With its midnight “shadow docket” opinion allowing the nation’s most restrictive—and facially unconstitutional—abortion law to go into effect, the Supreme Court has now invited copycat legislation in other GOP-controlled states that could gut the right to choose for millions of women.
I keep hearing that the Texas draconian, handmaid's-tale anti-abortion law can't be challenged because it leaves enforcement up to vigilante justice. But this strategy is not new. Qui tam lawsuits have a history going back to Roman and Anglo,-Saxon antecedents. Qui tam, which is an abbreviation of the latin phrase qui tam pro domino rege quam pro se ipso in hac parte sequitur, meaning "[he] who sues in this matter for the king as well as for himself," was used for various issues in England up to the 19th century, including Sunday laws. It is still used in the United States for enforcement of the federal False Claims Act. Qui tam lawsuits may be brought by private individuals, but they are really for the purpose of law enforcement. The government is delegating enforcement to private individuals. Enforcement is still government enforcement. And should be challenged as such.
False Claims Act allows private citizens on behalf of the gov't AND the United States to pursue perpetrators of fraud on its own. Private citizens who successfully bring qui tam actions may receive a portion of the government’s recovery. Not an equal comparison. Additionally, an injury, in the FCA a fraud perpetrated on the gov't is theoretically an injury to its people. Not a fair comparison.
The obvious move here is for New York or California to pass facially unconstitutional gun restrictions enforced under the same regime. That way, at least the members of the five-judge majority can go ahead and be honest about the hypocrisy.
Texas, the New Afghanistan. With Sharia rule under the guise of being good Christians. Another fine example of why religion is bad for the masses and enriches the few.
The fact that a serial rapist, who undoubtedly caused women to seek an abortion, got 1/3 of the court rammed through, is beyond ironic. If I remember correctly, at least 4 of the 5 who are allowing this, said, under oath, that Roe is settled law. The showed us that they lied, under oath. Can anything be done about that? The court needs to be expanded to at least 13, but, this current crop of Democrats don't seem to have the courage to do much of anything that might endanger their precious filibuster. Everyone, except straight, white, males, are going to be screwed over. Republicans have been working towards this for decades. Carefully brainwashing their base, feeding their hate, setting up this us vs. them scenario. I am disgusted and heartbroken with this country. Even though Roberts voted with the minority, he should be ashamed of himself. This court is a joke. They're nothing more than a super PAC.
The anti-abortion base doesn’t care that they are being exploited by flailing desperate idiots who don’t even believe themselves. It’s all for blind votes. And it burns my biscuit! I’m thankful to have access to knowledgeable people on this forum for a sanity check.
Yes. Florida already said they would enact a similar law and this morning on a Volkh Conspiracy/Reason blog post about it, some commenters were already noting approvingly how the same strategy could be applied to undermine constitutional rights/federal laws in other contexts. I don’t think it’s an exaggeration to see this signalling a serious constitutional crisis in this country. I would love to read the district court and 5th circuit opinions but don’t know how to find them.
I still don't understand why the citizen enforcement would prevail...doesn't it have to go to court? Abortion is still legal at six weeks under Roe so why would the court find it valid for the citizen enforcer to be enforcing an unconstitutional law?
I keep hearing that the Texas draconian, handmaid's-tale anti-abortion law can't be challenged because it leaves enforcement up to vigilante justice. But this strategy is not new. Qui tam lawsuits have a history going back to Roman and Anglo,-Saxon antecedents. Qui tam, which is an abbreviation of the latin phrase qui tam pro domino rege quam pro se ipso in hac parte sequitur, meaning "[he] who sues in this matter for the king as well as for himself," was used for various issues in England up to the 19th century, including Sunday laws. It is still used in the United States for enforcement of the federal False Claims Act. Qui tam lawsuits may be brought by private individuals, but they are really for the purpose of law enforcement. The government is delegating enforcement to private individuals. Enforcement is still government enforcement. And should be challenged as such.
False Claims Act allows private citizens on behalf of the gov't AND the United States to pursue perpetrators of fraud on its own. Private citizens who successfully bring qui tam actions may receive a portion of the government’s recovery. Not an equal comparison. Additionally, an injury, in the FCA a fraud perpetrated on the gov't is theoretically an injury to its people. Not a fair comparison.
The obvious move here is for New York or California to pass facially unconstitutional gun restrictions enforced under the same regime. That way, at least the members of the five-judge majority can go ahead and be honest about the hypocrisy.
Texas, the New Afghanistan. With Sharia rule under the guise of being good Christians. Another fine example of why religion is bad for the masses and enriches the few.
This is beyond bad and will turn into a witch hunt I fully expect that they will be burning women at the stake again very soon
The fact that a serial rapist, who undoubtedly caused women to seek an abortion, got 1/3 of the court rammed through, is beyond ironic. If I remember correctly, at least 4 of the 5 who are allowing this, said, under oath, that Roe is settled law. The showed us that they lied, under oath. Can anything be done about that? The court needs to be expanded to at least 13, but, this current crop of Democrats don't seem to have the courage to do much of anything that might endanger their precious filibuster. Everyone, except straight, white, males, are going to be screwed over. Republicans have been working towards this for decades. Carefully brainwashing their base, feeding their hate, setting up this us vs. them scenario. I am disgusted and heartbroken with this country. Even though Roberts voted with the minority, he should be ashamed of himself. This court is a joke. They're nothing more than a super PAC.
The anti-abortion base doesn’t care that they are being exploited by flailing desperate idiots who don’t even believe themselves. It’s all for blind votes. And it burns my biscuit! I’m thankful to have access to knowledgeable people on this forum for a sanity check.
This is all so discouraging! The judiciary was always the branch I held onto for some balance and reasoning. Not anymore.
Yes. Florida already said they would enact a similar law and this morning on a Volkh Conspiracy/Reason blog post about it, some commenters were already noting approvingly how the same strategy could be applied to undermine constitutional rights/federal laws in other contexts. I don’t think it’s an exaggeration to see this signalling a serious constitutional crisis in this country. I would love to read the district court and 5th circuit opinions but don’t know how to find them.
I still don't understand why the citizen enforcement would prevail...doesn't it have to go to court? Abortion is still legal at six weeks under Roe so why would the court find it valid for the citizen enforcer to be enforcing an unconstitutional law?