Ostensibly exploring the practice of law before the internet. Heck, before good highways for that matter.
Thursday, April 18, 2024
Tuesday, April 2, 2024
Lex Anteinternet: Hurling invectives.
We published this on March 31:
Lex Anteinternet: Hurling invectives.: This may seem like a strange thing to put up for Easter Morning, but maybe it isn't. One of our major elected office holders in this sta...
Today, the Tribune has a very similar article by a Wyoming poet laureate, entitled:
What we say when we speak
Sunday, February 18, 2024
Legislatures. Back to the future and other diversions?
Former Wyoming Legislator Tom Lubnau, who was truly one of the great ones in the old school Wyoming way, has taken up writing columns for The Cowboy State Daily. That's to the CSD's credit and shows its effort to become a real electronic journal, something that's impressive considering it was set up as a right wing organ. Lubnau is a conservative Wyoming Republican, but a conservative Wyoming Republican, something that's becoming increasingly rare.
Or maybe not.
He's not afraid of poking at the wolverine.
He recently wrote this interesting item:
Tom Lubnau: Legislating Private Parts Is Popular This Legislative Session
This op ed is written from the point of view that virtually defined Wyoming Republicans for my whole adult life, up until the Obama/Trump Era, when things began to get really radical in the legislature.
His article is illuminating and I'm linking it in for several reasons.
One of those is that Lubnau give a really nice discussion of the law as it used to be, on some of the same topics that I addressed here:
Until Death Do Us Part. Divorce and Related Domestic Law. Late 19th/Early 20th Century, Mid 20th Century, Late 20th/Early 21st Century. An example of the old law, and the old customs, being infinately superior to the current ones and a call to return to them.
It seems, now, there is a trend to sponsor legislation to invite the State of Wyoming back into the bedroom.One has to wonder if regulating bedroom conduct is the pressing issue of the day, or if there is some other motive such as creating a campaign issue for the election season, that is driving the legislation. In other words, how many people do you meet every day whose biggest concern is lack of regulation of private parts?
HOUSE BILL NO. HB0068Obscenity-impartial conformance.Sponsored by: Representative(s) Hornok, Angelos, Bear, Neiman, Ottman, Pendergraft, Penn, Rodriguez-Williams, Strock, Trujillo and Ward and Senator(s) IdeA BILLforAN ACT relating to crimes and offenses; repealing an exception to the crime of promoting obscenity regarding possessing obscene materials for specified bona fide educational purposes; and providing for an effective date.Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Wyoming:Section 1. W.S. 6-4-302(c)(ii) is repealed.Section 2. This act is effective July 1, 2025.
And:
HOUSE BILL NO. HB0088
Public display of obscene material.
Sponsored by: Representative(s) Ottman, Davis, Hornok, Penn and Strock
A BILL
for
AN ACT relating to crimes and offenses; prohibiting public communication of obscene material; providing a definition; and providing for an effective date.
Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Wyoming:
Section 1. W.S. 6‑4‑301(a) by creating a new paragraph (vi) and 6‑4‑302(a)(iii) are amended to read:
6‑4‑301. Definitions.
(a) As used in this article:
(vi) "Publicly communicate" means to display, post, exhibit, give away or vocalize material in such a way that the material may be readily and distinctly perceived by the public at large by normal unaided vision or hearing.
6‑4‑302. Promoting obscenity; penalties.
(a) A person commits the crime of promoting obscenity if he:
(iii) Knowingly disseminates or publicly communicates obscene material.
Section 2. This act is effective July 1, 2024.
§ 5808. Attempted miscarriage.
Whoever prescribes or administers to any pregnant woman, or to any woman whom he supposes to be preg- nant , any drug , medicine , or substance whatever, with intent thereby to procure a miscarriage of such woman ; or with like intent uses any instrument or means whatever, unless such miscarriage is necessary to preserve her life, shall if the woman miscarries or dies in consequence thereof , be imprisoned in the penitentiary not more than fourteen years .
§ 5809. Woman soliciting miscarriage . Every woman who shall so- licit of any person any medicine , drug or substance or thing whatever , and shall take the same , or shall submit to any operation or other means whatever , with intent thereby to procure a miscarriage (except when necessary for the purpose of saving the life of the mother or child), shall be fined not more than five hundred dollars and imprisoned in the county jail not more than six months ; and any person who , in any manner whatever, unlawfully aids or assists any such woman to a violation of this section , shall be liable to the same penalty.
