‘She Was About To Die’: Justice Sotomayor Details Real Abortion Hypotheticals To Idaho Lawyer

Justice Sonia Sotomayor questioned Joshua Turner, attorney for Idaho's Office of the Attorney General, during Wednesday’s oral arguments in Moyle v. United States & Idaho v. United States.
Fuel your success with Forbes. Gain unlimited access to premium journalism, including breaking news, groundbreaking in-depth reported stories, daily digests and more. Plus, members get a front-row seat at members-only events with leading thinkers and doers, access to premium video that can help you get ahead, an ad-light experience, early access to select products including NFT drops and more:
account.forbes.com/membership...
Stay Connected
Forbes on Facebook: forbes
Forbes Video on Twitter: / forbes
Forbes Video on Instagram: / forbes
More From Forbes: forbes.com

[@deepattison9329]

The issue is that politicians are practicing medicine without a license and it should stop NOW!

[@Michael-pw6qk]

You mean like during Covid?

[@danielequintini]

Yes! Like during COVID. But permanently.

[@mikecaine185]

@@Michael-pw6qk No, during Covid, the medical science supported the actions taken and was done with consultation with medical experts. Politicians supporting bans are ignoring them and requiring everyone to go against the medical advice. Your example actually is evidence against your argument.

[@aquawoelfly]

No sotomayor wants ths lawyer to play dr here. There is no way she is STUPID enough to expect a straight yes or no answer because its not that simple.

[@curiousnerdkitteh]

They're also practicing fascism.

[@nbenefiel]

I had a dear friend, she and her husband tried to get pregnant for 7 years. It just didn’t happen and then it did. We were all overjoyed for them. They decorated the nursery, bought stuff. Then, at her six month check up, the doctor said that her uterus was too big. They did tests. The fetus lacked brain, lungs and kidneys. The lack of kidneys meant it could not process the amniotic fluid, which was growing to the point of rupturing her uterus. The right to life kooks had recently blown up our Planned Parenthood clinic. The local doctors were afraid to do anything. So she was sent to Dr. Tiller in Kansas. He performed an intact d and x, more commonly referred to as a partial birth abortion. The fetus was anesthetized. The huge head was pierced allowing the accumulated excess fluid to escape and the fetus was delivered, saving her uterus and possibly her life. Thank God for Roe v Wade and damn the Republicans for repealing it.

[@kristashafer93098]

I’m so sorry for your friend’s loss. I can’t imagine how devastated she must have been. I’m glad she had a compassionate physician who gave her the medical care she needed.

[@carolro6673]

You missed the point of her story. The point was Drs out of fear can no longer do what is right for their patients. They must defer to laws coming from religious fanatics. They’re not done yet. Next they’re going after some forms of birth control.

[@kobaltkween]

​@@kristashafer93098 A doctor who was murdered for that compassion.

[@Nopenopenope6969]

The thing is that this kind of shit just HAPPENS. All the time! It is not a perfect process at all, and it's like religious people think every pregnancy and birth is immaculate conception, and the baby just floats out of a woman's body on tiny angel wings and starts making donations to Republican politicans.

[@Deraiil]

You are exactly right!!!

[@emme-7575]

Personal religious beliefs are being forced on women in MEDICAL CRICIS.

[@lolab.268]

Sotomayor rightly highlights that the doctor is taking on a lot with their medical judgements. Now doctors are not just considering the health and welfare of the woman, but their own legal exposure.

[@joiisler3012]

And in the “old days,” the “back door abortionists” were rarely caught and prosecuted, because the women Died, and couldn’t identify their “butchers.” smh

[@johnhall3570]

Not to mention their own safety and their family’s! 😡

[@janices5389]

Exactly this. The lawyer at one point says, 'If the doctor in good faith believes...' What that means is that he can be brought up on charges for each time he believes an abortion is medically necessary and he will have to defend that decision in court, before non-medical likely pro-life courts, AT HIS OWN EXPENSE. Of course they are scared to perform abortions except in very cut and dry immediately life threatening cases! Politics has no business in the Church, the bedroom, or the doctor's office!

[@johnhall3570]

@@janices5389 And likewise, the church has no business being in politics!

[@katherinemcintosh7247]

Fact is, Idaho women are in a position to not even have good prenatal care at this point due to OB/GYNs leaving the state…this is true for several states.

[@Nopenopenope6969]

But they really care about children! And mothers! Look at all the evide-

[@skyrocketcoast219]

Ectopic pregnancies happen quick. There is no time for mucking about. No other option- a emergency abortion within days of 1st notice of pain.

[@Jannett-ik5lh]

No woman should have to wait period

[@Lorrdd]

No, but you could learn to use commas and periods.

[@aquawoelfly]

Maybe (as in 95+% of aboelrtions) she should have said no.

