OTOH, if it bans abortions at earlier stages, it won’t reach the Supreme Court. The federal District Court will overturn it, the nearest appeals panel will uphold, and the Supremes will refuse to look at the case. I doubt Roberts and Alito are ready to open that can of worms yet, and even if they do I wouldn’t at all be surprised if one or two other conservatives chickened out, so they’ll simply avoid having to go on the record about it for now.

ZD, it does contain an exemption for life of the mother. Just not rape or incest.

Which makes me theorize that it actually is the product of a bunch of red-state legislators playing a game of legislative chicken where they try to “out-life” each other.

So, can you really pass laws pending approval? Or is this merely a ploy to challenge Roe?

Yes. I doubt that the law specifically says that it won’t take effect unless/until Roe is overturned, but everyone knows that’s the case anyway. What I want to know is what legal eagle told all these conservative legislators that the current Supreme Court was in any danger of overturning Roe.

No allowance for the life of the mother. (eliminating self-defense… a parent can kill its child in self-defense, even if that child isn’t born.)

No allowance for rape… first the woman is victimized, then if she becomes pregnant is victimized for another 9 months – putting her life at risk…etc. Typical “patriarchic” move. Don’t think this is an issue? Look up your history on the rape camps in the Balkan war… Bosna/Croatia/etc. All part of ethnic cleansing.

No allowance for incest… see rape.

This law doesn’t meet any of the terms set down over the years by the court. It exists for one reason – to overturn Roe – or to try.