• zifnab25 [he/him, any]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    801 year ago

    My sister has the option of offices to work for in her next rotation. She’d been planning to move back to Houston to live near her family. However, she recently changed her mind, explicitly because - and I quote - “I want to have more children, and I can’t do that safely in Texas”.

    That’s the real ultimate consequence of this shit.

  • nightshade [they/them]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    791 year ago

    The same people think that public transit and walkable city design are literally 1984 because the government will use them to control where you can go.

  • regul [any]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    501 year ago

    get ready for a 6-3 reinterpretation of the commerce clause, baybee

  • sovietknuckles [they/them]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    48
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    yeonmi-park In North Korea, getting healthcare is illegal, and if you’re on a highway but headed in the direction of healthcare, they throw you in jail

  • somename [she/her]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    321 year ago

    How do you even enforce this law? Like, I know shit like this is selectively applied, but even then, like, this would be so difficult to apply. Unless they’re just going to ban pregnant people in general from driving?

    • 7bicycles [he/him]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      321 year ago

      One must imagine this works like the “Are you a terrorist” immigration question in the US where it’s just there to punish you more severely after you got caught by whatever nightmare texas law allows someone to collect bounties by kidnapping women from abortion clinics or something

      • operacion_ogro [he/him]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        21
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Yes, it will 100% be used to retroactively punish women, I doubt they set up blockades scanning for pregnant people.

    • roux [he/him, they/them]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      251 year ago

      Something that was brought up in the meeting I was at last night is that neighbors gonna snitch. You see your neighbor is pregnant, then you see they are no longer pregnant after a long weekend out of town, in other words. Pearl clutching ensues.

      Now realistically most people that seek abortions aren’t even showing at the time they decide to terminate the pregnancy so yeah the whole fucking thing is stupid.

      I’m no anatomy knower but I can see this backfiring on people who suffer from miscarriages after they are showing that they are carrying baby weight though since the panhandle is extremely religious and conservative.

    • Evilphd666 [he/him, comrade/them]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      191 year ago

      They find out who had an abortion and then “build a case” backwards from there. Like slapping using a computer to commit a crime. Like who doesn’t use a computer to do basic tasks in society. But it’s just a punishment multiplier.

      How could it hold up in court who knows, but until that’s challenged those people remain in jail.

    • Frank [he/him, he/him]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      151 year ago

      It’s partially a chilling effect thing, partially a threat, and partially the state has very invasive surveillance.

      they’re just going to ban pregnant people in general from driving?

      No. No. Your lathe-of-heaven Lathe access is cut off!

    • VILenin [he/him]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      151 year ago

      Texas women prohibited from leaving the house without a male relative, whether pregnant or not.

    • @timicin@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      151 year ago

      the law is there to add leverage for the state for when they start catching and charging people for getting abortions out of state

    • supafuzz [comrade/them]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      101 year ago

      station officers outside of abortion clinics in neighboring states looking for TX plates and have them phone APBs home

    • Yeah, it would be so difficult to apply in a fair and reasonable way. Who knows what’s next? All suspected uterus-havers on house arrest in case they get pregnant? Shit’s bad. They’re also building a wall across the entire US-Mexico border. It’s not just to keep immigrants out, it’s to keep capital’s “breeding stock” in trapped in the united states. Bad things are happening and it’s going to get worse.

    • the_post_of_tom_joad [any, any]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      51 year ago

      How do you even enforce this law?

      Well on its own you probably can’t but a couple more laws, ip address warrants and/or tech advancement could make this very scary for women very quickly, and that’s not even thinking hard on it

  • Dolores [love/loves]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    251 year ago

    i know i shouldn’t use reddit as a serious heuristic but its easier than turning on cable news for an hour, but lately it seems like all the texas border shit & reproductive rights stuff is all being quietly swept under the rug for house speaker circuses & trump prosecution circuses.

    i mean this article isn’t even on the front page of the paper that published it. it really feels like there’s a concerted redirection from the things the dems are willing to go along with domestically (that their constituents have voted to oppose) to dog-and-pony shows in DC that don’t materially change anything

    • fox [comrade/them]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      51 year ago

      I tell ya the lathe emote at phone resolution really looks like Vince Gilligan putting a burger king crown on Will Ferrell

  • InevitableSwing [none/use name]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    191 year ago

    Eventually the GOP justices on the supreme court will issue a “surprising” ruling that somehow makes this sort of clearly unconstitutional stuff legal.