Lex Anteinternet: The Governor Certifies the Trigger Law on Abortion.: We ran this, this morning: Lex Anteinternet: Thursday, July 21, 2022. The AG reports on Dobbs : Today In Wyoming's History: July 21 : ...
And the lawsuit, as we predicted, was filed.
This is a cautionary tale, if ever there was one.
Back during the Obama Administration, in a fit of right wing upsettedness and paranoia, Wyoming amended its constitution as follows.
Artice 1, Section 38.
Right of health care access
(a) Each competent adult shall have the right to make his or her own health care decisions. The parent, guardian or legal representative of any other natural person shall have the right to make health care decisions for that person.
(b) Any person may pay, and a health care provider may accept, direct payment for health care without imposition of penalties or fines for doing so.
(c) The legislature may determine reasonable and necessary restrictions on the rights granted under this section to protect the health and general welfare of the people or to accomplish the other purposes set forth in the Wyoming Constitution.
(d) The state of Wyoming shall act to preserve these rights from undue governmental infringement.
You'll recall, of course, when "Obamacare" was new, and before Americans had acclimated themselves so much to it that it could not be repealed, the Republican Party was full of stories about how government panels were going to make your health care decisions for you, like it or not. This inspired early Tea Party type movements to address this, this being one of them.
Of course, the amendment goes largely unused and in spite of quite a bit of debate on masks and quarantines during the height of the pandemic, the amendment has sat dormant until now, when it was predictably noticed.
So now this is on a trip to the Wyoming Supreme Court. Some judge is going to be asked to stay the new law until the Supreme Court can rule on it, a nightmare for whomever is tasked with this, and this isn't going to be pleasant for the Wyoming Supreme Court either. As a hot button issue in really polarized times, no matter what they do will make somebody really angry.
In my view, abortion isn't "health care" per se, and so this amendment ought not to apply. That will really upset people who place it in the health care category, but it really isn't. I hold the same view, fwiw, of cosmetic surgery for "beauty" purposes. Not to compare the two, but by example getting bigger boobs isn't a health care decision. Abortion for avoidance of a natural biologic process isn't either, at least until you get into the topic of the physical life of the mother.
I can't help but note, however, how this right wing constitutional amendment has now swung around as a leftward one. So now the article is being used by the left against the right. And there are other ways the same article could be. If a legislature, for example, determines to address transgender surgery or treatment with pharmaceuticals, which I'd guess some legislators would like to do, can they?
1 comment:
I find your insights sharp and illuminating, always worth reading and thinking about. Yet then there is this: "In my view, abortion isn't 'health care' per se…"
There is no arguing with the preface, "In my view." Your view is your view. But you go on to say, "Abortion for avoidance of a natural biologic process isn't either," "either" meaning, I take it, "health" or "care." Certainly, we seek remedies for any number of biological processes that are far from life threatening. Is that fatuousness on my part? No less, despite your rather weak qualifier, than comparing abortion to "boob" enhancement.
The question goes to what the nature of a fetus is in relation to the woman who is carrying it. Is it at one extreme, human life from the moment of conception–and in the prohibitions against artificial contraception, even in the potential of life–or does it not become human until expelled from the womb? With that, it is–I won't even say, "perhaps"–the most dreadful question we face these days, and one, regrettably, not being looked at with sufficient gravity by enough of us.
As war is too important to be left to the generals, the moral, ethical, legal, and eschatological understanding of what constitutes the human is too portentous a matter to leave to the absolutes of judges, lawyers, politicians, theologians, or commentators. Where that leaves the human race is the longest question.
Tom
Sheridan, WY
Post a Comment