Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Attorneys for the Yellowhammer Fund argued that authorities in Alabama cannot prosecute someone for conspiracy in another state where abortion is legal. “As a matter of law, Alabama’s abortion ban reaches only as far as its borders,” the motion said. “Yellowhammer Fund would not violate any law if it helped pregnant Alabamians access lawful abortion care in other states, and Defendant’s assertion that he can criminalize people who support such care offends the values of sovereignty and comity that are foundational to our constitutional structure.” A judge has scheduled a hearing Tuesday to consider Marshall’s motion to dismiss."
————————————————————————————————
GIST: "Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall said the state can prosecute people who help women travel out of state for abortions in response to a lawsuit filed by a pro-abortion rights group and owners of women’s clinics.
Marshall filed a motion Monday in federal court to dismiss a lawsuit filed by providers, the ACLU and Yellowhammer Fund, which helped fund abortions in Alabama before the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the right to an abortion with its Dobbs decision.
With that decision the high court left states in control of abortion access. Some states, including Alabama, have severely limited abortion access.
The lawsuit, filed July 31, alleged Marshall violated the right to free speech when he said that individuals could be charged with conspiracy for helping women get abortions in other states. A doctor and a clinic owner said the comments made it difficult to advise or treat pregnant women, even those with complications. It stemmed from comments made in July 2022 on the Jeff Poor Show, a talk radio program.
After the Dobbs decision, Alabama outlawed almost all abortions in the state. The Human Life Protection Act created a class A felony for performing abortions, which is punishable by up to life in prison.
Marshall said on the show the state would investigate potential conspiracy or accessory charges for groups that openly fund or promote out-of-state abortions.
“If someone was promoting themselves out as a funder of abortions out of state, then that is potentially criminally actionable for us,” Marshall said. “One of the things we will do in working with local prosecutors is making sure that we fully implement this law. There’s nothing about that law that restricts any individual from driving across state lines and seeking an abortion in another place. However, I would say that if an individual held themselves out as an entity or a group that is using funds that they are able to raise to facilitate those visits, then that’s something we’re going to look at closely.”
In his in his motion to dismiss, Marshall further argued the state can pursue charges because it has outlawed abortion.
“Though abortion may be legal elsewhere, it is plainly illegal pursuant to Ala. Code § 13A-4-4 for Plaintiffs to conspire with others to procure abortions that would be illegal in Alabama,” according to Marshall’s motion. “The criminal conduct is the agreement (the conspiracy) itself, which is conduct that occurs in Alabama that Alabama has every right to prosecute. Thus, the legality of abortion in other States is irrelevant to whether Alabama can prosecute a conspiracy formed in Alabama.”
The First Amendment does not cover speech related to breaking the law, according to Marshall’s motion.
“While Plaintiffs’ clients may be allowed under Alabama law to obtain abortions outside Alabama, Plaintiffs are ‘plainly [not] allow[ed]’ under Ala. Code § 13A-4-4 to conspire in Alabama to help procure abortions.”
Attorneys for the Yellowhammer Fund filed a motion for summary judgement Monday that said Marshall’s language had chilled the speech and conduct of people at the organization. The organization stopped funding abortions after Marshall’s comments on the radio show. Instead, they shifted their resources into providing services such as birth control and pregnancy support.
If the attorney general had not made those comments, staff at the Yellowhammer Fund would have continued to fund travel to states where abortion is legal, the motion said.
“There can be no dispute that Defendant’s threats blatantly burden speech and expressive conduct on the basis of its content and viewpoint, infringe on the right to associate with others in pursuit of shared goals, and inhibit a wide range of expression about lawful out-of-state conduct,” the motion said.
Attorneys for the Yellowhammer Fund argued that authorities in Alabama cannot prosecute someone for conspiracy in another state where abortion is legal.
“As a matter of law, Alabama’s abortion ban reaches only as far as its borders,” the motion said. “Yellowhammer Fund would not violate any law if it helped pregnant Alabamians access lawful abortion care in other states, and Defendant’s assertion that he can criminalize people who support such care offends the values of sovereignty and comity that are foundational to our constitutional structure.”
A judge has scheduled a hearing Tuesday to consider Marshall’s motion to dismiss."
The entire story can be read at:
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue/resource. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com. Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog;
SEE BREAKDOWN OF SOME OF THE ON-GOING INTERNATIONAL CASES (OUTSIDE OF THE CONTINENTAL USA) THAT I AM FOLLOWING ON THIS BLOG, AT THE LINK BELOW: HL
https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/120008354894645705/47049136857587929
FINAL WORD: (Applicable to all of our wrongful conviction cases): "Whenever there is a wrongful conviction, it exposes errors in our criminal legal system, and we hope that this case — and lessons from it — can prevent future injustices.
Lawyer Radha Natarajan;
Executive Director: New England Innocence Project;
—————————————————————————————————
FINAL, FINAL WORD: "Since its inception, the Innocence Project has pushed the criminal legal system to confront and correct the laws and policies that cause and contribute to wrongful convictions. They never shied away from the hard cases — the ones involving eyewitness identifications, confessions, and bite marks. Instead, in the course of presenting scientific evidence of innocence, they've exposed the unreliability of evidence that was, for centuries, deemed untouchable." So true!
Christina Swarns: Executive Director: The Innocence Project;
------------------------------------------------------------------
YET ANOTHER FINAL WORD:
David Hammond, one of Broadwater’s attorneys who sought his exoneration, told the Syracuse Post-Standard, “Sprinkle some junk science onto a faulty identification, and it’s the perfect recipe for a wrongful conviction.”
https://deadline.com/2021/11/alice-sebold-lucky-rape-conviction-overturned-anthony-broadwater-1234880143/
------------------------------------------------
