- Alabama’s Senate passed the strictest abortion law in the U.S., banning the procedure in all stages of pregnancy and making no exceptions for rape or incest.
- Opponents say the law is unconstitutional and in direct opposition to Roe V. Wade.
- However, many of the politicians who pushed this bill did so hoping it would bring the topic of abortion back to the Supreme Court, in an effort to try and overturn the landmark Roe V. Wade decision.
Update: Governor Kay Ivey has now signed the bill into law.
Alabama Law Moves Through Senate
The Alabama State Senate passed a bill on Tuesday that effectively bans abortion in almost all cases, marking what would be the strictest abortion law in the country if signed by Governor Kay Ivey.
The bill was passed by Alabama’s house last month. Gov. Ivey has not publicly indicated her support for it, but many leaders in the state believe she will sign it.
The bill bans abortion in every stage of pregnancy and does not make an exception for cases of rape or incest. It includes three exceptions: if the pregnancy poses a severe risk to the mother’s life, if the pregnancy is ectopic, or if there is a case of lethal fetal anomaly.
The bill also criminalizes abortion procedures. Any doctor who performs it could be charged with felony offenses and land up to 99 years in jail.
Democrats quickly condemned the movement of this bill, citing its direct opposition to Roe V. Wade, which is the 1973 Supreme Court decision that affirmed women’s constitutional right to choose. The bill’s critics include 2020 candidates like Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), who called the ban “dangerous and exceptionally cruel.”
Fellow presidential runner Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) called the bill “unconstitutional.”
Democrats in Alabama also spoke in opposition of the legislation headed for its governor. State Sen. Bobby Singleton (D-AL) went on CNN and called the bill “horrible.”
“I think that we raped women last night,” said Singleton. “We made women of Alabama the model of the new Roe v. Wade. I think that this is just a horrible bill.”
“I hate to think the fact that if someone would rape my daughter at 12 years old,” Singleton continued, “that is just sad to tell my daughter that she had to carry that baby for nine months here in the state of Alabama and look that rapist in the face for the rest of her life.”
On the Senate’s floor, Sen. Vivian Davis Figures (D-AL) also spoke out against the legislation her colleagues were passing.
“You don’t have to raise that child,” she said while debating a male Republican senator. “You don’t have to carry that child. You don’t have to provide for that child. You don’t have to do anything for that child — but yet, you want to make the decision for that woman, that that’s what she has to do.”
Alabama Republicans Support Bill
Republicans in the state spoke in defense of the legislation. Alabama State Sen. Clyde Chambliss (R-AL) said, “This bill has the opportunity to save the lives of millions of unborn children.”
Alabama’s Senate Majority Leader Greg Reed (R-AL) said this bill aimed to speak on behalf of the beliefs of the state’s residents.
“Alabamians stand firmly on the side of life,” he said in a statement.
State Rep. Terri Collins (R-AL) said that this legislation is about more than just the laws it will enact in the state of Alabama. After the vote, she said it was about creating a larger debate around Roe V. Wade.
“This bill is about challenging Roe v. Wade and protecting the lives of the unborn, because an unborn baby is a person who deserves love and protection,” she said.
What Challenging Roe V. Wade Looks Like
Having states pass abortion laws with the intent of challenging Roe V. Wade is nothing new. Several states have recently proposed or passed abortion legislation knowing that it will likely be challenged in court.
Both Ohio and Georgia recently joined Mississippi and Kentucky in passing fetal heartbeat bills, which ban abortion after a heartbeat can be detected. This happens around six weeks into a pregnancy, which opponents of the laws note is often before many women even know they are pregnant.
Organizations have already promised to take these to court. On Wednesday, the ACLU filed a lawsuit against the bill in Ohio.
Legal experts argue that a lot of these laws could be appealed, and could end up in the hands of the Supreme Court.
Since the nomination of Justice Brett Kavanaugh, the court now swings in conservative favor with five right-wing justices and four liberal justices. This could mean that if the topic of abortion were to be brought to the Supreme Court, it is possible that Roe V. Wade may not be held up.
So, what would happen if Roe V. Wade were to be overturned? Well, a full and complete reversal of Roe V. Wade would likely not happen overnight. It would take years for a case to really land in the hands of the Supreme Court. However, the court could make a series of decisions that slowly chip away at it, and severely limit abortion rights.