[@melaniaarnett1755]

Maybe mind your own damn busines. Period

[@LisaBamsey]

@@aquawoelflyshe should have said no to unknown complications, if only these women could see into the future😅

[@aquawoelfly]

@@LisaBamsey so you want to talk about the

[@julietwochholz9755]

Yes or no means just that. A pregnant woman like the ones in these situations is not interested in prevarications, for her it is "yes" we will perform the procedure and save your life as well as save you from far greater danger and pain, terror, and complications (sepsis, hysterectomy.) or "No" - go home and hope you do not bleed to death when the time comes. Man up and answer the question - because women's lives are on the line.

[@joiisler3012]

In think you meant “prognostications.” But point taken anyway. Lives and health are on the line here.

[@dylanjohnston4388]

I think they need to add "Health of the Mother , mental and physical" to the abortion ruling. The Life of the mother is now such a wish washy term to do politicians pushing what it means Live.

[@kateluck1555]

⁠@@dylanjohnston4388 “health of the mother” is still wishy washy. How unhealthy would she have the risk of being, in order to qualify for an abortion? It’s all subjective. There shouldn’t be any qualifiers at all, it should be completely up to the patient and doctor to make a decision amongst themselves, with zero legal involvement.

[@kobaltkween]

​@@joiisler3012 "Prevarications" are what he responded with, since he tried to avoid answering definitively. She used the term correctly, just as an fyi for your own use. 😊

[@joiisler3012]

@@kobaltkween You are probably right. In further listening to this Hearing, he is at the very least “pivoting” throughout. (I assume in an attempt to avoid out and out Lying.) It is sad to think that All Women’s Reproductive Rights (and some Lives) are being put at risk here. And by the very people who claim to Abhor government intervention in their own lives. (GOD forbid we try to keep Guns out of the hands of Children and the Mentally Unstable by having Responsible Adults help to keep track of them by just Registering them.) I agree that abortion is not for me, or even most people; but I shutter to think that it will not be available if one of my nieces’ Lives, or future healthy childbearing options, were on the line. This wouldn’t even be an issue if it were Men’s Reproductive Rights. People are acting as if this decision is as easy as what to choose on a dinner menu. (Sorry for unloading a “downer response” on you.💜🕊️)

[@cslattfri]

I can’t believe we are having conversations like this in 2024. It’s mind numbing really…..

[@aquawoelfly]

Yep the fact abortion exists as an option outside of medical necessity is a problem. Drs should be the ultimate determining force in what is medically appropriate and in the vast majority of abortions it WAS NOT

[@entropy8634]

@@aquawoelflyand still republicans dragging their feet answering the question. Did you watch the video?

[@aquawoelfly]

@@entropy8634 Yes... i did watch a liberal judge make a damn fool of herself expecting a lawyer to make medical decisions without even the oppertunity to look at the medical file of said [hypothetical] patient.

[@kateluck1555]

@@aquawoelflywhy should the lawyer be making medical decisions at all?

[@aquawoelfly]

@@kateluck1555 DING DING DING you are not the dumbest liberal on this thread.

[@Pbdave1092]

This was so simple then. The SC should NEVER have reversed RvW.

[@aquawoelfly]

No it never shoukd have been taken out of the states hands as per the 10yh amendment. But hey lets not dwell to much on a 230y ild document.

[@landerz]

@@aquawoelfly When an issue is so determinative that it ought not to be left to individual States to determine by majority rule, it NEEDS to be determined by the highest courts/powers in the land. Literally every civil movement, ever, follows this same trend, and any headway is made by progressive-minded people who recognize the writing on the wall, all-the-while dragging the reluctant dinosaurs, kicking-and-screaming, into some semblance of modern times. It was bad when it dealt with basic human rights for women and for people of colour. Now women are legitimately DYING over "the issue", but hey: Let's leave it to "the people" to decide!

[@aquawoelfly]

@@landerzabortions kill women too especially when conducted by organizations that FIGHT laws meant to bring the standards for abortion clinics to that of any other surgicenter. - addmitting rights to a local hospital -access for emergency services -policy for contacting emergency services -sterilization -clean (not blood stained blankets) Many other issues. Its hard to say its about protecting women when they hurt women in other ways.

[@Nopenopenope6969]

@@aquawoelfly Just like slavery, right? State's rights! Jack-ss.

[@aquawoelfly]

@@Nopenopenope6969 someone is unfamiliar with the 4th, 6th, 9th, 10th, and 14th amendments andbit shows. Maybe you should come back when you have a legal argument for why it shouldnt be in the states hands. But as evidebced by your previous 2 replies to me, i highly doubt your capable of reading the constitution or comprehending it. Ps if you read this far your answer (as given to me by multiple pro abortion proponants) is listed above (by me) yet you choose to attack me instead of my statement.

[@maidenofsantafem.g.valdez1154]

Save the mother.

[@a.k.7341]

ALWAYS.

[@Smackwater587]

Go Justice Sotomayor! ❤

[@scottluzny4030]

That's right, he should not have the ability to answer, should just move to to hear next hypothetical! Let Keegan speak, she has a brain.

[@nothingruler14All]

How can a doctor prove in court that he or she has a "good faith belief"? And, more to the point, why should they have to?