Would the legislature of today go that far? Again, this is clearly unconstitutional under the current law, and it would in fact outlaw homosexual conduct, as well as a bunch of non-homosexual conduct. Presumably no modern legislature would be comfortable with what the pre 1970s Wyoming legislature, and pre 1970s Wyoming society, was in this era. Probably nobody ought to be, as this is really invasive.
§ 3951. Remarriage prohibited within one year .
During the period of one year from the granting of a decree of divorce , neither party thereto shall be permitted to remarry to any other person . Any person violating the provisions of this section shall be deemed guilty of a mis- demeanor , and shall be fined in any sum not less than twenty - five dollars nor more than one hundred dollars , or be imprisoned in the county jail not exceeding three months , in the discretion of the court.
§ 3924. Causes for divorce .A divorce from the bonds of matrimony may be decreed by the district court of the county where the parties , or one of them reside , on the application of the aggrieved party by petition , in either of the following.cases :First - When adultery has been committed by any husband or wife .Second - When one of the parties was physically incompetent at the time of the marriage , and the same has continued to the time of the divorce .Third - When one of the parties has been convicted of a felony and sentenced to imprisonment therefor in any prison , and no pardon granted , after a divorce for that cause, shall restore such party to his or her conjugal rights .Fourth - When either party has wilfully deserted the other for the term of one year .Fifth - When the husband or wife shall have become an habitual drunkard .Sixth - When one of the parties has been guilty of extreme cruelty to the other .Seventh - When the husband for the period of one year , has negected to provide the common necessaries of life , when such neglect is not the result of poverty, on the part of the husband, which he could not avoid by ordinary industry .Eighth - When either party shall offer such indignities to the other , as shall render his or her condition intolerable .Ninth - When the husband shall be guilty of such conduct as to constitute him a vagrant within the meaning of the law respecting vag- rancy .Tenth - When prior to the contract of marriage or the solemnization thereof, either party shall have been convicted of a felony or infamous crime in any state , territory or county without knowledge on the part of the other party of such fact at the time of such marriage . Eleventh - When the intended wife at the time of contracting mariage, or at the time of the solemnization thereof shall have been pregnant by any other man than her intended husband and without his knowledge at the time of such solemnization . [ R. S. 1887 , § 1571 ; R. S. 1899 , § 2988. ]
Evidence was required:
§ 3947. Corroborating evidence required .
No decree of divorce, and of the nullity of a marriage, shall be made solely on the declara- tions , confessions or admissions of the parties , but the court shall in all cases require other evidence in its nature corroborative of such declarations , concessions or admissions . [ R. S. 1887 , § 1597 ; R. S. 1899 , § 3011. ]
§ 3948. Proof of adultery insufficient when .
In any action brought for divorce on the ground of adultery , although the fact of adultery be established , the court may deny a divorce in the following cases:
First - When the offense shall appear to have been committed by the procurement , or with the connivance of the plaintiff .
Second - When the offense charged shall have been forgiven by the injured party and such forgiveness shall be proved by express proof , or by the voluntary cohabitation of the parties with the knowledge of the offense .
Third - When there shall have been no express forgiveness and no voluntary cohabitation of the parties but the action shall not have been brought within three years after discovery by the plaintiff of the of fense charged . [ R. S. 1887 , § 1598 ; R. S. 1899 , § 3012. ]
Wednesday, January 3, 2024
The 2024 Election, Part X. Your money where your mouth is edition, sort of?
The last edition started wiping out everything on the front page for some glitchy computer reason, and was hard to post in. So, already on to a new one, with which we start with this interesting item:
November 21, 2023
But there happen to be better numbers than the ones Cohn and his prophesizing colleagues are citing. And they show Biden well ahead. The prediction markets for elections — essentially investors putting money on candidates — has a Biden win trading at 43 cents, which implies a 43% chance of victory, according to the Financial Times. Trump is trailing at 37 cents, while the other candidates are long shots.
What might make these markets a better indication of the candidates’ prospects than those political polls? For one thing, they have a better record of accurately predicting the winner.PredictIt is currently the biggest legal site for political-prediction trading in this country.
