COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) — The most far-reaching of Ohio’s laws restricting abortion was struck down on Thursday by a county judge who said last year’s voter-approved amendment enshrining reproductive rights renders the so-called heartbeat law unconstitutional.

Enforcement of the 2019 law banning most abortions once cardiac activity is detected — as early as six weeks into pregnancy, before many women know they’re pregnant — had been paused pending the challenge before Hamilton County Common Pleas Judge Christian Jenkins.

Jenkins said that when the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade and returned power over the abortion issue to the states, “Ohio’s Attorney General evidently didn’t get the memo.”

  • Nougat@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    67
    ·
    13 days ago

    … returned power over the abortion issue to the states, …

    “No not like that”

    • BossDj@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      12 days ago

      Republicans in every state have been working very hard to try and cripple voter initiatives

      • Serinus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        12 days ago

        Have you read the language on Ohio’s Issue #1 this ballot?

        The current mapping of congressional districts system is a bipartisan commission. If the commission doesn’t agree, the state legislature decides the maps. Guess how that turns out every time. The new system would replace that with an actual bipartisan commission that doesn’t just default to the state legislature.

        Turns out the state legislature doesn’t like this. While they couldn’t prevent the ballot measure, they could decide the language used. I’ll go find it and reply here.

        • Serinus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          12 days ago

          **Issue 1 ** To create an appointed redistricting commission not elected by or subject to removal by the voters of the state
          Proposed Constitutional Amendment

          The proposed amendment would:

          1. Repeal constitutional protections against gerrymandering approved by nearly three-quarters of Ohio electors participating in the statewide elections of 2015 and 2018, and eliminate the longstanding ability of Ohio citizens to hold their representatives accountable for establishing fair state legislative and congressional districts.

          2. Establish a new taxpayer-funded commission of appointees required to gerrymander the boundaries of state legislative and congressional districts to favor either of the two largest political parties in the state of Ohio, according to a formula based on partisan outcomes as the dominant factor, so that:

          A. Each district shall contain single-member districts that are geographically contiguous, but state legislative and congressional districts will no longer be required to be compact; and

          B. Counties, townships and cities throughout Ohio can be split and divided across multiple districts, and preserving communities of interest will be secondary to the formula that is based on partisan political outcomes.

          1. Require that a majority of the partisan commission members belong to the state’s two largest political parties.

          2. Prevent a commission member from being removed, except by a vote of their fellow commission members, even for incapacity, willful neglect of duty or gross misconduct.

          3. Prohibit any citizen from filing a lawsuit challenging a redistricting plan in any court, except if the lawsuit challenges the proportionality standard applied by the commission, requirements pertaining to an incumbent elected official’s residence, or the expiration of certain senators’ terms, and then only before the Ohio Supreme Court.

          4. Create the following process for appointing commission members: Four partisan appointees on the Ohio Ballot Board will choose a panel of 4 partisan retired judges (2 affiliated with the first major political party and 2 affiliated with the second major political party). Provide that the 4 legislative appointees of the Ohio Ballot Board would be responsible for appointing the panel members as follows: the Ballot Board legislative appointees affiliated with the same major political party would select 8 applicants and present those to the Ballot Board legislative appointees affiliated with the other major political party, who would then select 2 persons from the 8 for appointment to the panel, resulting in 4 panel appointees. The panel would then hire a private professional search firm to help them choose 6 of the 15 individuals on the commission. The panel will choose those 6 individuals by initially creating a pool of 90 individuals (30 from the first major political party, 30 from the second major political party, and 30 from neither the first nor second major political parties). The panel of 4 partisan retired judges will create a portal for public comment on the applicants and will conduct and publicly broadcast interviews with each applicant in the pool. The panel will then narrow the pool of 90 individuals down to 45 (15 from the first major political party; 15 from the second major political party; and 15 from neither the first nor second major political parties). Randomly, by draw, the 4 partisan retired judges will then blindly select 6 names out of the pool of 45 to be members of the commission (2 from the first major political party; 2 from the second major political party; and 2 from neither the first nor second major political parties). The 6 randomly drawn individuals will then review the applications of the remaining 39 individuals not randomly drawn and select the final 9 individuals to serve with them on the commission, the majority of which shall be from the first and the second major political parties (3 from the first major political party, 3 from the second major political party, and 3 from neither the first nor second major political parties).

          5. Require the affirmative votes of 9 of 15 members of the appointed commission to create legislative and congressional districts. If the commission is not able to determine a plan by September 19, 2025, or July 15 of every year ending in one, the following impasse procedure will be used: for any plan at an impasse, each commissioner shall have 3 days to submit no more than one proposed redistricting plan to be subject to a commission vote through a ranked-choice selection process, with the goal of having a majority of the commission members rank one of those plans first. If a majority cannot be obtained, the plan with the highest number of points in the ranked-choice process is eliminated, and the process is repeated until a plan receives a majority of first-place rankings. If the ranked-choice process ends in a tie for the highest point total, the tie shall be broken through a random process.

          6. Limit the right of Ohio citizens to freely express their opinions to members of the commission or to commission staff regarding the redistricting process or proposed redistricting plans, other than through designated meetings, hearings and an online public portal, and would forbid communication with the commission members and staff outside those contexts.

          7. Require the commission to immediately create new legislative and congressional districts in 2025 to replace the most recent districts adopted by the citizens of Ohio through their elected representatives.

          8. Impose new taxpayer-funded costs on the State of Ohio to pay the commission members, the commission staff and appointed special masters, professionals, and private consultants that the commission is required to hire; and an unlimited amount for legal expenses incurred by the commission in any related litigation.

          If approved, the amendment will be effective 30 days after the election.

          SHALL THE AMENDMENT BE APPROVED?

    • saltesc@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      13 days ago

      There does certainly seem to be a few that oppose democracy, which is an unusual thing to do while claiming oneself to be an American.

      • spaghettiwestern@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        13 days ago

        Not so unusual these days and way more than a few. We’ve got most of a political party that is perfectly willing to line up behind a fascist and cheer him on.

  • Maggoty@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    41
    ·
    12 days ago

    The article doesn’t make it clear what was really going on here.

    So the head line is that last year Ohio passed a constitutional measure protecting abortion up to viability. The actual thing they did though was much deeper. They made the doctor and the mother the legal point of decision for the mother’s healthcare, including abortion. So if the doctor says the fetus isn’t viable, that’s it. Nobody can come in and prosecute the doctor. They also made it unconstitutional to indirectly interfere with this care.

    The Ohio AG tried to say, okay you got me on the abortion. But all the counseling, waiting period, video recording of the procedure, reporting, and felony penalties for screwing any of that up are still in place.

    The judge called him on his bullshit and ruled all of that unconstitutional. So doctor/patient based healthcare is the law of the land in Ohio again.

    • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      edit-2
      12 days ago

      Fuck these people. They’re literally just disregarding voter passed measures. If they can pass that measure I hope they kick his ass out next chance.