Categories
Health

A Reminder That We Won't Need a Full Repeal of Roe v. Wade for Abortion to Be Restricted


On Wednesday, Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy announced his retirement from the bench. The 81-year-old has served since his appointment by President Ronald Reagan in 1988. Now, the world must sit and wait for President Donald Trump to nominate his second Supreme Court judge in less than two years.

Though conservative, Justice Kennedy was known for his more centrist viewpoints and rulings. As CBS reported, he was a pivotal swing vote for marriage equality, corporate spending on elections, affirmative action, and the protection of abortion rights in 1992’s Planned Parenthood v. Casey. That case, CBS explained, would have prohibitively restricted abortion access for women across the nation.

And now, women fear they may soon face a similar battle. After all, Trump himself stated during the final presidential debate that he would work to see the end of Roe V. Wade.

“If we put another two or perhaps three justices on, that’s really what’s going to be, that’s what will happen,” he said. “And that’ll happen automatically in my opinion, because I am putting pro-life justices on the court.”

To find out just how concerned women should be, Glamour called Jennifer Dalven, Director of the Reproductive Freedom Project of the American Civil Liberties Union, to find out more. For two decades, Dalven has dedicated her work to protecting access to abortion and reproductive health care.

And due to the latest SCOTUS shakeup, she says she’s never been more worried about women’s reproductive rights.

“I can say this is the time I’ve been most concerned in my 20 years here about the future of access to abortions in our country,” she told Glamour.

That’s because she knows that it won’t take a repeal of Roe v. Wade for extreme restrictions to be put in place. Here, she explains:

What specifically is making you so concerned?

Justice Kennedy provided a key vote to uphold a woman’s right to abortion and to stop politicians from blocking women from getting abortions. And President Trump, as you know, has repeatedly pledged to appoint justices who will take away our right to legal abortion. If we allow him to follow through on that promise, the balance of the court will certainly turn against the constitutional right to abortion and access to abortion.

What’s the possibility of Roe v. Wade being overturned?

That’s a really good question, but I think that if President Trump gets to appoint a new justice in the mold he has said he would appoint, whether Roe gets overturned outright or not won’t really be the question. We may not know the specifics, but whether the right to legal abortion is taken away entirely or whether the court decides, ‘no, we don’t need to go quite that far, we don’t need to be that explicit about it, but we’ll simply uphold every restriction that comes this way,’ the effect will be dire for women and families in this country.

How have abortion rights been restricted already?

In the first quarter of 2018, 37 states introduced 308 new abortion restrictions. So there is no doubt that there are politicians out there in a huge number of states who are standing at the ready to restrict women’s access to abortion care.

This could really go two ways: With a new justice on the court, the right to legal abortion could just be taken away entirely. And states could ban abortion outright and we know that there are states chomping at the bit to do that. By some counts almost half of the states are ready to do that. But, as I said, the court doesn’t have to go that far. It could simply decide to uphold any restriction that a politician can dream up and that will just make it impossible for women to get the care they need.

A couple of years ago, there was a case before the Supreme Court called Whole Woman’s Health that was challenging a Texas abortion restriction that would have had the effect of making Texas a state that went from about 40 clinics to about 10 clinics. And what that would’ve meant for women is that abortion would have been as good as outlawed. Justice Kennedy provided the crucial fifth vote to strike down that law. Without Justice Kennedy on the court, if a new justice upholds a requirement like that, we could see laws like that throughout the country. We know that 10 percent of the states are down to one abortion provider already.

Of President Trump’s a current list of nominees, who would you say is the closest to a Justice Kennedy that the American public could hope for?

I can’t comment on the specifics of that list, but what I can tell you is he and Mike Pence have been unbelievably clear that they have a litmus test and that they will only nominate somebody who will overturn the right to legal abortion. Mike Pence said he wants abortion “consigned to the ash heap of history where it belongs.” So we need to be incredibly skeptical and need to carefully evaluate any nominee that President Trump forwards. And the Senate really needs to do its job and carefully evaluate any potential nominees.

This isn’t a drill. This is real. This will have effects for generations to come. Seven in 10 Americans believe that abortion should remain a legal right. If you are one of those people, the time is now to make your voice heard.

Speaking of making your voice heard, what would you say people should do to make that happen?

The most direct way is to let your Senators know where you stand because they are the folks that will stand between a nomination from President Trump and that person actually sitting on the Supreme Court. But I would not be surprised if there are marches and protests in the streets in the coming weeks and months ahead as this battle heats up. But I think that the most direct thing is letting your Senators know where you stand and that you take this issue very seriously.

Note: This interview has been condensed for clarity and length. You can find more information on abortion and women’s reproductive rights, here.

Related Stories:

How Justice Anthony Kennedy’s Retirement From the Supreme Court Could Erode Women’s Rights

Democratic Voters Wanted Something Different. They Got Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.