A smaller political predictions market is Iowa Electronic Markets, at the University of Iowa. Like PredictIt, the Iowa market operates under the academic exception made by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). PredictIt works in a nonprofit arrangement with Victoria University in New Zealand.
The Financial Times sets forth the argument made by PredictIt founder John Aristotle Phillips that “prediction markets are a truth generator, powered by the invisible hand. ... If you trade based on fake news or half-baked punditry, you’re going to lose your money.”
From Harrop: Actually, Biden is ‘polling’ really well in the markets.
Whose running, check the last edition, it hasn't changed.
Breaking tradition and protocol, Speaker of the House Johnson has endorsed Trump.
November 23, 2023
November 28, 2023
Koch-backed super PAC Americans for Prosperity Action endorsed Nikki Haley.
December 4, 2023
Mysterious mailers attack Wyoming lawmakers, prompt investigation
On a different note, one of the panel members on This Week came absolutely unglued at the argument that Trump is a threat to democracy.
Now, frankly, I think Trump is a threat to democracy.
However, the commentator's point was a good one, which was that the Democrats don't believe that. His argument was that if they did, they wouldn't be fielding Biden.
Now, I think many Democrats are correct that Trump is very much a threat to democracy, but it is hard to ignore the fact that it's hard to believe their sincerity in the argument when they only think they're will got five voters is a warmed over Cup of Joe. People keep asking to see the menu, but the waitress just asks, "can I reheat that cup for you?"
Not only that, I'd note, but at the same time that Democrats are arguing that Trump is a threat to democracy, they're also arguing that all third party choices must not be considered.
Eh?
Um, in a functioning democracy they would be considered.
Of course, the reason for that is, to extend the analogy above, you might walk across the street and look at somebody else's menu. "Hmmm. . . I think I've had enough of this coffeee, do you want to walk across the street and get some ice cream?" What? What, are you crazy? Ice Cream will make you fat! Let me reheat that for you.
December 5, 2023
Doug Burgum has dropped out of the Republican contest.
While other candidates do remain, basically this race is down this Haley, DeSantis, Trump and Christie, with it appearing increasingly unlikely that Christie has a chance.
December 6, 2023
Criminal Defendant Donald Trump, in an interview with Sean Hannity, stated:
I love this guy. He says, 'You’You’re not going to be a dictator, are you?' I said, 'No, no, no. Other than Day One.' We’re closing the border, and we’re drilling, drilling, drilling. After that, I’m not a dictator.
So, contrary to the headlines, Trump in fact confirmed that he'd act like a dictator, but confined it to a single day, which gets back to his delusional comments that anything can be done in a day.
President Biden indicated he likely wouldn't be running again, but for Trump, in which case he should not be running, as most Democrats don't want him to be and it looks like he'll lose to Trump.
Liz Cheney is hinting that she may run for the Presidency as a third party candidate.
December 17, 2023
Drawing his lines clearer than ever, Donald Trump unleashed a series of far right dog whistles this past week, including those that recall strongly racist and fascists elements. To start with, regarding immigration:
TRUMP: No, nobody has ever seen anything like this. And I think we could say worldwide. I think you could go to the... you could go to a banana republic and pick the worst one, and you're not going to see what we're witnessing now. No control whatsoever. Nobody has any idea where these people are coming from, and we know they come from prisons. We know they come from mental institutions. . . insane asylums. We know they're terrorists. Nobody has ever seen anything like we're witnessing right now. It is a very sad thing for our country. It's poisoning the blood of our country. It's so bad, and people are coming in with disease. People are coming in with every possible thing that you could have. And I got to know a lot of the heads of these countries. They're very cunning people. Very street-smart people. If they're not street-smart, they're not going to be there very long. And when they send up those caravans, and I had it ended, we had the safest border in the history of our country, meaning the history, over the last 80 years. Before that, I assume it was probably not so bad. There was nobody around. But, we had the safest in recorded history by far. The least amount of drugs in many, many decades. The least amount of human trafficking, which is a tremendous problem. But, when you look at what's taking place now, nobody's... first of all, it's not sustainable by any country, including ours, even from a (inaudible) standpoint. And, you know, we built over 500 miles of wall. We were going to put up another 200 miles. And, we had it bought. Everything was bought. Everything was purchased. They were going to ready. It could have been done within three weeks. Another 200 miles, all done. And they didn't want to do it. When you look at the numbers of people coming in, and the numbers, Raheem, are much bigger than anyone understands. I really believe it's going to be 15 million people by the end of this year during this administration. That's larger than New York state. Ok, this is what we have.1 2
Trump also stated that immigrants would be subjected to stout entry testing, including determining if they agree with "our religion".
