Barrett ‘shocked’ at ambiguity of Idaho argument
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 23 апр 2024
- During April 24 oral arguments, Justice Amy Coney Barrett expressed skepticism about whether doctors would have enough guidance under Idaho’s abortion law. Read more: wapo.st/3JT28pT. Subscribe to The Washington Post on RUclips: wapo.st/2QOdcqK
Follow us:
Twitter: / washingtonpost
Instagram: / washingtonpost
Facebook: / washingtonpost
![100 Days - [Minecraft Creative 2]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/OmogWsk_ZZg/mqdefault.jpg)
'prosecutorial discretion'= youre safe until we say youre not. cool cool cool.
IDAHO prosecutors : Do what you think is best for the patient but, ifthe current prosecutor or any prosecutor appointed during the statute of limitations you're in jeopardy of 2 to 5 years in prison.
@@reasonablegentleman exactly, and every woman on the court got what it meant for real women with failing pregnancy. It is unexpected, can be painful and scary, and involves grief and uncertainty, and only women, and especially so many women who want to be pregnant and want that baby have to face this!
EXACTLY!!
The goal is for things to be simultaneously illegal for some and legal for others
@@octosalias5785 Bingo!
Lawyers and politicians practicing medicine can only lead to tragedy!
Mr Turner said the quiet part out loud: "Doctors always have to be worried about being prosecuted, because the law puts it up to 'prosecutorial discretion'. At a minimum, the doctor will be investigated.
In UK, Australia, the gynaecologist and Obstetricians just stop doing anything controversial, problem solved. It's only those bleeding hearts who take things into their own hands will suffer.
@@josephwallis8965Not really. You're either ignorant or misogynist. Probably both.
@@josephwallis8965providing basic healthcare is being a “bleeding heart”? What a wild comment
"just stop doing anything controversial" is one of a solution of all time
@@josephwallis8965 that's why nearly 1 in 4 OB/GYNs have just up and left the state altogether and now resources for all pregnancies in Idaho are stretched thinner. Brilliant.
As a woman and mother Barrett should understand the ramifications of politicians making medical decisions for pregnant girls/ women. Let the doctors and women make the medical decisions!
Forgive me but reducing the act of terminating an unborn fetus to simply a medical decision makes the act seem trivial. It’s got to weigh heavy for those that go thru with it. It’s a complex life decision that can carry with it some long lasting effects on the soul. But agree that ladies need to make the decisions but can we have more respect for the gravity of the decision.
I agree, inprinciple, but we know how it ends: Parent Parenthood defending not giving medical attention to a baby to the shock of Democrats and proposals that legalize infanticide. I am not some Wako, if you don't know this I can link, including an analysis by a couple of feminist lawyers (they are married). Europe basically arrived, for the most part, to a consensus authorizing abortion with limits. Obama was partial to having a law, with limits as long as there were exceptions for the mother's health. Basically like most of the Western world, one recognizes that a 4-month fetus is no less or more a bunch of cells than you and me, and women autonomy, and you strike a balance.
@@dustinkwilliams Abortion is a heavy and traumatic act for everyone involved. Nobody is doing it for the kicks. And that's exactly why you and the politicians need to stay the f out of it.
Agreed but that’s not why she was appointed. The authoritarianism she was appointed to support is that of those that believe the government needs to approve and monitor your decisions.
You’re forgetting she comes from a culture where women have NEVER been free to make their own decisions.
Barrett didn't seemed "shocked" when she stated during her confirmation hearings that Roe v. Wade was settled law - then overturned it. Who's shocked?
Saying a precedent is 'settled' law does not mean that precedent should not be overturned. _Lochner v. New York_ was settled law. You could argue _Plessy v. Ferguson_ was settled law too. It was the law of the land for over half a century. That much is irrelevant.
In fact all of the justices appointed by W Bush and Trump said the same during their hearings. They’re all liars.
Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization was. 6 to 3 vote why is everyone so focused on Amy’s vote?