To see the most severe results possible, let’s take a look at the country without Roe V. Wade. Overturning the ruling would not make abortion illegal nationwide, rather, abortion would become a state issue.
Some states already have regulations in place in the event that Roe V. Wade is ever overturned, most of which would ban abortion in most cases. According to the Guttmacher Institute, nine states have bans pre-Roe that would be retained, and six others have a post-Roe trigger law that would ban abortion immediately upon its reversal. There are seven states who have expressed intent to severely limit abortion rights.
Ten states would protect abortion rights. Nine would make sure the procedure is legal up to the point of viability, while one would protect the right throughout a full pregnancy.
As for whether or not Americans want Roe V. Wade upheld, a Fox News poll back in February showed general support for it. About 57 percent of responders said they wanted to let the ruling stand, while 21 percent said they wanted it overturned.
See what others are saying: (CNN) (Reuters) (Washington Post)
Man Spent COVID Relief Loan on $58,000 Pokemon Card, Feds Say
The man is facing a wire fraud charge, which carries a max sentence of up to 20 years in federal prison, along with a $250,000 fine.
COVID Relief Funds Used on Pokemon Card
Authorities have accused a man in Georgia of misusing COVID-19 relief funds, claiming that he spent $57,789 on a single Pokemon card.
Prosecutors said Vinath Oudomsine made false statements about the gross revenue his business earns and the number of workers he employs when he applied for aid authorized under the CARES Act.
On his July 2020 application, Oudomsine allegedly claimed he had 10 employees and 12-month gross revenues of $235,000.
The following month, he was given about $85,000 from the Small Business Administration (SBA), which means he spent nearly all of the money on the rare card.
Authorities have given few details about the specific card purchased, though they have said Oudomsine was charged with wire fraud and is expected to appear in court on Thursday.
The charge carries a max sentence of up to 20 years in federal prison, along with a $250,000 fine.
Misuse of COVID Relief Funds
Oudomsine is far from the first person to face charges for fraud related to small business loans issued amid the pandemic. Others who received relief funds have been accused of spending the money on Lamborghinis, nights at strip clubs, and even an alpaca farm, among other purchases.
In fact, the first person to be charged with fraudulently seeking a pandemic relief loan was recently sentenced to 56 months in prison following a nationwide search after the man faked his own death.
According to The Washington Post, a federal watchdog said this month that the SBA overpaid $4.5 billion in grants to self-employed people and that “no system of controls was in place to flag applications with flawed or illogical information.”
On top of that, the SBA inspector general determined earlier this year that the agency rushed to send out billions of dollars in loans through the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) “at the expense of controls” that could have blocked inappropriate aid.
In a statement on Sunday, the agency said that under the Biden administration, it has worked with Congress and the inspector general to add antifraud measures. Meanwhile, defenders of pandemic relief programs have argued that flagged loans and grants represent only a small fraction of the distributed aid that has been critical to small businesses and their pandemic recovery.
See what others are saying: (NPR)(USA Today)(The Washington Post)
FDA Authorizes Moderna and J&J COVID Vaccine Boosters, Approves Mix-and-Match Doses
The approval will allow at-risk Americans who received Pfizer and Moderna vaccines to get any booster six months after their initial series and all Johnson & Johnson recipients 18 and older to do the same two months after their single-shot dose.
New FDA Authorization
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on Wednesday authorized boosters shots of Moderna and Johnson & Johnson COVID-19 vaccines and approved a mix-and-match strategy that will allow people who got one company’s shot to get a booster from a different maker.
The decision paves the way for millions of more at-risk Americans to get extra protection, and not just certain Pfizer recipients as previously approved by the FDA.
Under the authorization, people who received Moderna or Pfizer can get any one of the three booster shots six months after completing their initial series if they are 65 and older, at high risk of severe COVID, or face increased exposure because of their work.
Meanwhile, all J&J recipients 18 and older can get any of the approved vaccines two months after they received the one-shot jab.
Hazy Recommendations, For Now
Notably, the FDA did not recommend a certain combination of vaccines, nor did the agency say whether or not it would be more effective for people to stick with their original vaccine maker for their booster.
