MA: Amendment to the Mideast Abortion Statute II (Statute)

[afleitch]

Seems like a lot of effort being put in to legislate a 'trigger' bill.

[afleitch]

Seems like a lot of effort being put in to legislate a 'trigger' bill.

This is not a trigger bill. Indeed, I said during the debate I would like to go further and outlaw abortions in every case but I understand that such a proposal would have a harder time being passed. Thus, I don't currently intend to propose another piece of legislation on the issue of abortion if this gets passed and can be ratified. (Actually, I originally said the "rape issue" can be handled at a later point in time but, in hindsight, that was probably mere wishful thinking).

I mean that, as is my understanding, Atlasia 'replaced' the USA for the purposes of the game in 2004; all laws and court decisions remain active and presumably; Roe v Wade included. I had always viewed abortion legislation passed by the regions as 'trigger' bills to be enacted should Roe v Wade fall.

[afleitch]

How can Roe v. Wade stand if it was decided based on a constitution we no longer have in effect?

That is ultimately the question; what status do these rulings, alongside rulings made under the First and Second Constitutions have. All were modeled on the US Constitution.

This is in part answered by Article VIII of the Second Constitution which confirmed;

"All Legislation and Judicial Rulings not inconsistent with this Constitution passed prior to the Adoption of this Constitution shall remain in full force, unless superceded by subsequent legislation or Judicial Rulings."

This language was retained in Article VIII of the Third Constitution

'Prior' would include rulings determined under the US Constitution as in terms of Atlasia, we are considered a successor to the USA. Indeed, the legislative process refers to many US laws (Civil Rights Act etc) as being 'in force' as well as to laws created to replace or supplant US laws that were previously in force. Even Court judgements refer to US law and US legal precedent.

I have always considered therefore, and indeed it makes sense from a game viewpoint that all existing US law and legal decision was 'carried over' to Atlasia and this would include Roe vs Wade

[afleitch]

I think the Second Abortion Statute would go against Roe v Wade already.

That's in part why I tried to overturn it in February to re-instate the First Trimester condition.

[afleitch]

You're acting like a bunch of Francoists, folks. Any way for the people to repeal this affront to freedom?

It's unconstitutional. Roe v Wade still stands and if the Governor signs it, I will challenge it on that basis.

[afleitch]

You're acting like a bunch of Francoists, folks. Any way for the people to repeal this affront to freedom?

It's unconstitutional. Roe v Wade still stands and if the Governor signs it, I will challenge it on that basis.

This may open a big can of worms. If we start scanning each and every bill which has ever been passed in any Atlasian region by applying the criterion whether a certain bill may violate rulings made by a US court before the year 2004, we might find that many bills are actually "uncostitutional" in that sense.

It is clear in the Constitution that those rulings are carried through into Atlasia and the wording of our constitution reflects the judicial ruling (right to privacy under due process) that 'legalised' abortion.

[afleitch]

You're acting like a bunch of Francoists, folks. Any way for the people to repeal this affront to freedom?

It's unconstitutional. Roe v Wade still stands and if the Governor signs it, I will challenge it on that basis.

This may open a big can of worms. If we start scanning each and every bill which has ever been passed in any Atlasian region by applying the criterion whether a certain bill may violate rulings made by a US court before the year 2004, we might find that many bills are actually "uncostitutional" in that sense.

It is clear in the Constitution that those rulings are carried through into Atlasia and the wording of our constitution reflects the judicial ruling (right to privacy under due process) that 'legalised' abortion.

I don't necessarily challenge your interpretation of the matter. My point is that if we had a look at Atlasian bills passed in the past, we could find plenty of cases where US rulings could interfere with Atlasian legislation. It's not that I have actually done that, but I imagine that this could be the case. And this is the "can of worms" I was alluding to. Matters could become extremely complex and tedious.

The constitutional basis (right to privacy/due process) for Roe v Wade exists within the existing constitution. Any judicial ruling would probably be very concise as a result. If a regional assembly were to enact a law that violated Brown v the Board of Education it would be so apparent it wouldn't take much legal wrangling to strike it down. The same is true of any bill that contradicts Roe v Wade.

If the bill is passed and signed, then it sits on our books as an example of unconstitutional legislation. Abortion will still be permitted in the Region therefore the bill is nothing more than a 'trigger bill', but it is so strict and so much of an affront to both women and to the scientific secular debate concerning the beginning of 'personhood' that it has no place on the books at all.

[afleitch]

If the bill is challenged and overturned, we are going to introduce a bill which will bypass Roe v. Wade. We will follow the path the Kansas State Legislature has shown us with their bill that establishes heavy restrictions for abortion clinics. I am confident that we'll be successful.

Is that the Kansas bill that was blocked by the court in July?

[afleitch]

If the bill is challenged and overturned, we are going to introduce a bill which will bypass Roe v. Wade. We will follow the path the Kansas State Legislature has shown us with their bill that establishes heavy restrictions for abortion clinics. I am confident that we'll be successful.

Is that the Kansas bill that was blocked by the court in July?

Yes. The bill is currently blocked, but the last word has not been spoken yet.

I'll follow it closely then and may challenge your proposed law on the same basis.