Mississippi to mount latest legal challenge to Roe vs Wade

[Patrick Degan]

No clause or amendment of any state constitution gets to trump the Federal constitution. Mississippi can just as well try to amend their constitution to legalise chattel slavery again and it would have about the same chance of standing a court challenge as this half-assed amendment will —absolute zero. This act is a dead-letter, no matter what its backers have deluded themselves into believing.

Only through a court challenge. First the law gets enforced and innocent people get sent to jail. The law does not go through Federal review before implementation.

Laws can be challenged in court before implementation, such as is the case with the blockage of parts of the recent string of immigration laws passed by several states this year and on South Dakota's recent attempt to impose new abortion restrictions. If a judge says so, a law can be suspended at any time, and there is no limitation on when a court challenge can be mounted.

[Eulogy]

If what Patrick says is true, then the state, and the shit-for-brains babyeating monsters that pass as prosecutors, are setting themselves up for a fuckhuge class-action lawsuit.

I hope they do get sued as well as disbarred.

[Faqa]

Necro for a significant update:

The amendment failed to pass

Jackson, Mississippi (CNN) -- Mississippi voters rejected an amendment to the state constitution that would have defined life as starting at conception, and outlawed abortion and many forms of birth control if passed.
"I think voters rejected a measure they understood to be dangerous," said Felicia Brown-Williams with the Mississippi for Healthy Families Campaign. "They really tried to manipulate values around faith and family."
If the amendment 26, or "Personhood," had passed Tuesday, it would have re-opened the national debate on abortion. Court challenges would have set the measure on a path for the U.S. Supreme Court and a showdown in the far right's mission to overturn Roe V. Wade.
"We are not conceding because we did our duty," said Les Riley, a Mississippi citizen and a petitioner of amendment 26. "We have obeyed God ... it is not tolerable that they kill children."
Gov. Barbour: Life begins at conception
Critics say the amendment was a restrictive attempt to outlaw abortion -- even in the case of mothers who are the victims of rape and incest.
It also bans certain forms of contraception that work after a woman's egg is fertilized and questions treatments such as in vitro fertilization because eggs would be considered people and are sometimes destroyed in laboratories.
"Even in a conservative state, tonight's vote reaffirms that people do not want government intruding in personal decisions best made by a woman, her family and her doctor," said Jennifer Dalven, director of the American Civil Liberties Union reproductive freedom project.
Opponents criticized the amendment as too vague. If it passed, it would have compelled the state legislature to write rules and laws to govern it.
"I think voters understood they could not support something that was so broad, sweeping and yes so unclear," said Atlee Breland of Parents Against Amendment 26. "Nobody wants to trust the government to work it out at a later date."
Mississippi's Gov. Haley Barbour questioned the amendment, but eventually supported it.
"If they had come to the Mississippi legislature and said, 'look, we want to change the constitution and say life begins at conception our legislature would have passed that," he said on CNN's John King USA.
"We'd all be better off if this had gone through the legislative process instead of trying to change the bill of rights of the Mississippi constitution by the initiative. You would have had hearings, people would have understood it, you would have gone through the conference committee and you would have ironed out a lot of these wrinkles."
The ballot initiative was part of a national campaign brought by Personhood USA. The Colorado-based group describes itself as a nonprofit Christian ministry that "serves the pro-life community by assisting local groups to initiate citizen, legislative and political action focusing on the ultimate goal of the pro-life movement: personhood rights for all innocent humans."
Despite the loss, the group said it has made steps in its fight.
"We accomplished our mission to be a voice for the voiceless who have no one else speaking for them," said Keith Mason of Personhood USA. "I want to make a commitment that we will stand with Mississippi until all humans are treated as persons."
A similar amendment was defeated in Colorado last year. Other personhood measures are planned in Florida, Montana and Ohio next year, according to supporters.
Clergy and church officials in Mississippi were split on the issue. Some anti-abortion religious groups believed the amendment was so extreme, it could lead to a Supreme Court ruling that strengthens Roe v. Wade.
The idea for personhood started during Roe v. Wade's oral arguments, when Justice Potter Stewart said, "If it were established that an unborn fetus is a person, you would have an impossible case here."
Personhood USA uses the amendments in an attempt to maneuver a direct challenge to the Roe v. Wade ruling. "We will establish a culture of life," said Dr. Freda Bush, a Yes on 26 spokeswoman. "This is a cultural war from the womb to the tomb and we will be back."

So, you know, score one for the good guys.

[LaCroix]

Question:

Wouldn't Roe vs. Wade trump a state constitution, anyway? I mean, a state defining life starts as conception doesn't really touch the fact that RvW allows abortion [of an unborn fetus].

[starslayer]

Yes it would. The idea for the anti-abortion side is to force a lawsuit, which would then hopefully get to the Supreme Court. The Court could then overturn Roe v. Wade if it wanted to (The Court has overturned its own decisions before; the one that immediately comes to mind is Brown v. Board of Education essentially overturning Plessy v. Ferguson).

[Block]

Yes it would. The idea for the anti-abortion side is to force a lawsuit, which would then hopefully get to the Supreme Court. The Court could then overturn Roe v. Wade if it wanted to (The Court has overturned its own decisions before; the one that immediately comes to mind is Brown v. Board of Education essentially overturning Plessy v. Ferguson).

Supposedly the point was to get Conservative voters to come to the polls. If this had succeeded there'd be similar ballot initiatives next year to energize the Republican base and get them to vote when they might not otherwise.

[Kamakazie Sith]

How many policemen would actually bother to haul victims mothers in for "murder"? How many judges won't throw out cases of miscarriage? What jury would rule her guilty?

They didn't think this sham all the way through, did they?

Eh. It shames me to say but there would probably be a significant number since most police identify as conservative.