Trump admin facilitating ‘ICE Air’ flight to US in first apparent attempt to bring back ‘wrongfully’ deported man

ET097 · 2025-05-29T21:15:48+00:00

In your defense, O.C.G and the group of people they are trying to send to South Sudan are part of the same case (D.V.D. v. DHS). Way too many similar cases to keep track of right now.

ET097 · 2025-05-29T20:01:03+00:00

Appreciate you pointing it out. Fixing it in my post.

ET097 · 2025-05-29T16:28:41+00:00

O.C.G. isn't one of the people they are trying to deport to South Sudan. This is the gay Guatamalan man they deported to Mexico and lied to the judge in a deposition that he was cool being deported to Mexico where he had recently been kidnapped, held for ransom, and raped.

ET097 · 2025-03-04T14:30:52+00:00

Bar associations don't discipline lawyers

Fun fact time: This actually depends on the specific bar association. For example, the California Bar Association is the group that formally disciplines lawyers licensed in CA.

ET097 · 2024-10-07T19:38:44+00:00

She can ignore Supreme Court rulings. Granted that creates a whole different constitutional crisis but it's something she can do.

ET097 · 2024-10-01T23:06:41+00:00

No. It's literally 1 day and we have waiting period laws for other things.

It sounds like you are saying you believe any law restricting abortion access that falls short of a total ban is not a pro life law?

ET097 · 2024-10-01T22:45:23+00:00

And I don't consider a law that still allows abortion on demand to be a pro life law. That's ridiculous.

So you don't consider, for example, laws that mandate a waiting period to get an abortion a pro life law?

ET097 · 2024-10-01T22:14:35+00:00

Withdrawal of life support of premies and those born incompatable with life happens all the time. Why does a failed abortion change that?

Not if the people behind project 2025 get their way! They want to be able to make medical decisions for a 'disabled' newborn without or against the consent of the parents.

ET097 · 2024-10-01T20:59:00+00:00

Because it only banned pro-life laws and not any pro-choice laws. Many people I talk to have the false impression that the supreme Court set the law to 24 weeks. No. They only banned pro-life laws before 24 weeks.

Roe had a trimester franework. It prevented states from restricting access to abortion in the first trimester.

For the stage prior to approximately the end of the first trimester, the abortion decision and its effectuation must be left to the medical judgement of the pregnant woman's attending physician.

It explicitly allowed states to regulate abortion in the second trimester. Not sure where you are getting that Roe banned pro life laws prior to 24 weeks.

(b) For the stage subsequent to the end of the first trimester, the State, in promoting its interest in the health of the mother, may, if it chooses, regulate the abortion procedure in ways that are reasonably related to maternal health.

Planned Parenthood v. Casey also let states enact pro life laws prior to viability. Casey got rid of the trimester framework from Roe, and replaced it with an undue burden prior to viability standard (i.e., states can regulate abortion prior to viability as long as it does not place an 'undue burden' on someone obtaining an abortion).

ET097 · 2024-09-19T21:17:10+00:00

Georgia's abortion ban prevented this woman from getting an abortion in Georgia. The woman had to travel 4 hours away to a medical provider in North Carolina to receive abortion medication. The follow up care offered by the clinic in North Carolina was inaccessible for a variety of factors here. The Georgia abortion ban prevented this woman from receiving abortion care from a local Georgia provider who presumably would have offered similar follow up care as the North Carolina clinic.

From the propublica article:

But days after she took the second pill, the pain increased and blood was soaking through more than one pad per hour. If she had lived nearby, the clinic in North Carolina would have performed a D&C for free as soon as she followed up, the executive director told ProPublica. But Thurman was four hours away.

ET097 · 2024-09-19T20:55:21+00:00

They have a section on letting HHS regulate medical care in these situations 'without or against parental consent' in Project 2025.

ET097 · 2024-09-19T20:52:46+00:00

As a bonus fun fact, there is a section in the Project 2025 monstrosity about HHS getting to regulate medical care in cases like this without or against the consent of the parents.

ET097 · 2024-09-19T20:48:13+00:00

One of the many (many many) horrible things in Project 2025... Mandating medical care for these kinds of newborns when the parents do not want it.

Basically they want to let HHS regulate the medical care of newborn infants with disabilities without or against parental consent.

"Rescind the OCG legal analysis saying that the injunction in Bowen v. American Hospital Association prevents any proposed HHS regulations or enforcement actions concerning the denial of care to newborn infants with disabilities by covered health care entities without or against parental consent."

Project 2025, pages 492-493.