@dustinkwilliams The Devil's in the detail. Roberts would not have voted to end the federal right to abortion. The 6-3 vote was in favour of upholding Mississippi's law, but it was 5-4 to end the federal right to abortion along with upholding that law. Ruth Bader Ginsburg would probably have deprived the majority to overrule _Roe_ and _Casey_ in toto, but Amy Coney Barrett didn't.
So he’s saying it is up to the discretion of the prosecuting attorney and not the doctor, if the doctor risks being brought to court and risk conviction. That is outrageous.
Why would Barrett or anyone on the court think that any of these state legislatures give a crap about what happens to any woman?
Exactly I am curious why she suddenly cares? She is so pro abortion she would rather see a mom die than a baby who is dead inside the woman already be removed without being birthed first. She has no respect for women's choice or health and safety.
Including this administration.
Are you that worried about whether they "give a c_ _p" about the helpless baby? Yes-it is a BABY.
@@kathybrown7658
Yep, it's a baby. 👶
Naivety.
We will remember in November
This Idaho solicitor is such a slime ball in the way he's arguing this case.
Like Joe Biden being asked why open Mexican border, his answer is like a schizophrenic, like Bill Clinton, I did for compassion. What kind of compassion is that??
@@josephwallis8965OH, you're clearly also a lying racist!
Joseph, you forgot to mention like how Trump wanted a stronger border bill, and never bothered to pass a border bill in the your years he was POTUS. Then when the Republicans in the Senate wrote a border bill, he forced Johnson to not introduce it in the House because he wants Biden to look weak on immigration.
@@josephwallis8965 we don't have an open border. That's why that question is so nonsense. Ask a nonsense question, get a nonsense answer
No arguments from me ..
So Idaho doctors are supposed to perform medicine based on prosecutorial discretion?!
"Based on" would imply the doctors know what the boundaries are, they will not.
It will be an after the fact prosecution at the discretion of the prosecutor based on his/her believe/religious based values.
Trust me bro argument
This is an example of our Republicans here in Idaho. 🙄
it cuts both ways..all laws have discretion
@@johnnyllooddte3415precisely why no law should be making medical decisions illegal.
This is what everyone was telling you before you overturned Roe! We told you this is what would happen!
Leaving it to prosecutorial discretion is dangling the sword of Damocles , wherein freedom from prosecution comes down to a whim . Caveat practicioner .
She is responsible for all this chaos.
Yes, she is directly responsible.
You were responsible for the Cuban missile crisis. There, I've added another accusation without any sense or grounding in reality to your comment.
Good reply. 👍 @@bukka6697
No she isn't.
@@marylamb7707She was explicitly appointed to overturn Roe, and she carried on that promise. She was quite literally groomed to do just that.
YOU DID IT SO SHAME ON THE COURT FOR BEING INHUMANE TOWARDS THE WOMEN WHO NEEDS THE SERVICE
I'm not sure if this is generally true but I admire the way Barrett backed up Sotomayor. It demonstrates moments where the court works to interpret the law and not political bias.
Would seem more sincere if she had taken a minute and considered this very obvious issue before voting to give the decision to the government instead of individuals
I admire your magnanimity, but this justice is directly responsible for this abuse of our rights.
One woman 🚺,backing up another woman 🚺 you say? Nowadays that's called girl 👧 power 🔋! Get you some!
@@markberryhill2715 Lol
Coming from one of the same right wing judges that overturned RvW. 🤯
Anybody else think that the blood type of the Idaho attorney is Mormon?
Bingo...
Yup
See what you have unleashed
Gee, maybe 50 years of precedence really did mean something Amy. Here's to the next 50 years of judgement by you.
These laws will and have started to turn these states into Women's health wastelands. Rational people can disagree on this subject, but to criminalize subjective medical opinions is ludicrous, and not the rapper. Any lawyer or prosecutor can find a person with a doctor degree, call them an expert based on their education, and reach the conclusion to the prosecutor wants. Medical decisions are private matters that the government should never weight in, except in the most extreme instances; elder abuse comes to mind as one of those circumstances.
Medical procedures need to be approved by law (FDA approved), and then they’re a private matter. saying that the procedure is itself private is unconstitutional, or not covered because it’s a legislative issue not a judicial one. Some procedures like abortion can be band (by state legislatures) because it’s an issue of public interest. The interest being that the unborn don’t, or can’t decide whatever they’re born or not. Understanding the issue in America is crucial (I am European) because there is more than meets the eye.