The new authorizations draw on a study from the National Institutes of Health (NIH), which found that there are no safety concerns with mixing boosters and that vaccine combinations were at least as effective in stimulating antibodies as matched vaccines.
In the case of J&J recipients, the NIH found that people actually had a higher boost from mixing either Moderna or Pfizer boosters.
However, some of the scientists who worked on the study said it should not be used to recommend one combination over another because the research was limited.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which determines vaccine recommendations, could issue more guidance on when and whether people should switch vaccine makers for their booster shots.
An advisory panel for the agency is meeting Thursday to discuss the new FDA authorizations and recommendations.
Once the panel makes its decision, the CDC director has the final say on the guidelines. If the agency agrees with the FDA’s decisions, the booster shots could be rolled out as soon as this weekend.
See what others are saying: (The New York Times) (NPR) (The Washington Post)
Paris Hilton Urges Lawmakers To Crack Down on Abusive Teen Treatment Facilities
The heiress alleges that she was a victim of abuse in these types of centers for two years and wants to ensure that no child suffers through the same experience.
Paris Hilton Details Abuse Within “Troubled Teen Industry”
Socialite and entrepreneur Paris Hilton spoke outside of the U.S. Capitol on Wednesday to support the Accountability for Congregate Care Act, which is set to be introduced in the near future.
Hilton joined Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA), Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), and Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) to advocate for the legislation, which aims to create a “bill of rights” for children in treatment and behavioral centers.
The heiress has alleged that she spent two of her teenage years in these types of facilities and was subject to rampant abuse. She is far from alone.
During a press conference, Hilton said that one night when she was 16, she woke up to two large men in her bedroom forcing her out of her house. She said she screamed for help because she thought she was being kidnapped, but her parents watched as she was taken away to a “troubled teen” program.
“Like countless other parents of teens, my parents had searched for solutions to my rebellious behavior,” she explained in an op-ed for The Washington Post this week. “Unfortunately, they fell for the misleading marketing of the ‘troubled teen industry’ — therapeutic boarding schools, military-style boot camps, juvenile justice facilities, behavior modification programs and other facilities that generate roughly $50 billion annually in part by pitching ‘tough love’ as the answer to problematic behavior.”
Hilton said she was sent to four different facilities where she was “physically and psychologically abused.”
“I was strangled, slapped across the face, watched in the shower by male staff, called vulgar names, forced to take medication without a diagnosis, not given a proper education, thrown into solitary confinement in a room covered in scratch marks and smeared in blood and so much more,” she explained during the press conference.
“At Provo Canyon School in Utah, I was given clothes with a number on the tag. I was no longer me, I was only number 127,” she continued. “I was forced to stay indoors for 11 months straight, no sunlight, no fresh air. These were considered privileges.”
Goals of the Accountability for Congregate Care Act
Hilton claims that a lack of transparency and accountability has allowed this structure of abuse to thrive for decades. In some cases, she said it has taken children’s lives. Now, she wants Congress and President Joe Biden to act.
“This bill creates an urgently needed bill of rights to ensure that every child placed into congregate care facilities is provided a safe and humane environment,” Hilton said of the Accountability for Congregate Care Act.
“This bill of rights provides protections that I wasn’t afforded, like access to education, to the outdoors, freedom from abusive treatment, and even the basic right to move and speak freely. If I had these rights and could have exercised them, I would have been saved from over 20 years of trauma and severe PTSD.”
Foster children, children being treated for mental disorders, and other children in youth programs would be impacted by the bill.
Hilton was one of several survivors and advocates who fought for the legislation on Wednesday. Rep. Khanna thanked them for using their stories to fight for change.
“No child should be subjected to solitary confinement, forced labor, or any form of institutional abuse,” he wrote. “Thanks to Paris Hilton, my colleagues & the survivors & advocates who joined us today to discuss how we can hold the congregate care industry accountable.”
While only Democratic legislators are currently sponsoring the bill, Hilton called for a bipartisan effort to fight for the rights of children.
“Ensuring that children are safe from institutional abuse isn’t a Republican or Democratic issue,” Hilton said. “It’s a basic human rights issue that requires immediate attention.”