And now Donald Trump has stated this at a campaign rally:
I’ll implement strong ideological screening of all immigrants…If you don’t like our religion…then we don’t want you in our country.
One Twitter commentator that I follow stated that this was the most anti-American statement he could imagine, but it really isn't. It's a very Southern populist viewpoint, of the type that we haven't seen openly from the 1960s and which most people believed was behind us.
This is ample evidence of how a genuine problem, the absurdly high level of immigration, legal and illegal, that has existed in the country for decades now, but which has been consistently ignored, has festered in the rust belt and populist populations. It could have been addressed in an equitable fashion before, but now it's threatening to breakout in a really malevolent fashion. This issue alone may end up defeating Biden, and we should take Trump fully at his word in what he intends to do.
The citation to religion, we'd note, is ironic, as Trump is not a religious man in any fashion, which again demonstrates the extent to which Southern Cultural Christianity has crept into the GOP, and particularly the New Apostolic Reformation movement. Apostolic Christianity and Judaism are full of Biblical injunctions that immigrants are to be welcomed, something that has long made conservative American Catholics uncomfortable. But this approach that Trump has now adopted is radical in pledging a religious test for entry, something that has never existed in the country's history. This too has been a smoldering cultural problem, although it's camouflaged here. Prior to Ted Kennedy's redrafting of American immigration, US immigration policy strongly favored immigrant pools that reflected existing American demographics. His reforms, adopted by Congress, changed that, and many have been uncomfortable with those changes, and this is again erupting in a malevolent fashion.
Trump also quoted Vladimir Putin about Joe Biden being a threat to democracy, which is absurd, but which again demonstrates the very weird Putin/Trump connection which has never been fully explored.
The truly scary thing here is that we seem to have gone over a tipping point where these views aren't shied away from, they're being endorsed by large segments of American society.
Footnotes:
1. Once again, I'm left amazed by some of the ignorance and weirdness in Trump's speech. The repetitious childishness of his speech patterns, and in this case prior to "80 years ago" "there was nobody around".
Trump just isn't right. Why is this being ignored?
2. Some have noted that the "poisoning the blood" language recalls Mein Kampf. In fact, it does. Hitler uses that line repeatedly, for example:
Unfortunately the German national being is not based on a uniform racial type. The process of welding the original elements together has not gone so far as to warrant us in saying that a new race has emerged. On the contrary, the poison which has invaded the national body, especially since the Thirty Years' War, has destroyed the uniform constitution not only of our blood but also of our national soul. The open frontiers of our native country, the association with non-German foreign elements in the territories that lie all along those frontiers, and especially the strong influx of foreign blood into the interior of the Reich itself, has prevented any complete assimilation of those various elements, because the influx has continued steadily.
The religious test quote Trump made, makes a person wonder if he's genuinely holding views of this type, although his language recalls anti desegregation Southern whites more strongly in my view.
December 20, 2023
The Supreme Court of Colorado, just as we predicted, has disqualified Donald J. Trump from appearing on the Colorado ballot.
Under the doctrine of full faith and credit, every state is now legally obligated to do the same, or at least give serious weight to Colorado’s decision. At least some other states will follow this route and as some, like Wyoming, will decry it, it will head to the United States Supreme Court. I’ll predict right now that the U.S. Supreme Court will uphold the Colorado decision, putting an end, although a precariously late one, to Trump as a candidate.
December 28, 2023
The case noted above has been appealed by the Colorado GOP to the United States Supreme Court, while at the same time, a similar effort in Michigan has failed to take Trump off of that state's ballot.
Should the U.S. Supreme Court take this matter up, which the Trump lawyers also say they will seek, it will prove to be an error and likely end up removing Trump from the race entirely.
Regarding Colorado, a surprise move by Lauren Boebert:
In a true Colorado political surprise, U.S. Rep. Lauren Boebert announced Wednesday night that she will abandon the congressional district she has represented for nearly three years — and seek her party’s nomination in 2024 on the other end of the state.
