sue.”
The Texas Heartbeat Act allows private citizens to “bring a civil action against any person who”:
(1) performs or induces an abortion in violation of this chapter;”
(2) knowingly engages in conduct that aids or abets the performance or inducement of an abortion, including paying for or reimbursing the costs of an abortion through insurance or otherwise, if the abortion is performed or induced in violation of this chapter, regardless of whether the person knew or should have known that the abortion would be performed or induced in violation of this chapter.”
The person cannot “have a connection to an abortion provider or a person seeking an abortion.”
So the law was written to give PRIVATE CITIZENS standing to bring a civil action against abortion providers, or anyone who helps provide an abortion. The abortion providers, therefore, can’t simply sue the state for an injunction, because the state is NOT the entity that would bring legal action. It’s a clever piece of lawfare that has the left tied in knots – and looking to the Supreme Court to SAVE THEM.
The Supreme Court – so far – has stayed silent. And so the law went into effect this morning, and the ghouls of the left lost their minds – including Jeffery “Zoomin” Toobin.
Yeah, Jeffrey Toobin has – ahem – a PERSONAL interest in keeping abortion legal.
Switched to CNN to see Jeffrey Toobin (who once attempted to pressure a coworker’s daughter he impregnated into an abortion) mansplaining and talking over two women about Roe v Wade lmao pic.twitter.com/v6Ltbh1Kga
— Maggie Howell (@Mar__G_3) September 1, 2021
But it isn’t just Toobin. The meltdown is all across the left, and however they can shove it into their intersectional shtick.
I am wondering how an abortion ban "disproportionately harms" queer folks https://t.co/jyTrfM6Sr3
— Ben Shapiro (@benshapiro) September 1, 2021
And they really want the Supreme Court to ride to their rescue. Like, yesterday.
Every woman, everywhere has the constitutional and moral right to basic reproductive health care. We will fight SB8 and all immoral and dangerous attacks on women’s health and freedoms with all our strength.
— Nancy Pelosi (@SpeakerPelosi) September 1, 2021
Here’s the problem. The Supreme Court has the Mississippi case on its docket (where elective abortions are banned after 15 weeks), and the state attorney general is clearly hoping the Court will overturn Roe v. Wade. With the way the Texas law is written, Roe v. Wade could be undone with actual legislation. Remember, a Supreme Court opinion is not a law, it is supposed to be an interpretation of the law. While rights have been created out of whole cloth time and again, the Texas law may have hit upon the only way that a state could effectively stop abortions – by putting the enforcement actions in the hands of the people, not the state. The very fact that the left is now desperately appealing to the Supreme Court to simply issue an injunction means that they have no idea how to stop this themselves. With five justices currently considered to be more “originalist” than not, would the Court actually step in at this moment? I don’t think they’re that inclined to save abortion in Texas, but I could be proven wrong.
In any case, the sheer cleverness of this Texas law needs to be examined, applauded – and replicated.