Source link

Categories
Health

Ireland Has Voted to Repeal Its Abortion Ban


It’s official, and by a landslide: The people of Ireland have voted to repeal the eighth amendment of its constitution, which currently says an unborn child has an equal right to life as the woman carrying it, effectively placing a total ban on abortion.

With 37 out of 40 constituencies reporting as this article was published, 67.3 percent of Irish citizens voted for the repeal, and 32.7 percent against—with just one remaining constituency, Donegal, expected to vote “no.”.

Abortion has been illegal in Ireland since 1861. In 1983, this was written into the country’s constitution with the passage of the eight amendment, which reads: “The State acknowledges the right to life of the unborn and, with due regard to the equal right to life of the mother, guarantees in its laws to respect, and, as far as practicable, by its laws to defend and vindicate that right.” This effectually outlaws abortion completely, including in situations of rape, incest, and if the fetus a woman is carrying has a fatal condition.

According to the most recent data from U.K. Department of Health, more than 170,000 Irish women are estimated to have traveled to the U.K. and the Netherlands for abortions since 1980. It’s also estimated that, every day, nine women make the journey from Ireland to the U.K. to have a legal abortion. Then, there are those who either choose to or must stay home, as not all can afford flights, hotels, lost wages, and childcare while away—an estimated 1,500 women each year take abortion tablets without any medical supervision; if they’re found in possession of said pills, they could face jail time for up to 14 years.

But the Ireland of today is a very different place than the Ireland of 1983, says Glamour’s editor-in-chief, Samantha Barry, who’s a native of Cork

“To Americans it might sound like we’re slow to adopt cultural norms you’re accustomed to, but progress has been made: In 1985 the Irish government approved the sale of contraceptives, divorce became legal in 1995 following another referendum, and Ireland is now the European hub of some of the largest and most innovative tech companies in the world, including Google and Facebook,” she wrote ahead of the repeal. “Our current political leader, Prime Minister Leo Varadkar, is the gay son of Indian immigrants!”

When news of the repeal vote broke, Varadkar posted about it on his Twitter account: “Fantastic crowds at Dublin Castle. Remarkable day. A quiet revolution has taken place, a great act of democracy,” he wrote.

In light of this historic referendum, many Irish ex-pats have traveled home to vote. (Unlike the United States, voting by mail or absentee ballot is not an option for Irish folks living outside the country.) One woman, Elaine Arnold, told Glamour she spent over $1,500 Australian dollars to travel from Sydney to her hometown of Dublin to do so; another Irish native, Sorcha Lowry, used her credit card and her only vacation days at a new job in New York, where she currently lives, to make sure she voted “yes” to the repeal.

“The minute the date was announced for the referendum, I booked my flights,” Lowry told Glamour. “I have to be part of it. Not turning up would essentially be a ‘no’ vote, so I have to do my bit.”

Though after 35 years in effect, the people of Ireland have voted to repeal the eight amendment, abortion won’t be available overnight—rather, it will be replaced by a clause that reads: “Provision may be made by law for the regulation of termination of pregnancy.”

But it seems like that provision is coming: According to Sky News’ senior political correspondent, Ireland’s health minister, Simon Harris, said on Saturday he’ll ask for formal approval to turn a draft of abortion law into “full text.”

Meanwhile, the Guardian reports that Varadkar hopes that laws allowing abortions in the first 12 weeks of pregnancy will be in place by the end of this year.

Related Stories:





Source link

Categories
Health

Cher Proves She's a National Treasure With Epic DACA Repeal Clapback


PHOTO: Tara Ziemba/Getty Images

Over the years, Cher has earned her reputation as a legitimate Twitter icon, frequently shading President Donald Trump by using the toilet emoji instead of his name. And her latest political clapback has everyone cheering once again in the wake of Trump’s order to end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), a federal program created by Barack Obama in 2012 that protects undocumented immigrants who entered the United States illegally as children, also known as Dreamers, from deportation.

Cher went on a Tweetstorm about the decision, saying, “Those Who Can Must Take a DREAMER In2 Their Home & Protect Them‼️I’m Ready 2 Do This & ??Others in MY BUSINESS WILL DO THE SAME‼️SANCTUARY.” One Twitter user, @bwebb56, who has since made her account private, doubted that the singer would actually put her money where her mouth is, writing that she’d “believe it when she saw it.” And, well, we found out what happens when you question Cher. She called the naysayer out to her millions of followers in six simple words: “Then keep your eyes open bitch.”

Needless to say, people were shook, writing things such as, “RT if you’re okay with using tax dollars to mosaic the walls of Trump’s cell with Cher’s tweets,” and “gotta delete your whole account now.” Cher hasn’t been the only celebrity to speak out against Trump and his DACA policies. actors, singers, tech leaders, and and Barack Obama himself have all condemned the latest ruling.

cher screenshot

PHOTO: twitter.com

Related: What is DACA, Exactly? 5 Key Things to Know



Source link