Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Mom for Gliberty's avatar

https://www.npr.org/2023/03/04/1161143595/walgreens-abortion-pill-mifepristone-republican-threat-legal-action

There is also things like the GOP states that threatened to sue Walgreens, until they folded and stopped selling abortion pills in those states.

They've been really innovative in finding ways for the government to weaponize the private sphere against personal freedom.

Expand full comment
Lauren Hall's avatar

I agree with everything else in here (mostly), but the Burgess case in Nebraska cited here isn't the one to use as evidence of draconian measures. The Burgess abortion occurred at almost 30 weeks of pregnancy and the duo tried to burn the body and bury it in a field (burning and concealment of a body are two charges the mother pled guilty to and which they likely would have faced charges for in almost any state).

The 30 week mark and the meds they used means there's a good chance the fetus was born alive (or would have been born alive in a hospital) and would have had good outcomes if born in a hospital at that stage. That changes the game significantly - morally, legally, and from a public opinion standpoint. Since murder charges were not filed, I'm going to assume police can't find evidence the fetus/baby took a breath, but the fact that murder charges weren't filed is interesting in and of itself. Nebraska *could* have gone far more draconian on this one and chose not to. In fact, from reports I'm reading, the prosecutors are setting things up for a deal and are not even making a sentencing recommendation, which signals likely leniency.

From a legal perspective, this case could have been prosecuted in any state that I'm aware of, including my own of New York. NY only allows abortion after 24 weeks in the case of a threat to the health of the mother or a non-viable pregnancy. NY also doesn't allow self-administered abortions after that time, so whatever state you're in, the Burgess case looks prosecutable, at the very least.

And from a public opinion standpoint, these kinds of cases of late term abortions and babies being burned in fields are exactly why the public isn't hot on abortion after 24 weeks. It's also likely why the prosecutor said he had never prosecuted a case like this - while that's being used in this piece to signal a pivotal change post-Dobbs, the more likely reason is that abortion after 24 weeks is very rare and self-administered abortions at that stage are even more rare.

None of this ignores the reality that the daughter may have been pregnant at 30 weeks because she couldn't access safe and effective abortion in Nebraska sooner. These laws are a bad idea generally. But this case doesn't serve the purpose this piece wants it to.

Expand full comment
2 more comments...

No posts