@@patrickbateman3840 you are arguing against yourself by saying it is private after fda approval but the procedure isn’t private. There is no public interest in pregnancy unless the public will support that child and we don’t in the US. We just shame the woman
@@philliplust8059 well obviously the FDA needs to approve it, and the law needs to approve the procedure (abortion). And the state legislature makes the regulation for those procedures, too ensure public safety and overall health. Abortion isn’t about shaming, it’s a moral issue that the state allows it.
Well before SCOTUS ruled it out
@@patrickbateman3840 well SCOTUS has ruled black people are property, so they have been known to get things wrong.
Why is she shocked? She helped cause this entire choas........
At least she is asking rational questions on this critical issue.
@@chuckstrawn3076Day late and a dollar short. The time for fleshing out these finer scenarios was BEFORE overturning Roe.
@@radiologicphysicist1083 So, according to you she should do nothing now because it's too late?
@@jaimeduncan6167You should always trust the person who caused the problem to fix the problem. 🤪
Heaven forbid that the federal government not have power over things it shouldn't. The constitution never gave the judicial system the right to legislate abortion, so it went down to the states where it, like almost all things, belong.
If the federal government is the one making deciions on how life goes in the states, then the states are no more than administrative districts.
Yes, well, Mrs. Barrett, this is all because of you. Good job!
You'd think that this being an intimately and uniquely women's issue that the male Justices would recuse themselves and respectfully defer to those members of the Court more biologically, emotionally and intellectually suited to decide this specific issue.
No justices should bring their religious beliefs into a court of law. A SCJ should follow the laws of the land not their religious beliefs.
The US has religious freedom, anyone can follow their religious beliefs within the law. If you are against that you are against the Constitution.
The problem with SCOTUS (and maybe all lawyers) is that they do not understand basic reproductive biology but rather are passionate about linguistic gymnastics. We are living in the 21st century and know the reproductive cycle of many species and also know that not every fertilized egg come to term. In fact the data we have indicates only about 50% (naturally) of fertilized eggs come to term. This implies that any woman who’s eggs have been fertilized more than once but the fetus has not come to term has had an abortion by definition. Miscarriages are also classified as abortion in some places. OK, so we classified medical abortion as different but the outcome is the same. We can also understand when problems for the fetus occur during pregnancy (naturally) which result in abortion. But this data is scarce in our polarized society. At some point, this is a moral dilemma and pro-life faction wants to make the decision for women regardless of how pregnancy happens or condition of the fetus or the mom. The easy way out is to ignore physiology, critical thought, logic and data and go with the belief through religious indoctrination.
If what you say is true then overturning the roe v wade ruling was the right choice. This effectively gets scotus out of the decision. Power to the people to determine how their states are run and who is elected.
any real lawyers here? Is that actually the nature of prosecutorial discretion?
Of course. As the state attorney you can decide whether to proscrcute. In this case it is tough as the judgment of the accused is the issue on trial. You just have to show that they might have been wrong and they can be found liable
@williamericwolff given the oral arguments are discussing serious injury or lasting negative health affects to the woman, and the criminal code only allows exception for death, the judgement will be in question and will not be in favor of the physician.
What am I missing?
Handmaids Tale is coming fast!
Why do you say that?
@@BizQACbecause the possibility of birth will be more important than actual life. Women will be allowed to die to bring forth precious babies because that's what God made them for.
@@AdrianneJH yawn...
@@AdrianneJH so, she’s strictly pro life?
@@erichooligan9329 getting tired of the fight? That's cool. The women you think so little of are very energized and nine out of nine states, they've won. So take a nap. We'll get our rights back while you think we're making you sandwiches
Legal GOP spin by the lawyer and the state legislature . Make it ambiguous so they can do what ever they want .
F Idaho
Buffalo Springfield song 🎵 " For What It's Worth." Amy Coney Barrett needs to have a little listen. It's an old protest song that makes sense today. 😢🙏
The Idahoan deputy solicitor general looks like he's 12 years old.
