.jpg)
In the fall of 2017, a fight over abortion, religious conscience, and the actions of government officials became the next marquee controversy over the Trump administration’s new worldview, in which religion and law became frequently interchangeable. It was a story told most commonly through the aperture of Margaret Atwood’s dystopian novel The Handmaid’s Tale. And the comparison was not inapt. Brigitte Amiri knows all about this strange dystopian meta-story, because, well, she litigated it. In fact, the Trump Justice Department tried (unsuccessfully, as it turned out) to ruin her professional career for prevailing in a constitutional challenge to it.
Yes, you read that right. The Litigator, the author of this book, all publishing participants, and more, saw a direct parallel of a court case held under the past president's administration to be comparative to The Handmaid's Tale! Let's get specific about that meaning. In this case, we find a 17-year-old who has been raped, seeking an abortion. She had undergone counseling and remained firm that she could not deal with being forced to carry her rapist's child, even to term... The court named her Jane Doe, she had been unaccompanied at the border. In fact, she had left her parents home where she was being abused.
At the Border she was immediately placed in a care facility and while she was waiting for asylum support, she discovered she was pregnant. She asked for an abortion. Because she could not get parental approval, she would have to seek approval of a judge.
Jane went to state court with Marie Christine Cortez, an attorney from Jane’s Due Process, a nonprofit organization that offers assistance to pregnant minors in Texas. (A state which was just beginning to flex their political power regarding women's health care.) She was appointed a guardian, and a state judge granted her request on September 25, 2017. The procedure was scheduled for the 28, toward the end of her first trimester.
All that would have been needed was for Jane to leave the care facility and then return to await action on her request for asylum. The head of that facility would not allow her to go! Scott Lloyd? In 2017, Donald Trump placed him in charge of ORR, which had custody over all immigrants. You may have heard about him via the news. It had been reported that he was tracking the menstrual cycles of all females under 18 in that facility! Yeah, you sure can tell what a man's like when they start keeping track of women's menstrual cycles! No wonder these young women did not trust him or others involved... But that was just the beginning as the court case began to allow her an abortion... With the new president's election, all things women's health would get harder, but Amiri knew she had no choice...
The panel Amiri drew for oral argument in Garza v. Hargan consisted of three appellate judges: Karen LeCraft Henderson, Patricia Millett, and Brett Kavanaugh. Attorney Catherine Dorsey, representing the Justice Department, opened by telling the court that the government was “not preventing, blocking, or imposing any obstacle on Ms. Doe pursuant of an abortion here, such that it could constitute an undue burden within the meaning of Casey. The Government has not put any obstacle in her path; rather the Government is refusing to facilitate an abortion, which it is permitted to do in furtherance of its legitimate interest in promoting childbirth.” The government wasn’t impeding her, it said; it just wouldn’t help her. Judge Kavanaugh pressed Dorsey on how it could be true that if Jane were an adult in a federal prison, she would have a constitutional right to abortion under Roe v. Wade, but not as an immigrant minor. Dorsey replied that “Ms. Doe has the option of voluntary departure” to her home country. Later in the argument Dorsey would be asked whether Jane’s home country allowed abortion. She conceded that it did not. Dorsey explained to the court that adult migrants in ICE detention can obtain an abortion but minors cannot because HHS has an interest in promoting “the best interests of the child,” which is, presumably, to give birth in every single case. Judge Kavanaugh asked how many pregnant minors were currently in ORR custody. Dorsey did not know. Judge Millett asked how it was possible that ORR would be “facilitating” an abortion given that Jane is “in the custody of a grantee who has no opposition to letting her go, other than . . . the Government’s threat to take away funding if they let her go have the abortion.” Dorsey acknowledged that the shelter needed only to do the paperwork to transfer her and provide care for her post-procedure. Millett was confused: “So the one health care they’re not willing to do is for abortion. They’d be willing to do anything if she were to continue the pregnancy and do all this facilitation if she were to continue the pregnancy?” Dorsey repeated that the government had an interest in promoting childbirth. Millett: “You’ve already had a judicial bypass that says she can make this decision herself, not