Boebert said she will run to represent Colorado’s 4th Congressional District, vying to succeed retiring U.S. Rep. Ken Buck, a fellow Republican.
“Personally, this announcement is a fresh start following a difficult year for me and my family,” Boebert said in a video announcement on Facebook. “I will not allow dark money that is directed at destroying me to steal this seat. It’s not fair to the 3rd District and the conservatives there who have fought so hard for our victories, of which I’m incredibly grateful.”
Boebert must be in real political trouble in her district to attempt this move, which very well may fail. She's going to have to relocate to get on the ballot, and presumably she'll have to resign her current seat when she does.
cont:
Colorado Supreme Court Ruling in Anderson v. Griswold Appealed to U.S. Supreme Court
Denver, December 28, 2023 - The Colorado Republican Party has appealed the Colorado Supreme Court’s decision in Anderson v. Griswold to the U.S. Supreme Court. With the appeal filed, Donald Trump will be included as a candidate on Colorado’s 2024 Presidential Primary Ballot when certification occurs on January 5, 2024, unless the U.S. Supreme Court declines to take the case or otherwise affirms the Colorado Supreme Court ruling.
Secretary of State Griswold has commented: “Donald Trump engaged in insurrection and was disqualified under the Constitution from the Colorado Ballot. The Colorado Supreme Court got it right. This decision is now being appealed. I urge the U.S. Supreme Court to act quickly given the upcoming presidential primary election.”
On December 19, the Colorado Supreme Court ruled Donald Trump is ineligible to appear on the Colorado 2024 Presidential Primary Ballot due to the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The Colorado Supreme Court simultaneously stayed that ruling until January 4, with that stay remaining in place in the event of an appeal.
Key Upcoming Dates:
- January 5: Deadline for Secretary of State Griswold to certify the names and party affiliations of candidates on the 2024 Presidential Primary Ballot.
- January 5: U.S. Supreme Court conference day
- January 20: Deadline for 2024 Presidential Primary Ballots to be sent to military and overseas voters.
- February 12: First day 2024 Presidential Primary Ballots can be mailed to active registered voters.
- February 26: First day of in-person voting for the 2024 President Primary.
- March 5: Colorado 2024 Presidential Primary Day, polls close at 7:00 PM Mountain Time.
cont:
January 3, 2024.
Donald Trump's is appealing the ruling of the Secretary of State that Trump cannot stand for election under the 14th Amendment.
Last Edition:
The 2024 Election, Part IX. The Biggest Danger To The World Edition.
Thursday, December 28, 2023
The Post Insurrection. Part VII. The Insurrectionist.
August 3, 2023
No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.
Fourteenth Amendment, Section 3.
Called for a Federal takeover?
The defendant will have some sort of initial appearance in court today on the latest charges.
August 15, 2023
Trump Indicted In Georgia
Make no mistake about it, this Georgia indictment is far more serious trouble for Trump than anything that came before it.
He will be convicted.
He cannot pardon himself (he can't anyway, but he'd try) for State crimes.
It's likely that he's going to go to prison. If convicted, he will be ineligible to serve as President. It will spark a Constitutional crisis, as he's already shown that he'll try to disregard the Constitution and his followers will as well.
It will go, in that scenario, if he were to be elected, to the Supreme Court.
The Court will rule him ineligible. It will have to, in part because he will be, and in part because if it does not, it will destroy the Court.
A normal person, including a normal politician, wouldn't put the country through this.
August 16, 2023
But Trump, as we know, is not normal.
One thing I'm glad to see about the Georgia indictment is lawyers included in it. As a lawyer, the entire Trump episode has really drug the profession into the mud, if I'm to put it politely, and that includes the lawyers currently defending him.
Everyone has a right to a defense, but that doesn't justify a lawyer taking any defense. Right now, Trump would be best served by lawyers who were telling him to negotiate, not defend, and so would the nation. Instead, he'll fight it out and the lawyers who are providing him with a defense will go home with a tidy sum, probably, fate the nation irrespective.
That this earlier collection may serve time is a good thing.
August 23, 2023
Another weird blathering from the former President.
August 23, 2023
John Eastman, who traded his role as a law professor to being an advisor with a crackpot legal theory in Trump's effort to subvert the vote, surrendered to Fulton County authorities.
