Only until the Reich-wing supreme court says it's not. Ditto with Brown, Obergefell, Griswold, Gideon, and the 13th, 14th, 15th and 19th Amendments. Then it'll reinstate Plessy and Dred Scott.
They don't come in size 0000000000 for my Chihuahua, so I'm glad I went through Vermont during August, but I keep telling people it was one of my favorite places so far out of like 30-ish states!
"...there is, like many other New England states, a particular sort of independent streak."
Or even more so. Let us not forget that before consenting to be annexed by the United States and being admitted to the Union as the 14th state, Vermont was an independent nation for exactly four years longer than Texas was. They also didn't separately fight for their independence and win against incompetent Mexicans, but the greatest Empire on the planet.
50+ years ago, my first question to my OB/GYN was who would he save if he had to make the choice--me or the child? If the doc says anything other than YOU, they're doing it wrong.
My further recollection is that under the Bushes, there was plenty of talk of national legislation, which might have led to anything from a general ban to a symbolic gesture. I would probably have backed the latter as readily as anything else. I suppose I started falling out with the party as it became clear nobody was really trying.
I am confused: when did the Supreme Court decide that all ERA ratifications have expired? I thought since Congress put a deadline on it, Congress can also remove it? As it has with at least one other amendment?
Also, Virginia, Illinois, & Nevada, with amicus from Michigan, is suing the Archivist David Ferriero (since 2009, appointed by Obama), with amicus from 5 states to support him, in order to compel him to finish the job of enacting the 28th amendment by writing it in. It must be written in by two years after the 38th state to ratify, Virginia on 1/27/20. He is refusing because the Office of Legal Council sent him a "don't you dare" memo in December 2020 (or maybe it was November?), then later, after Biden took office, the OLC sent another memo that I think was to tell the Archivist to ignore the first OLC memo, and Ferriero threw up his hands and said he won't do anything unless a court compels him to! The case will be appearing in the DC Circuit Court of Appeals.
I just sent a paper letter to my state's Attorney General saying remember the ladies! (Er, I asked that the state join VA in the suit with an amicus brief.) Hey Wonkettes/Wonketties/Wonkers, think about doing the same in YOUR states, even if your states are run by Republicans.
Also, my understanding is that, once a state ratifies a proposed amendment, it can't take it back, or constitutional amendments would exist in some weird limbo state, subject to fickle whims of state legislatures. So WV can fuck all the way off with that BS.
IANAL, so if you're a legal eagle, speak up with the corrections already.
Actually, it just depends on whether the 12(b)(6) is granted without prejudice, such as by poor pleading that fails to meet the Twombly/Iqbal standard, in which case the judge will usually give the plaintiff a deadline for filing an amended complaint. That would not be eligible for appeal because the remedy is to file an amended complaint that meets the required pleading standard.
OTOH, if the facts as alleged clearly show a claim upon which relief may not be granted, the 12(b)(6) would be granted with prejudice. For example, several times in my career I had Plaintiffs who tried to file Title VII discrimination claims against their supervisors, despite the fact the law clearly states that supervisors can’t be held individually liable - only the actual employer. If that were the only claim in the case, you could appeal it (and it would not be an interlocutory appeal, because the case would be terminated), although it would be pretty stupid to file an appeal over something that is settled law.
To be fair, I’ve only said they’ve already overturned Roe in Texas by allowing SB8 to take effect, even though they have explicitly said it yet.
But the bottom line is if (when) they officially overturn Roe, it will go back to being up to the individual states to determine whether and under what circumstances abortion will be legal in their specific state.
Abortion is legal in Massachusetts up to 24 weeks of pregnancy, and beyond 24 weeks in certain cases. People can obtain an abortion from a physician, physician assistant, nurse practitioner or nurse midwife. People who are less than 10 weeks pregnant can also access the abortion pill through telemedicine as part of a federal study that Massachusetts joined in January 2021.
Patients under the age of 16 are required to obtain parental consent, though a judge can excuse a young person from this rule.
Massachusetts has some of the widest access to abortion in the country, according to the Guttmacher Institute. Numerous other states have restrictions such as waiting periods, required counseling or ultrasounds, insurance restrictions, and regulations about the physical clinics and buildings where abortions can be performed — none of which apply in Massachusetts.
....
[If Roe v. Wade is overturned?] Abortion access would continue to be protected in Massachusetts.
In December 2020, the state legislature overrode a veto from Gov. Charlie Baker [Republican] and passed the ROE Act in anticipation of challenges to Roe v. Wade. The act strengthened access by allowing abortions after 24 weeks in certain cases to protect the health of the patient or if there is a fetal anomaly. The act also lowered the age that a person can obtain an abortion without parental consent to 16, from 18.
Only until the Reich-wing supreme court says it's not. Ditto with Brown, Obergefell, Griswold, Gideon, and the 13th, 14th, 15th and 19th Amendments. Then it'll reinstate Plessy and Dred Scott.
