I just don’t see how SCOTUS wouldn’t strike this down.
I agree. However, I'd argue that setting legislative precedent gives blue judges in red states an excuse to say "Oops! Law is changed! Now I'm going to disregard Dobbs in my ruling." And then we get another pitched battle at the appellate courts that takes years to resolve. And, in the meantime, people don't die over this shit.
So it seems that any commerce clause route toward passing a national abortion law would be doomed to fail, and it’s not clear what other route Congress could really take.
The Privileges and Immunities Clause (aka Comity Clause) leaps to mind. That, combined with the 14th amendment and the Supremacy Clause. The Feds wouldn't be compelling private firms to provide abortion services. They'd be forbidding state governments from regulating abortion services or prosecuting abortion as a crime.
Hell, a particularly bold federal judge could claim abortion is protected under the Comity Clause right now.
What's the comity clause argument? We didn't study this much in my 14A class, and from what I remember from the bar prep courses, it was just "States can't treat citizens of other States differently than they treat citizens of their own State." I'm not seeing the applicability here - but again, very possible I'm not knowledgeable about how it works.
I agree. However, I'd argue that setting legislative precedent gives blue judges in red states an excuse to say "Oops! Law is changed! Now I'm going to disregard Dobbs in my ruling." And then we get another pitched battle at the appellate courts that takes years to resolve. And, in the meantime, people don't die over this shit.
The Privileges and Immunities Clause (aka Comity Clause) leaps to mind. That, combined with the 14th amendment and the Supremacy Clause. The Feds wouldn't be compelling private firms to provide abortion services. They'd be forbidding state governments from regulating abortion services or prosecuting abortion as a crime.
Hell, a particularly bold federal judge could claim abortion is protected under the Comity Clause right now.
What's the comity clause argument? We didn't study this much in my 14A class, and from what I remember from the bar prep courses, it was just "States can't treat citizens of other States differently than they treat citizens of their own State." I'm not seeing the applicability here - but again, very possible I'm not knowledgeable about how it works.