Companies offering abortion travel benfits

[Desk trauma]

Does Texas really want to drive large companies out of the state?

One of many things we will find out in the race to find out what state gets to decree 770 first.

 

[Green Sun]

Does Texas really want to drive large companies out of the state?

I've seen a lot of self-sabotaging from conservative states on economics before - Even with the warning from some of the largest companies and organizations that they'll pull out of North Carolina, the state government still passed House Bill 2, costing them a lot of revenue, including losing out on the 2017 All Star Game. They caved eventually, by somewhat repealing the law.

Texas is a different beast of a different size, so I don't know if we'd see the same sort of boycotts, but I won't underestimate the ability for a state to inflict an economic wound on itself through conservative policies.

 

[QvQ]

There was a person who committed armed robbery in Arizona. The robber went to his girlfriend's house, left his robbery vehicle in the driveway and absconded with her car. She had given him the keys earlier.
He left the State. She was charged with aiding and abetting.
She had a terrible time proving that she had no knowledge of his crime, and that he had taken the car without her approval.
He was subsequently arrested out of State and extradited to Arizona.
Now, the companies could, by providing a vehicle for the commission of a crime, be charged under the laws of the State in which the abetting occurred.
It was the State that charged the girlfriend, not the Feds.
Now, if the boyfriend had taken her car Prior to the crime, used that car to cross Statelines to commit a crime, could she be charged? Abetting would mean the abettor had foreknowledge of the intent to commit the crime. I think that person providing the means is subject to State Law.
Interesting question. I am certain the lawyers will get rich before this is all sorted out!

 

[Bradskii]

Transporting persons across State Lines for immoral purposes.
Mann Act

It used to be for immoral purposes. It was changed to prevent people committing federal offences across state borders. It's not applicable.

Edit: I see this had already been covered.

 

[Bradskii]

I suppose that killing off the child is less expensive than providing maternity leave,

So what's your position on women travelling to another state where it's legal? We've all had a few weeks to think about the consequences of what the SC decision would be. We all realised that this would happen. So do you think it should be prevented?

 

[civilwarbuff]

I suppose that killing off the child is less expensive than providing maternity leave,

Don't forget all the prenatal visits (ultrasounds are expensive), delivery, post natal care, vaccinations, broken bones, etc......yeah, just cheaper to off'em and add the cost savings to the bottom line.....even leftists look out for the bottom line it seems......

 

[civilwarbuff]

States rights until they have the votes to take away the rights of the states using their rights n ways the GOP doesn’t approve of.

I read that 4 times and still don't understand what you are trying to say......

 

[Tanj]

There was a person who committed armed robbery in Arizona.

Exactly. They committed a crime in Arizona. They didn't travel to another state and perform an action illegal in Arizona, but legal in the state they performed it.

Using gambling as a better example, if gambling were illegal in Arizona and someone committed the crime of gambling in Arizona then I gave them my car so they could leave the state, then I can get done for aiding and abetting.

If gambling were legal in California and this person used my car to travel to California to gamble, then Arizona State has no crimes they can prosecute.

 

[civilwarbuff]

Why don't we just open up the Constitution and read it?
No person shall ... be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law

WOW.....What a smart suggestion.......Read the constitution.......who'd a thunk it?

 

[QvQ]

Yes, But, in the case of gambling, how does the State of Arizona prove that the transportation provider knew the intent of the person who went to California to gamble?
The companies cannot claim that they did not know the intent to circumvent State Law when they provide travel for abortion.
If you loan your car to a hit man, even if you claim he told you he was simply going to see his mama before she died, then you would have a bit of trouble convincing the Court that you didn't know it was his intent to hasten mamma's departure. And if you bought him a pillow, "just to pad the car seat. Honest, your Honor!" then things might get to be a bit stickier in claiming "innocence."
In this case, the State can prove "knowingly and willfully" aiding in the commission of a crime with intent to evade or circumvent the law of Arizona.

 

[Desk trauma]

I read that 4 times and still don't understand what you are trying to say......

I’m sorry to hear about your reading comprehension issues.

