Critics argued the bill would ban abortions before some women even know they’re pregnant. That likely sets the state up for a legal challenge, including from the same federal appeals court that three years ago struck down similar legislation approved in Arkansas and North Dakota.
Well, it’s only money. We can stop providing pre-natal health-care to pay for these legal challenges.
From a purely political standpoint, I think it would be great news for Democrats and progressives if an abortion bill like this will gets before the Supreme Court ASAP. With the current makeup of the court, the vote to overturn Roe is 5 to 3 against with one vote unknown. The unknown vote belongs to Republican appointee (Dubyia) Justice Roberts.
The reason this is important is that if Roberts votes in favor of these restrictions it means that overturning Roe is currently 5 to 4 in favor of keeping Roe with the oldest two justices, Ginsberg 85 and Kennedy 81, being in the current 5 majority to keep Roe. With Republicans and Trump vowing to appoint justices to overturn Roe, this would make the entire Midterm elections and the 2020 election about abortion which most people want legal.
If, however, Roberts votes to uphold Roe, it would mean that once again the GOP lied to America about its commitment to make abortion illegal and therefore people who vote Republican because of opposition to abortion have no reason to vote Republican.
Therefore I see the Iowa Governor signing this bill as a win/win for Democrats providing they do not find a way to blow it. It means that after 40 years of saying they are against abortion, Republicans will either prove they really are against abortion or that for 40 years Republicans have been lying about their opposition to abortion.
“I’m pro-life. I’m proud to be pro-life. I’ve made that very clear.”
No, you are not, you are pro-birth, which is different.
Dear AP, what sets this up for a court fight is that currently settled law from the supreme court that says the first trimester is off limits for state regulation. The fact that the bill was passed and signed by a bunch of psychos who are objectively in favor of more dead women, and thus criminalizes behavior that occurs before a pregnancy is known to exist is just a bonus.
Virtue signaling theo-fascist peacocks.
So ND tried this 2013 and didn’t go well, so why is IA repeating the same mistake?
You never know when a crack will appear in the SCOTUS…
[quote]Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds signed a six-week abortion ban into law on Friday.
“We couldn’t be more pleased,” DeWitte said. “She is following through on her pledge to the people of Iowa that she is 100 percent pro-life.”[/quote]
Actually, by their own definition, wouldn’t that make her around 83.3% “pro-life”?
To be “pro-life” you must also be “pro-choice” as in choice of health prenatal care, choice of daycare, choice of education and job training and above all choice of contraceptive care. All choices Kim Reynolds and the Republican party oppose.
Chiselin’ Trump: “There has to be some form of punishment [for the woman].”
They believe that it’s a woman’s choice to engage in sexual activity. They believe that it’s a choice to be poor and not be able to afford prenatal care, daycare education and job training. Mostly, they don’t want women (White Women) to have a choice when it comes to contraceptives.
Iowa is a very White state that seems to fear diversity. I can tell you from personal experience that Steve King says what a lot of more polite (or fearful or smart) Iowa Republicans won’t say- they want to keep their state as White as possible. Banning abortion helps that. Banning contraceptives helps that. They though English Only laws help that, but I guess they figured out that wasn’t working.
They passed a 20 week ban, but that’s not good enough, so they passed aa six week ban, and still looking for more. They don’t seem to have the prespective to see that they are becoming what they fear from Islam…
The rhetoric that Republicans are pro life because they want stop women from the legal right to make a choice is a prime example of how they win the argument by defining the rules of the language we speak when we have political discussions.
The Republicans are not pro life. They have no desire to educate, feed, or give health care to children who are poor or on the margins economically.
What the Republicans are is pro Handmaids Tale.
This is their ideal society: Groups of heavily armed men in charge absolutely enforcing their version of the Bible while neutralizing anyone who disagrees with them, through violence and brute force. That is by no means pro life, and we should always work to highlight this abortion of our language, this rape of political phrasing that cedes them the upper ground. Every time that phrase gets uttered by a talking head on TV, it should be vehemently challenged as an insult.
I would love for states to start requiring reasonable forecasts for legal costs be included in the budget for all bills and tracked for those that pass. Shine some light on how much is actually wasted by this stuff.
Not just wasted but what other services, agency, functions does the state cut so to pay to defend the law suits.
I’ve long wondered how many abortions drump paid for.
These folks pretend that they are pro-life. What they really are is pro-forced birth … and after that? "You’re on your own kiddo. Now get out of here and take your mooching mother with you - you’re beginning to annoy me … "
How exactly can Democrats blow being opposed to what this woman-hating governor is planning on doing to women? We’re talking about a blow to women’s health first and foremost, it’s not simply one more political maneuver.
I would bet many!