It's interesting in that he cited the right of attorneys to advise their clients as a defense. Attorneys do not have a right to advise their clients, but not with made up crap that justifies anything.
But that's exactly what attorneys in the US have been doing in some instances for years, and with impunity. If nothing else comes out of this, that this may have reached its limit is at least a good thing.
August 25, 2023
Booked in.
September 1, 2023
John Eastman and Rudy Giuliani are complaining about being indicted for giving legal advice.
Frankly, it's about time that lawyers giving batshit crazy legal advice bore some penalty for it, no matter how polished the crap may be.
Trump's trial in Georgia will be livestreamed, which I feel to be a mistake, quite frankly.
September 6, 2023
Trump has been found liable in the E. Jean Carroll defamation case, so when it proceeds to trial on January 15, the only issue will be damages.
September 9, 2023
DA Wills replied to Representative Jim Jordan, giving him a dope slap.
Regarding efforts to keep Trump off the ballot, the trial court in Colorado found that Trump did engage in insurrection, but that the office of the President was not included in "officers of the United States" to which the Fourteenth Amendment applies.
Colorado Supreme Court Ruling in Anderson v. Griswold Appealed to U.S. Supreme Court
Denver, December 28, 2023 - The Colorado Republican Party has appealed the Colorado Supreme Court’s decision in Anderson v. Griswold to the U.S. Supreme Court. With the appeal filed, Donald Trump will be included as a candidate on Colorado’s 2024 Presidential Primary Ballot when certification occurs on January 5, 2024, unless the U.S. Supreme Court declines to take the case or otherwise affirms the Colorado Supreme Court ruling.
Secretary of State Griswold has commented: “Donald Trump engaged in insurrection and was disqualified under the Constitution from the Colorado Ballot. The Colorado Supreme Court got it right. This decision is now being appealed. I urge the U.S. Supreme Court to act quickly given the upcoming presidential primary election.”
On December 19, the Colorado Supreme Court ruled Donald Trump is ineligible to appear on the Colorado 2024 Presidential Primary Ballot due to the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The Colorado Supreme Court simultaneously stayed that ruling until January 4, with that stay remaining in place in the event of an appeal.
Key Upcoming Dates:
- January 5: Deadline for Secretary of State Griswold to certify the names and party affiliations of candidates on the 2024 Presidential Primary Ballot.
- January 5: U.S. Supreme Court conference day
- January 20: Deadline for 2024 Presidential Primary Ballots to be sent to military and overseas voters.
- February 12: First day 2024 Presidential Primary Ballots can be mailed to active registered voters.
- February 26: First day of in-person voting for the 2024 President Primary.
- March 5: Colorado 2024 Presidential Primary Day, polls close at 7:00 PM Mountain Time.
The Post Insurrection. Part V. Wyoming politicians react to the Trump Indictment and pour another heartly glass of Trump flvored Kool Aid for the voters.
Wednesday, December 13, 2023
The golden ticket.
Robert Reich.
Which is exactly what's wrong with the Ivy League system (I'll omit MIT from that).
Which is also why, quite frankly, government, particularly the Court's, ought to go on a 30 year moratorium on hiring Ivy League grads.
Wednesday, June 28, 2023
Lex Anteinternet: Most of the time, the Supreme Court is highly predictable. The Independent State Legislature Theory bites the dust, as everyone knew it would.
And this is also why nobody thinks that the Court is going to adopt the "independent state legislature theory".
That'll probably be a nine to nothing ruling, in spite of people like Robert Reich running around the streets declaring that the sky is falling, and Justice Thomas is a baddy.
Friday, June 23, 2023
Owens signalling intent?
Ninth Judicial District Judge Melissa Owens expanded her series of injunctions to preclude prohibitions on abortion pills, indicating that there's a strong chance that the Plaintiffs may win in this case on the basis, she says, that abortion can be regarded as health care.
While its difficult for me to see how infanticide is health care, this is another reason to point out what we already did in this thread:
Lawsuit filed over Wyoming's abortion restriction law. . . and a cautionary tale.
As we then noted:
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?
We noted in another thread how the prime mover on this amendment noted that he'd feel awful if his amendment was interpreted in the fashion it now risks being, that person being a strong opponent of abortion. While I admire his stance in that regard, he should feel awful. His paranoia on a non problem has helped create a real one.