They don't come in size 0000000000 for my Chihuahua, so I'm glad I went through Vermont during August, but I keep telling people it was one of my favorite places so far out of like 30-ish states!
Plus it's slippery out there, what with all the freeze/thaw recently.
Mrs Mild went to a small private college in Vermont (starts with M) in the mid-late 70s. We'd go to homecoming weekend to visit her classmates.
I remember lots of barfing in the parking lot by lots of old white guys with lobster pants.
Looking at you Massachusetts
"...there is, like many other New England states, a particular sort of independent streak."
Or even more so. Let us not forget that before consenting to be annexed by the United States and being admitted to the Union as the 14th state, Vermont was an independent nation for exactly four years longer than Texas was. They also didn't separately fight for their independence and win against incompetent Mexicans, but the greatest Empire on the planet.
True.
OK, we're all moving to kansas.
50+ years ago, my first question to my OB/GYN was who would he save if he had to make the choice--me or the child? If the doc says anything other than YOU, they're doing it wrong.
My further recollection is that under the Bushes, there was plenty of talk of national legislation, which might have led to anything from a general ban to a symbolic gesture. I would probably have backed the latter as readily as anything else. I suppose I started falling out with the party as it became clear nobody was really trying.
I am confused: when did the Supreme Court decide that all ERA ratifications have expired? I thought since Congress put a deadline on it, Congress can also remove it? As it has with at least one other amendment?
Also, Virginia, Illinois, & Nevada, with amicus from Michigan, is suing the Archivist David Ferriero (since 2009, appointed by Obama), with amicus from 5 states to support him, in order to compel him to finish the job of enacting the 28th amendment by writing it in. It must be written in by two years after the 38th state to ratify, Virginia on 1/27/20. He is refusing because the Office of Legal Council sent him a "don't you dare" memo in December 2020 (or maybe it was November?), then later, after Biden took office, the OLC sent another memo that I think was to tell the Archivist to ignore the first OLC memo, and Ferriero threw up his hands and said he won't do anything unless a court compels him to! The case will be appearing in the DC Circuit Court of Appeals.
I just sent a paper letter to my state's Attorney General saying remember the ladies! (Er, I asked that the state join VA in the suit with an amicus brief.) Hey Wonkettes/Wonketties/Wonkers, think about doing the same in YOUR states, even if your states are run by Republicans.
Also, my understanding is that, once a state ratifies a proposed amendment, it can't take it back, or constitutional amendments would exist in some weird limbo state, subject to fickle whims of state legislatures. So WV can fuck all the way off with that BS.
IANAL, so if you're a legal eagle, speak up with the corrections already.
Actually, it just depends on whether the 12(b)(6) is granted without prejudice, such as by poor pleading that fails to meet the Twombly/Iqbal standard, in which case the judge will usually give the plaintiff a deadline for filing an amended complaint. That would not be eligible for appeal because the remedy is to file an amended complaint that meets the required pleading standard.
OTOH, if the facts as alleged clearly show a claim upon which relief may not be granted, the 12(b)(6) would be granted with prejudice. For example, several times in my career I had Plaintiffs who tried to file Title VII discrimination claims against their supervisors, despite the fact the law clearly states that supervisors can’t be held individually liable - only the actual employer. If that were the only claim in the case, you could appeal it (and it would not be an interlocutory appeal, because the case would be terminated), although it would be pretty stupid to file an appeal over something that is settled law.
To be fair, I’ve only said they’ve already overturned Roe in Texas by allowing SB8 to take effect, even though they have explicitly said it yet.
But the bottom line is if (when) they officially overturn Roe, it will go back to being up to the individual states to determine whether and under what circumstances abortion will be legal in their specific state.
Abortion is legal in Massachusetts up to 24 weeks of pregnancy, and beyond 24 weeks in certain cases. People can obtain an abortion from a physician, physician assistant, nurse practitioner or nurse midwife. People who are less than 10 weeks pregnant can also access the abortion pill through telemedicine as part of a federal study that Massachusetts joined in January 2021.
Patients under the age of 16 are required to obtain parental consent, though a judge can excuse a young person from this rule.
Massachusetts has some of the widest access to abortion in the country, according to the Guttmacher Institute. Numerous other states have restrictions such as waiting periods, required counseling or ultrasounds, insurance restrictions, and regulations about the physical clinics and buildings where abortions can be performed — none of which apply in Massachusetts.
....
[If Roe v. Wade is overturned?] Abortion access would continue to be protected in Massachusetts.
In December 2020, the state legislature overrode a veto from Gov. Charlie Baker [Republican] and passed the ROE Act in anticipation of challenges to Roe v. Wade. The act strengthened access by allowing abortions after 24 weeks in certain cases to protect the health of the patient or if there is a fetal anomaly. The act also lowered the age that a person can obtain an abortion without parental consent to 16, from 18.
Source: https://www.wgbh.org/news/l...
10 months of winter, 1 month of tough sleddin'
You will NOT find genuine maple syrup in a Waffle House