her custodian. She’s got a guardian ad litem that agrees. And your position is that the facilitating would be ORR saying okay we’re going to let you exercise your choice.” Then it was Brigitte Amiri’s turn at the lectern. “May it please the court. Good morning,” she opened. “Since 1973 the Supreme Court has held that the Government may not ban abortion. By refusing to transport J.D. for an abortion, or refusing to allow anyone to transport J.D., including the shelter or her guardian ad litem, the Government is violating well established Supreme Court Precedent.” Judge Kavanaugh pressed her on why a sponsor couldn’t be found for Jane. Giving custody of Doe from the government to a sponsor would prevent the shelter from facilitating an abortion and thus allow the court to avoid making a ruling on an undocumented minor’s right to an abortion in federal custody. Amiri replied that the government had been unsuccessfully seeking a sponsor for six weeks already, that one attempt to locate a sponsor had already fallen through, and that finding a sponsor could take months. Judge Millett asked why the federal government didn’t have an interest in helping unaccompanied minors make decisions that are safe and appropriate for them. Amiri replied, “Your Honor, they do have the requirement to act in the best interest of minors. And I will say that they are not doing that with respect to J.D., when she has made a decision to have an abortion. She has a judicial bypass from a state court judge. What they are actually doing is supplanting their decision about what J.D. should do with her pregnancy and that is not acting in her best interest and that is actually veto power over J.D.’s abortion decision.” Judge Kavanaugh* pressed her on why having a sponsor, another adult to talk to, wouldn’t help Jane make a better, more informed decision. Amiri reiterated that Jane already had a judicial bypass, plus a guardian ad litem, plus an attorney ad litem for emotional support. She added that Scott Lloyd had gone to another minor in a shelter, personally “to talk to her about her pregnancy and, I believe, unfairly pressure her to carry her pregnancy to term.”
*Judge Kavanaugh was one of the three Trump appointments who overthrew Roe even though during his appointment interviews, he indicated that he considered it a precedent and told the women who asked that he would not vote to change...Barrett also said this during her interviews! Yet both voted for the overthrow on the first chance they got!
Now we all know what happened under the past president, don't we? First his Attorney General made it a law to separate children from the parents, as they allowed immigrants through the border! With a deal made with evangelical christians, Trump placed judges who were from a pre-selected list for appointment. It was rigged of course... And then they proceeded with actions like just this one case times so many we can't count... And she also knew that they lost count and location of where those children were taken when they stole them from the parent(s)!
And it gets worse daily. Roe was overturned and the whole nation is in uproar... I've shared about a number that were extremely upsetting to the individual making the news who needed to have a medical procedure... But this week it has gotten even worse, thanks to Clarence Thomas (yeah, him who gets big sums of financial support from a millionaire, and whose wife assisted in the January 6th insurrection planning...)who in his concurrent statement on abortion suggested states go back into the historical records to see if there was already a law for abortion in place... Suddenly Arizona's state supreme court pulled a law that was written by one man, before even the state was authorized...in 1846...and made it the law of the state!!! This week!
You can't write fiction that is this extreme!
Most of you may remember that, in my opinion, IF there must be a law, it should be Pro-Choice. But, women's health care is a personal issue that should not be controlled in any way by the government! Can you imagine a woman who has had a problem with pregnancy for whatever reason, that the doctor and all who are involved would be jailed!!!
As the Attorney General clearly stated yesterday, this cannot be allowed to continue! Women are being used for political power on all levels... Men are the primary architects creating such laws! And no, they are doctors, they are politicians!!! Stop this Madness!
I found it ironic that this book included reference to my last read book... I am continuing to read this book. Included, for example, is what happened in Virginia where a young woman was killed by car during demonstrations... I have found it of benefit to see WHAT happened legally after those events took place in front of us! I'll be fitting in this type of post among reviews of other books I've already read... I've even thought about making it into a book club discussion here on BRH... What do you think? Comment if interested!
God Bless
Gabby
No comments:
Post a Comment