Well, it’s 99% likely that’s he’s Mormon, so yes 🤣
This is why national consensus is needed with a bill. Roe V Wade screwed everything up by making the Court a legislator.
I wonder if in real life she actually clutched her pearls. thanK you aIMee. We will never forget.
Prosecutor discretion= Hey I need to get My Name in the News so I can run for X,Y,or X.
= I Personally feel that this should Not be OK even thought it effects NO one but you.
= I just don't like the demegrafics Of this person so Im gonna Make them feel Bad and scared Until I drop it later.
= I am personally friends with this person , cop, doctor so I will Not prosecute for them or Prosecute For them.
ETC ETC
I kinda dig how ABC I’d sticking up for SM. Left or right they’re there to do a fair job.
These laws make getting pregnant a dangerous gamble and make the practice of obstetrics, already one of the toughest fields in medicine, much more challenging.
I think this country has to put some reasonable limits on prosecutorial discretion compared to due process and selective enforcement.
Wouldn't be an issue if the right wasn't taking away our rights and letting lawyers decide
@@michaeltillotson3711Do you realize that folks on the other side say the exact same thing?
@richdobbs6595 saying something and being able to back it up with facts is the issue..
Punishing dissenting speech- Republicans
Stripping rights- Republicans
Human trafficking- Republicans
Latest gun control laws- Republicans
Those are actual actions. Not assumptions that something might happen. Direct actions.
Facts matter, not your feelings
@@AmmYisraellChaii incorrect. It refers to the decisions of whether to charge(your point), what to charge, and whether to accept pleas
Be accurate please
@williamericwolff not just a specific charge, but what charges to bring. They also have the decisions on pretextual charges. So what is being charged is part off that discretion.
Sorry, you wanted to enter the conversation and argue technicalities, then be specific in return and don't blame the forum
Good one
Ummmmm uh eerrr are not words that should ever be said when being questioned by a scotus judge. This is madness. Bring back roe v wade.
The govenment needs to stay out of our bedrooms homes churches and most of all out of our body's ( female as well as male ).
Why is Barrett speaking for Sotomayor? Can't she speak for herself?
Too bad there wasn’t anything about what this is about. Very uninformative waste of time.
This court should have the same to say about abortion as does the bible- NOTHING!
Sixth Commandment (?)
And when Elizabeth heard the greeting of Mary, the baby leaped in her womb. And Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit, and she exclaimed with a loud cry, t “Blessed are you among women, and ublessed is the fruit of your womb!
The really shocking thing in this clip is how ACB pronounced Idaho. No once in my 65 years have I heard anybody say that states name that way. Is this a defect in experience, or a true innovation by ACB?
Ida hooo ?
also, is prpsecuting to win not to seek truth obsteuiction
too late, she realised, "i wanted this ..."
She's responsible for all the chaos...
Incorrect…Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization was a 6-3 vote
that puts a lot on the doctor 2 b 100% sure an that ain't poss.. stop the BS only GOD would know 4 sure . men have no idea what the hell they r talking about 4 sure stop this game of life ok.let the women chose
All people deserve bodily autonomy and privacy with access to medical care.
Including babies.
Roe v wade makes the argument that the right to privacy in amendment 14 gives the government the right to protect your ability to terminate a fetus. That’s a pretty weak argument. So the government protects your right to privately terminate a fetus. I’m pro choice but roe v wade was wrong.
yes and no.. thats how all laws work
Sure, that’s why no law should make medical decisions illegal!
“Prosecutorial discretion” aka your life and career are political tools
She was such a mistake from the start.
how is a mistake to get him to admit its both yes and no
@@johnnyllooddte3415it's just yes though. Yes, the doctor could lose their job and go to jail
Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization was 6 to 3 vote.. why is everyone fixated on Amy? Smells like identity politics.
Fringe cringe stuff.
Warning: RUclips is a private partner of the Democrat party. All remembe to hail the glorious leader.
Yet, she voted against the future of her daughter anyway.
see? Straight from the playbook where the christian theocrat suddenly becomes ignorant
that voice.... shrew comes to mind