tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post7574786080327206632..comments2024-03-18T22:21:33.261-07:00Comments on The Debate Link: "Ex Post Facto" Abortion ProsecutionsDavid Schraubhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04946653376744012423noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post-76853422457600967042022-05-10T02:58:11.846-07:002022-05-10T02:58:11.846-07:00This is (obviously) an extremely horrifying and ye...This is (obviously) an extremely horrifying and yet extremely plausible analysis. The targeting of individual women <i>might</i> (or might not) stay fixed in the realm of overzealous DAs, but targeting of <i>abortion providers</i> would likely be immediate and intense as soon as people figure this out. Can you elaborate on whether you would expect this to apply for laws enacted <i>after</i> Roe that were challenged in court and had judicial injunctions issued barring/mitigating enforcement? <br />CT has / is in the process of enacting its Reproductive Freedom Defense Act which among other things sets up counter-claims in CT court if someone gets sued under a TX-style civil liability scheme for an abortion act performed in CT. Could this (or something else) be adapted to help such states shield abortion providers who potentially seek refuge from prosecution in eg, TX for abortions performed in the Roe era in TX? My gut is no, there's no legal recourse at all (unless SCotUS does extend <i>ex post facto clause</i> style protections), but maybe there's a rationale sitting around for states to award political asylum against other states in the union? Benjamin Lewishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04115050650579749235noreply@blogger.com