16 Republican AGs Threaten Maine Over Protections for Abortion & Gender Affirming Care

[Murdoc's Mistress]

Republican attorneys general from 16 states are threatening to sue Maine if it passes a law shielding providers of gender-affirming care and abortion from out-of-state legal action.

Maine legislators are considering a bill, Legislative Document 227, which “aims to protect health care providers from subpoenas or warrants, health records requests, extradition requests and other civil or criminal proceedings if they provide care — including abortion and gender-affirming care — that has been banned in a patient’s home state,” the Portland Press Herald reports. It would also allow these health care professionals to sue out-of-state officials who take action against them.

Seventeen states and the District of Columbia have adopted similar “shield laws” regarding abortion providers, and 11 states and D.C. have such laws regarding providers of gender-affirming care.

The letter from the Republican AGs, led by Jonathan Skrmetti of Tennessee, claims that LD 227 “violates the United States Constitution and flouts the federalist structure that allows each of our States to engage in self-government responsive to the will of our citizens.”

https://news.yahoo.com/16-republican-ag ... 11241.html

Link to letter:
https://www.tn.gov/content/dam/tn/attor ... Letter.pdf

[Murdoc's Mistress]

My thoughts:

I find it interesting that republican states that have banned abortion and GAC are now taking issue with a state trying to implement protection laws. Maine isn't the first to do this, or even the second. Some speculate that the AGs are puffing their chests now because Maine is smaller and possibly easier to bully into compliance since they don't have the kind of money that the other states have in terms of fighting back.

The other thing I find ridiculous is how these AGs seem to believe that their laws can be applied outside of their state or that their laws travel with their citizens (fyi, they do not obviously). They're all about state rights until a state tries to pass a law saying they won't cooperate with any prosecution or civil suits...which those states have every right to pass.

[Della]

Uh, what happened with States Rights?

[Pjmm]

Uh, what happened with States Rights?

don't you know that only applies if the state toes the Republican line?

[cgd5112]

It would be in the interest of the other states to support Maine in beating off the suit. If the lawsuit is in favor of the Rep Gas, it will send a precedent for the right extremist and the religious fascists.

[Murdoc's Mistress]

It would be in the interest of the other states to support Maine in beating off the suit. If the lawsuit is in favor of the Rep Gas, it will send a precedent for the right extremist and the religious fascists.

Considering a dozen other states have already put laws in place to protect patients, doctors and those who help people gain access, I def agree that they should be making it clear they have Maine's back if the knuckle draggers try to take it further. A united front could scare them all back to under their bridges.

I wouldn't be surprised if the AGs involved want a multi state court challenge so they can try to get it to the Supreme Court. It's like they're desperately trying to set the stage to claim ownership over its citizens regardless of where they go in the country. They thought they had it all in the bag with their laws until other states started coming out with laws that basically neutered them before they even got a chance.

[jessilin0113]

The violation of privacy alone is mind boggling. How would a state know someone is going out of state for care?

[Murdoc's Mistress]

The violation of privacy alone is mind boggling. How would a state know someone is going out of state for care?

Well, Paxton did try to demand Seattle Children's Hospital to pony up records of any TX resident who came to them for care so it's not too much of a reach to assume others will try similar moves.

[Murdoc's Mistress]

Uh, what happened with States Rights?

I think their argument has to do with full faith and credit bullshit. Basically, if State A issues a court order or judgment then other states normally would follow it. Most of the states that passed similar block laws also include barring even abortion/GAC related civil judgments against citizens and doctors in their state. So I think their tantrum may focus around their inability to sue and collect on any monetary judgment.