Oklahoma lawmakers approve bill to revoke licenses of abortion doctors

[GMDino]

I...I can't even express how profoundly STUPID this is.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-oklahoma-abortion-idUSKCN0XJ29I

Quote:An Oklahoma bill that could revoke the license of any doctor who performs an abortion has headed to the governor, with opponents saying the measure in unconstitutional and promising a legal battle against the cash-strapped state if it is approved.


In the Republican-dominated legislature, the state's House of Representatives overwhelmingly approved a Senate bill late on Thursday. Governor Mary Fallin, a Republican, has not yet indicated whether she will sign it.

Under the bill, doctors who perform abortions would risk losing their medical licenses. Exemptions would be given for those who perform the procedure for reasons including protecting the mother or removing a miscarried fetus.

"This is our proper function, to protect life,” said Senator Nathan Dahm, the Republican who authored the bill.

A handful of representatives argued against the bill, saying it violated the Constitution by prohibiting a doctor from performing a medical procedure that was legal under law.

"Oklahoma politicians have made it their mission year after year to restrict women’s access vital health care services, yet this total ban on abortion is a new low," said Amanda Allen, senior state legislative counsel at the Center for Reproductive Rights.

The lobbying group and several other abortion rights organizations have promised court challenges if the bill is enacted.

Supporters of the bill said it will help protect the sanctity of life.

"If we take care of morality,” bill supporter David Brumbaugh, a Republican, said during deliberations, "God will take care of the economy."

They even tried to tie the ECONOMY into it!!!

[Rotobeast]

I lean towards Pro-Life, but this is absurd.

I don't think it will pass veto.
However, if it we're enacted many women would return to unsafe abortion practices, when the doctors dry up.
Tie that to the economy !
You are removing a high tax paying doctor/consumer from the system and quite possibly a tax paying young woman/consumer (permanently).

Nonsense !

[*michaelsean*]

Doesn't seem like they can do that, but maybe since they run the license board they can. I guess the question is if they are allowed to do this with a medical procedure not called abortion.

[*bfine32*]

I have a question for all the Poli-Sci experts. If a state wanted to ban abortions would this be they way to go about it?

My assumption is they could do this and point to the 10th Amendment and the only way it could get overturned would be to go before SCOUTUS.

[Benton]

(04-23-2016, 11:51 AM)bfine32 Wrote: I have a question for all the Poli-Sci experts. If a state wanted to ban abortions would this be they way to go about it?

My assumption is they could do this and point to the 10th Amendment and the only way it could get overturned would be to go before SCOUTUS.

I doubt they would outright devide over the previous court decision and outright ban. That would most likely have to come as an amendment. The court does hear abortion cases (including one from Texas last month), but I can't recall them coming close to anything that would ban it.

[GMDino]

(04-23-2016, 11:51 AM)bfine32 Wrote: I have a question for all the Poli-Sci experts. If a state wanted to ban abortions would this be they way to go about it?

My assumption is they could do this and point to the 10th Amendment and the only way it could get overturned would be to go before SCOUTUS.

This, to me, would not ban abortions...just abortions by doctor with licences from the state.  So women would have to leave the state to get a legally allowed procedure, go to a doctor with out a licence, or not get an abortion.

And abortions would still be legal.

[Belsnickel]

(04-23-2016, 07:45 PM)GMDino Wrote: This, to me, would not ban abortions...just abortions by doctor with licences from the state.  So women would have to leave the state to get a legally allowed procedure, go to a doctor with out a licence, or not get an abortion.

And abortions would still be legal.

But, if the courts have said that banning abortion is unconstitutional that also means that placing an undue burden on someone seeking the service is also unconstitutional. Forcing someone to go out of state for a legal procedure (since unlicensed doctors cannot legally perform services) has been seen as an undue banning tantamount to banning in judicial precedent.

[GMDino]

(04-23-2016, 10:53 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: But, if the courts have said that banning abortion is unconstitutional that also means that placing an undue burden on someone seeking the service is also unconstitutional. Forcing someone to go out of state for a legal procedure (since unlicensed doctors cannot legally perform services) has been seen as an undue banning tantamount to banning in judicial precedent.

I agree.  I was just answering the question if that was a way to go about banning abortions.  Hypothetically even if it was upheld abortions would still be legal.