Categories
Diversity

JK Rowling is a bigot

Politico has a new story about JK Rowling and her battles with the trans community.

I liked the Harry Potter books and the Fantastic Beasts movies, but I’m not a fan of Rowling. Or that sad excuse for a human being the NY Times let write an awful piece this week.

These people are using the fight for women’s rights as a transphobic attack. They’re no longer even hiding it.

I had thought we, who have long fought for equality, would be better than this. Evidently, not.

Here are two terms for you: AFAB and AMAB.

They stand for assigned female at birth and assigned male at birth. They’re inclusive terms that can be used in debates such as those around the right to control our access to abortion, to pregnancy prevention aids, and to healthcare used to treat gender dysphoria.

If we want to include cis women, transmasculine, and non-binary in a discussion—and we do when it comes to the harm tossing Roe aside does—then AFAB will do until something better comes along.

I am a woman. I am a cis woman. I use she/her as my pronouns. Even fitting society’s stereotypical model of a ‘woman’, it is still a fight being the person who I am. I can’t even imagine how much harder it is being someone who does not identify themselves the same way, but is facing the same, or worse, healthcare restrictions. The least I can do is make sure when talking about abortion rights, we’re all included.

We’re all being hurt by the same people: those who value power over humanity. I’d be a pretty sad excuse for a human being if I allowed this.

So, sorry that Rowling gets her feels hurt. She’s a bully, and a bigot.

Categories
Legal, Laws, and Regs

A post-Roe world…15 years ago

There has been a lot of conjecture about what it means to have a post-Roe world. Can states make it illegal for women to travel to other states for an abortion? Can we talk about abortion services on the internet? Can abortion counselors work in anti-choice states?

Alito pretends that the issue of abortion is over and done; SCOTUS has figuratively wiped its hands and walked away. However, as he must have known, rather than settling law, Dobbs triggered chaos.

I went searching for writings on a post-Roe world and discovered an excellent paper by Harvard Law’s Richard Fallon Jr. The paper is titled “If Roe Were Overruled: Abortion and the Constitution in a Post-Roe World“. It’s freely available (no paywall). And it was published in 2007, 15 years before today’s turmoil.

The professor touches on all of the topics I opened with, and more. He asked the same questions we’re asking, and then provides enough explanation of the law for us to come away knowing there are no simple answers to any of them.

For instance, Kavanaugh seeks to reassure us that women will still have freedom to travel to other states to get the abortions they seek.

May a state bar a resident of that state from traveling to another state to obtain an abortion?” he wrote in a concurring opinion. “In my view, the answer is no based on the constitutional right to interstate travel.

However, as Professor Fallon carefully details, the pregnant individual may be able to travel to another state, but abortion providers in that state may not be able to provide the healthcare they need. And that’s the kicker: can a state forbid an abortion provider in another state from providing a service to the anti-choice state’s citizen?

In substance and effect, the Court would need to weigh one state’s interests in protecting fetal life against another state’s interests in making abortion within its territory a matter of individual conscience, and it would need to do so while, at the same time, taking account of the implications of national citizenship. So much for the idea that the overruling of Roe v. Wade would remove hard decisions about abortion regulation from the judicial province.

Not just interstate travel: could states punish a citizen for getting an abortion in another country? Could the people who assisted the person be criminally charged? Civilly sued? That trip to California or Canada may not be as straightforward as you think.

Frankly, Kavanaugh’s assurances on the freedom of interstate travel are just as duplicitous as his assurances about support for precedents.

I don’t think I understood until this week how much our freedoms, our rights, the very existence of our country and government, now seem to exist solely on the sufferance of the Supreme Court.

We only need to turn to the last page and the last paragraph of Professor Fallon’s work to see a summary of the post-Roe world we now live in (I added the emphasis):

As I have emphasized repeatedly, my aim is not to judge whether Roe v. Wade should be overruled. But when contemplating the possible eradication of that jurisprudential landmark, we ought to have a clear-eyed view of the constitutional consequences. If Roe were to go, it would not go gently. Instead, its departure would roil the waters of constitutional law and surrounding politics and churn up a host of new controversies. No matter how much the Supreme Court might wish to extricate itself from abortion debates, it could not imaginably do so.

Categories
Political

Biden and the McConnell ‘deal’

Update and edited 

Slate has more on the Devil’s deal. Evidently Biden will be ‘allowed’ to appoint two people to US Attorney positions in Kentucky, and McConnell will not block him.

That’s it. That’s the ‘big’ deal. Two positions tied solely to the President’s tenure for a judgeship that’s for life.

It’s a fool’s deal.

Earlier:

Yesterday, a story quickly spread on social media that President Biden was going to appoint a McConnell-backed anti-abortion Federalist lawyer to a permanent position on the bench in Kentucky. This, even after SCOTUS completely killed Roe v Wade the week before, and people in the country were still reeling from the impact.

Those of us alarmed at the news were told—in less than polite terms—that we were traitors to Biden, harmful to the Democratic party, and our concerns were unfounded because there were no judicial openings in Kentucky, anyway.

Well, that was true yesterday, but not today.

Today, Judge Karen Caldwell announced her intent to retire and take senior status, leaving an opening for Biden to make a nomination.

The McConnell Setup

The possibility that Biden would appoint someone like Chad Meredith in a supposed ‘deal’ with McConnell positively reeks of the latter’s connivance.

McConnell gets a judge that even Trump couldn’t stomach. In exchange, McConnell doesn’t use the ‘blue slip’ to hold up two US Attorney positions in Kentucky.

What’s a blue slip? It’s a courtesy extended to the Senators of the state where the appointment is made. The senator can either approve or disapprove of the appointment. It has no real power, and Trump and the Republicans routinely ignored them during his tenure.

That’s it. That’s the deal.

It’s a win/win for McConnell. By making this deal, he undercuts Democratic efforts not only for the 2024 Presidential bid, but also for the mid-term election this fall. Why? Because it confuses the message about  Biden’s, and hence, Democratic commitment for abortion rights.

Biden’s appointment says to the world (likely parroted by gleeful Republicans) that the Democratic party ‘talks’ about abortion rights…but that’s all it is. Talk. When it comes to politics, well, people’s basic right to control our own bodies has to take a back seat.

All of the candidates that have pro-choice strongly embedded in their campaigns for the fall now have to fight an unconscionable, undermining, ill-conceived ‘deal with the devil’.

We’re put on the defensive. Again.

Having faith in our candidates

If Biden follows through on this deal, he also sends a message that he has no faith in our candidates this fall, or the Democratic voters.

It says to all of us that he assumes we’ll lose the Senate and the House, and that if he wants to pull any kind of legacy out of the last two years in office, he’ll have to have all sorts of deals with McConnell in order to do so.

This is a pretty horrid message to send to the party and the people, especially when we’re freshly galvanized by an awful, terrible, no-good SCOTUS.

As party leader, he should have faith in the candidates. They’re a great group of people. And he should have faith in us.

Telling us we don’t matter

Worst of all, if Biden follows through on this appointment, he’s telling women and members of the LGBTQ+ community that we just don’t matter.

We just lost a fundamental right. We just got forced into a second-class citizenship. Where Biden was Presidential by encouraging the Senate to carve out a filibuster exemption to pass abortion support in the Senate, he would be anything but by making this extraordinarily bad appointment.

One and Done

I’m older and I’ve been through so many must-win political campaigns. I consider myself a ‘centrist’ and also pragmatic about how politics works.

But there are lines I won’t cross. Support for abortion is one of those lines. If President Biden crosses this line with this appointment, then he’s One and Done to me.