PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "That's not all: The case has also surfaced some pretty terrifying legal arguments about women's right to leave the state. In his legal briefs, Marshall wrote that Alabama could restrict women's travel in the same way they do sex offenders. Yes, really—he argued that in the same way the state has an interest in protecting people from sexual violence, it has "strong, legitimate interests including preserving unborn life."
-------------------------------------------------------
COMMENTARY: “In The Courts,” by Jessica Valenti, in her Blog ‘Abortion, Every Day’ published on March 5, 2025. (Jessica Valenti is a writer, activist, and one of the country’s most influential voices on gender and politics. The award-winning author of eight books—including the New York Times bestseller Abortion—she has shaped the national conversation on feminism for over two decades.)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
GIST: All eyes should be on Alabama today, where a critical hearing took place over whether the state can prosecute people who help others get abortions—whether that's a friend, family member, or an abortion fund.
A quick refresher: After Roe was overturned, Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall warned in a radio interview that those who 'aid and abet' abortions would face "conspiracy" and "accessory" charges. With the help of the ACLU, the Yellowhammer Fund and West Alabama Women's Center (WAWC) sued Marshall's office for violating their First Amendment rights. They pointed out that the AG's threats meant that they couldn't even provide a patient with information about a pro-choice website without fearing prosecution!
The suit asks the court to make clear that Alabama can't prosecute people for helping someone obtain an out-of-state abortion or abortion medication. But Marshall has continually doubled and tripled down, arguing that assisting with an abortion is a "criminal conspiracy" unprotected by free speech. Under his interpretation of the law, even telling someone about a clinic where they could get care would be a crime. And then there was this jaw-dropping comparison:
"One cannot seriously doubt that the State can prevent a mobster from asking a hitman to kill a rival because the agreement occurred through spoken word. So too here for conspiracies to obtain an elective abortion."
The goal is clear: to isolate abortion patients and terrify anyone who might help them.
That's not all: The case has also surfaced some pretty terrifying legal arguments about women's right to leave the state. In his legal briefs, Marshall wrote that Alabama could restrict women's travel in the same way they do sex offenders. Yes, really—he argued that in the same way the state has an interest in protecting people from sexual violence, it has "strong, legitimate interests including preserving unborn life."
The hearing today was in a federal court in Montgomery, where both sides were seeking summary judgement. Robin Marty, Executive Director of WAWC, said they feel "very optimistic":
"We look forward to a ruling that will finally allow us to resume providing our patients and other pregnant people with comprehensive information about all the legal medical options available to them, so they can make and effectuate their fully informed medical decisions and prioritize their own health and well-being.””
The entire commentary can be read at:
https://draft.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/120008354894645705/2892032714767779598
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/120008354894645705/4704913685758792985
———————————————————————————————
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;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------