Historically, a state’s laws and regulations were assumed to end at its boundaries. For the most part, states have not prosecuted residents who leave to do things that are legal at their destination but illegal at home. “Before legalization in most places, people would go to Las Vegas or Atlantic City to gamble without fear of their hometown coming back and charging them with a crime,” David S. Cohen, another author of the article. . Cohen) said. Associate Professor, Thomas R. Kline School of Law, Drexel University. “There are anti-gambling moralists, but they’re not in a rush to make sure people don’t go to Las Vegas. But anti-abortion extremists are trying to stop as many abortions as possible, and this uncertain case law will give them a trial opportunity for water.”
This spring, Missouri considered but failedthe measure criminalizes travel abroad for abortion, resulting in something similar to New anti-abortion laws in Texas Mandatory.Exercising “extraterritorial jurisdiction,” or attempting to enforce one state’s law within another state’s jurisdiction, would be a new area of abortion restrictions, but laterroe The world, legal scholars cannot rule out.In New York State, which has declared itself a safe haven for abortion, lawmakers have introduced a bill Protecting abortion providers from extradition to prosecution in anti-abortion states, Connecticut has passed a law This prevents extradition as well as sentencing by other countries.
Conflicts between state laws and regulations are just one type of conflict that can arise when people cross national borders—or drugs or the Internet. For example, cross-border travel and interstate commerce are constitutionally protected, while delivery of mail is a federal program. It is the FDA’s responsibility to approve the safety and distribution of drugs nationwide. GenBioProThe company that manufactures Mifepristone is Sue Mississippi Because it has stricter restrictions on drug supply than those set by the FDA.
“The federal government controls the mail, and the federal government controls whether drugs can be obtained and sold in the United States,” said Khiara M. Bridges, a law professor at the University of California, Berkeley School of Law. “So we expect a state’s ability to regulate the practice of medicine to be comparable to that of the federal government. There is a conflict between the government’s ability to regulate the supply of any drug in the United States.”
Reproductive law scholars watching the slow-motion debacle predict that lawmakers in pro-abortion states won’t wait until the courts have ruled on these conflicts before taking action to remove abortion access. They want those states to continue imposing restrictions on the privacy of mail, the movement of goods between states, and other states’ prerogatives to direct health care behavior — and continue to do so until the government decides on some level. The court system tells infringing states that they have gone too far.