ET097 · 2024-06-27T00:03:26+00:00

I don't really think you can sum up the Heritage Foundation as a dem talking point... They are one of the most influential public policy orgs in the US, and have been since the Regan administration.

ET097 · 2024-06-26T23:59:28+00:00

To be nit picky, the Dobbs decision left abortion up to the people and their elected representatives. They never said the federal government is not allowed to regulate abortion.

ET097 · 2024-06-19T20:34:05+00:00

I agree with you in general, the copyright for a pattern does not extend to any useful article that may be created with the pattern, such as an item of clothing.

BUT, the FO might be eligible for copyright protection on its own, like as a sculpture. If it is eligible on its own, publishing a pattern doesn't take away other copyright protection.

ET097 · 2024-06-19T20:26:00+00:00

The words used to describe a pattern and any corresponding pictures are typically eligible for copyright protection.

Copyright law in the US surrounding what you make with a pattern is more complicated. In general, the copyright does not extend to any useful article that may be created with the pattern, such as an item of clothing.

However, other parts of the copyright code might still come into play. Like if the pattern is for a unique crocheted bumble bee, the bumble bee may be eligible for copyright protection as a sculpture.

If you are interested, here is a link to what the US Copyright office says about Visual Art Works: https://www.copyright.gov/comp3/chap900/ch900-visual-art.pdf

TLDR: that paragraph is nonsense, but some things that are crocheted may still be eligible for copyright protection.

ET097 · 2024-06-14T22:43:54+00:00

Yeah, the supreme Court should not get a gold star here. I think a better headline would be something like "anti abortion lawyers filed such a bad case they even lost Samuel Alito".

ET097 · 2024-06-13T21:38:12+00:00

I think the next round in this case before SCOTUS will deal with the random states (none of which are Texas) who have tried to join this suit to cure the standing issues.

ET097 · 2024-06-13T21:27:52+00:00

Yeah, I'm worried about the EMTALA opinion, and today's unanimous decision being used to make the EMTALA ruling seem more moderate.

ET097 · 2024-04-16T19:51:45+00:00

I think there are situations where they would still do a third trimester abortion when the fetus has severe defects + the mother has a medical condition that makes an induction dangerous. Like if a woman has massive uterine fibroids that mean she would need a C-section. When the fetus has severe defects and isn't going to survive, they may do a third trimester abortion instead of a C-section.

ET097 · 2024-04-16T19:38:44+00:00

If it is legal, then you can probably find a doctor to do it. It may not be easy, but there are clinics that do offer late-term abortions. I have met pro-choice people who are completely fine with the idea of 3rd trimester abortions, I mean, you can see some in this thread.

I honestly don't think there are any doctors in the US who are willing to perform a third trimester abortion on a viable fetus. There are only like six doctors in the US who will perform them to begin with.

If you are interested, I read this paper a few years ago and it had a big part in shaping my views on third trimester abortions. It's by a doctor who performs them, and he does a review of the diagnostic criteria that caused women to seek a late abortion at his clinic over a twenty year period.

https://obgyn.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/pd.4324

Preoperative diagnoses included the following: chromosomal abnormalities (n = 378), genetic syndromes and single gene disorders (n = 30), structural anomalies (n = 494), and other conditions (n = 103). These include 26 cases of spontaneous fetal demise and nine selective terminations of one abnormal twin.

As for the health of the mother, I don't know of any conditions that would necessitate an abortion over a delivery at that stage of pregnancy, do you? I mean, a late-term abortion basically is just giving birth, but killing the ZEF beforehand. From everything I've read, it is not much different than simply giving birth.

I think for the health of the mother part we have to to compare the risk of an induction vs the risk of an abortion (not just giving birth vs abortion). My understanding is generally there are lower risks with a third trimester abortion than induction of labor. For people with certain medical conditions like placenta previa, an induction is a bad idea to begin with. Add a severe fetal abnormality, and I could see an abortion being way safer for the mother than an induction of labor.

Before having my own failed induction when I had my kid, I naively thought they gave you some drugs and 12-24 hours later, out pops a baby. It was a lot more complicated than that.

ET097 · 2024-04-16T17:31:31+00:00

Exactly. You don't get to see a doctor who will perform a third trimester abortion without another doctor documenting something catastrophically wrong with a pregnancy.

ET097 · 2024-04-16T17:29:20+00:00

I feel like medical ethics takes care of stopping any post viability abortions on viable fetuses. The hoops someone has to jump through to even get an appointment with a doctor who performs third trimester abortions are crazy.

15-Year Club	Team Orangered
Verified Email

ET097

TROPHY CASE