 

[Green Sun]

Yes, But, in the case of gambling, how does the State of Arizona prove that the transportation provider knew the intent of the person who went to California to gamble?
The companies cannot claim that they did not know the intent to circumvent State Law when they provide travel for abortion.
If you loan your car to a hit man, after he told you he was simply going to see his mama before she died, then you would have a bit of trouble convincing the Court that you didn't know it was his intent to hasten mamma's departure. And if you bought him a pillow, "just to pad the car seat. Honest, your Honor!" then things might get to be a bit stickier in claiming "innocence."
In this case, the State can prove "knowingly and willfully" with intent to evade or circumvent the law of Arizona.

How would the state know it's for an abortion, and not gambling?
Microsoft can buy plane tickets or rent a car or whatever. It works just like any other rental or ticket purchase. I've never been asked why I'm buying a plane ticket for interstate travel.

The law could require that the transportation company asks for intent, but you'd catch the gambler just as well if that's the case.

 

[Tanj]

Yes, But, in the case of gambling, how does the State of Arizona prove that the transportation provider knew the intent of the person who went to California to gamble?

The companies cannot claim that they did not know the intent to circumvent State Law when they provide travel for abortion.

It's legal circumvention, just like I can travel to Colorado for a joint.

If you loan your car to a hit man

Said hit man is going to commit a crime in the state he performs the hit. How is this hard for you? If, since you want to keep coming back to murder, the state of California made murder legal (whatever that would look like, hence my gambling analogy), then once again, the State of Arizona has no crimes it can prosecute.

In this case, the State can prove "knowingly and willfully" aiding in the commission of a crime with intent to evade or circumvent the law of Arizona.

Except it's not a crime if it's not performed in the state of Arizona, as opposed the poor analogies you keep using. Heck, you cannot even do it on a county level. There are plenty of "dry" counties in the US, or at least dry at certain times, and it is perfectly legal for me to "circumvent county law", drive to the next county in your car waving a giant banner saying "I am using this car to travel to the next county to drink", and down a bottle of gin.

 

[GoldenBoy89]

Except it's not a crime if it's not performed in the state of Arizona, as opposed the poor analogies you keep using. Heck, you cannot even do it on a county level. There are plenty of "dry" counties in the US, or at least dry at certain times, and it is perfectly legal for me to "circumvent county law", drive to the next county in your car waving a giant banner saying "I am using this car to travel to the next county to drink", and down a bottle of gin.

Just be sure to sober up before driving back!

 

[civilwarbuff]

I’m sorry to hear about your reading comprehension issues.

So, you don't understand what you are saying either?.....makes me feel better......

 

[Desk trauma]

So, you don't understand what you are saying either?.....

I would have used language that included me were that the case however I said your issues not our issues.

 

[civilwarbuff]

How would the state know it's for an abortion, and not gambling?
Microsoft can buy plane tickets or rent a car or whatever. It works just like any other rental or ticket purchase. I've never been asked why I'm buying a plane ticket for interstate travel.

The law could require that the transportation company asks for intent, but you'd catch the gambler just as well if that's the case.

Having traveled a bit at company expense you always have to justify why you need such and such......lying about it to a company would usually result in termination (not in this instance though) but in order to write it off as a legitimate business expense (which I am sure they want) it would have to be justified to both state and federal taxing authorities......who also look to violations of law. A company lying to the state would be subject to penalties.

 

[civilwarbuff]

I would have used language that included me were that the case however I said your issues not our issues.

Thank you for the verification.....

 

[Desk trauma]

Thank you for the verification.....

If you say so.

 

[QvQ]

The stated intent of the Companies is to provide transportation to abortion clinic. That is stated intent, collusion and accessory. The same as if a person put a notice in the local news, "I am giving an airplane ticket to a hitman to go out of State to do a hit."

BTW The State of California is going to pay for abortions for people who come from restricted States as "health care" benefit.
Trust me, the State of California legislates, taxes and promises to provide all sorts of benefits to people. Housing, welfare, health care, HOWEVER when a person gets in line to collect that benefit, then the person is found to be "unqualified." The government handout person states, "Now that you have filled out the pages of forms and turned out your pockets, I am so sorry. You Don't Qualify"
Witness the homeless in California. Land of Utopian Benefits, you bet. The Homeless don't qualify.

California promising to give a penny is really a code for "we're going to raise your taxes a dollar to pay for that penny we would give you but you don't qualify"