Excerpts:

“Seattle responded to the request by filing a lawsuit in Travis County, stating they cannot comply because Texas has no jurisdiction in Washington State, and no care was provided by the hospital in Texas. They also point out that the Dormant Commerce Clause, protected by the United States Constitution, “protects the right to interstate travel, including to obtain healthcare services.” By targeting out-of-state hospitals for enforcement of laws that only apply within the jurisdiction of Texas, they “discriminate against healthcare based on an interstate element,” violating constitutional protections, according to the legal filing. Lastly, Seattle Children’s Hospital cannot comply due to a shield law passed by Washington State. This law bars the hospital from providing any patient data and from responding to subpoenas pursuant to “protected healthcare services” obtained within the jurisdiction of Washington. Protected healthcare services include abortion, reproductive care, and gender-affirming care.”

“This case promises to be extraordinarily complex. Seattle Children’s Hospital is challenging the jurisdiction of the demands directly in a Texas state court. Regardless of what the local court decides, the claims are likely to go to the Texas Supreme Court. Given that the claims also have a time limit on them and that appeals in Texas automatically favor the attorney general due to an automatic lifting of stays in the state, Seattle Children’s Hospital workers and providers for trans patients from Texas could be under legal jeopardy. Ultimately, the case presents questions of conflicting state laws and regulation of conduct across state lines, and the implications of those laws could be dire for abortion and trans care nationwide.”

  • paddirn@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    Going by the media probably isn’t a good barometer either of how the country leans, as most/all media outlets are owned by corporations and conservative-leaning investment-class folks who have no interest in left-leaning content. Even something like MSNBC will only go so far to the left, more like center-left and corporate-friendly.

    I suspect most people are probably somewhere in the middle or left-leaning, not in total agreement with either party, but generally supportive of policies typically pushed by Democrats that help the broadest numbers of people, many are probably just politically agnostic and don’t care to even think about politics that much. However, Democrats suck at messaging and at actually getting their policies enacted, either through ineptitude, naivete, or by design, and the demographic groups they go after are also the least dependable when it comes to voting. So we’re left with Republicans usually getting their stuff pushed through because they have no shame and are willing to do questionable things in the pursuit of power.

    • 31337@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      IDK. Most people I personally know are right-leaning (unfortunately). Either for religious reasons, bigotry, or from drinking the “free-market” kool-aid. They definitely have a different outlook on things. They highly value the nuclear family, hierarchies, retribution, people getting what they “deserve,” etc. They think these things are what’s best for everybody. A lot of these people don’t really follow politics closely, they just think “killing babies” is evil (meaning abortion), the Democrats let crime run rampant, taxes hinder progress and the economy, men kissing is gross and unnatural, the gays, media, and trans’ are grooming children, etc.