[@brendamiller8856]

This is sick so so sick!!!!! What woman deserves to go through that!!?????

[@darkdan3379]

Government should stay out of the doctors office...

[@ketanjibrownsfavemolester7592]

"I'd rather be born first, and shot at later, rather than the other way around. Please inform my mother, she's supposed to protect me" -- unborn girl --

[@jonathansegraves8623]

People should stay out of other people's lives and bedrooms. Why are others so interested and feel that it is their appointed duty to oversee what other people do in THEIR PRIVACY ? Are their OWN LIVES that DULL & BORING that they feel they need to TELL OTHER PEOPLE WHAT GOD THINKS OF THEIR BEDROOM HABITS ?? WHY DON'T THOSE PEOPLE JUST GET A LIFE AND TAKE A LONG GOOD HARD LOOK IN THIEIR OWN MIRRORS and FACE THEIR OWN HATRED.

[@ketanjibrownsfavemolester7592]

@@jonathansegraves8623 We feel your periods, dude...👈🤔.. That's important, right ???..

[@ketanjibrownsfavemolester7592]

@@jonathansegraves8623 Happy Easter, dude...👈🤔... Without Easter, you would be invisible...

[@gogeta667]

​@@jonathansegraves8623I hate people who are so selfish that they would kill their offspring to avoid the responsibility of raising them.

[@nancycrowe9063]

Men don’t have any knowledge how a woman feels when she’s pregnant! How dare they! But if it happened to the females in their family they WOULD get help for them! And where did they get their medical license? Vote blue so we can get our rights back! This is NOT the 1800 s!!💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙

[@johnseaberg5028]

Murder is not help

[@nbenefiel]

@@johnseaberg5028Abortion is not murder. Never has it been equated with murder.

[@johnseaberg5028]

@@nbenefiel Ridiculous and to say you have never heard that it is appears to be disingenuous. Science says it is a human being at conception

[@francois853]

@@nbenefiel Abortion does actually fit the definition of murder. Definition of murder: the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another. (noun) kill (someone) unlawfully and with premeditation (verb) People who have killed pregnant women have been charged with and found guilty of double homicide.

[@user-lt9dk4hl2u]

@@francois853an already dead fetus is aborted

[@deepattison9329]

Perhaps she wouldn't die but she could lose her ability to have another child.

[@tammyowens7776]

can you imagine having such a crisis of conscience? to defend silly laws based on religion, they have to go against their conscience and common sense. youjhave to do mental gymnastics to even wrap your head around this lack of common sense. fun fact, a fetus, is part of a womans body until it disconnects and comes out and breaths on its own, until that time, it has no 'legal' personhood in my view, because it is in fact part of her body. if this body part, becomes a risk to her life, like some other failed organs, [ appendix and gall bladder] it can be removed.... I cant believe the short sightedness of the GOP to attack a 50 yr old abortion right, that everyone was ok with. we have bigger problems.

[@Angel-qu1gk]

A persons health is up to there doctors and the person and only should make the advice not a politician.

[@april5666]

BALANCE THE SUPREME COURT: 13 circuits = 13 SC Justices make america SANE again

[@gabrielduran291]

A lot of people are dunking on Sotomayor on her phrasing of hypothetical but I think what she meant by hypothetical that was true, is it actually happened in Florida but hasn't happened in Idaho. So the hypothetical was imagine what actually happened in Florida happened in Idaho, then what would follow? So she can say hypothetical. She just didn't phrase it that well.

[@aquawoelfly]

I wont dunk on her use of hypothetical but i will dunk on her assumption that a lawyer is qualified to make medical decisions.

[@td152]

The lawyer is the only one who can answer the question, because it's the lawyer's job to defend the medical law that's in question. ​@@aquawoelfly

[@Nowolf]

​@@aquawoelflya lawyer, particularly a lawyer for the state defending a particular law in the supreme court, should be able to tell us clearly about the law and the extent to which it applies to a specific situation. Understanding that specific law and its effects and implications is, in this situation more than ever, his job.

[@aquawoelfly]

@@Nowolf sis sotomayor give him the medical records of said patient to test against thebstandard given in the lae? NO Therefore this is an unreasonablw expectation. Not sure how hard that is to comprehend.

[@Nowolf]

@@aquawoelfly he should be eminently familiar with the case already. This is court, not improv, you prepare beforehand for questions you might be asked.

[@Mr_Bob_Loblaw]

He should’ve responded with an answer in the affirmative (abortion would be allowed), and THEN thrown in the caveat. You try to start your answer wth ambiguous legal caveats and she’s gonna eat your lunch.

[@clayoreilly4553]

So, he should've lied, in your opinion?

[@ApolloandMuse]

⁠What @@clayoreilly4553 said, that would have been a lie. And she would have, as you said, eaten his lunch anyway because she knows the clear legal difference between ‘severe medical condition’ and ‘certain threat of death.’ In her first example, she shows very few, if any, doctors would risk their careers or being sent to jail over providing an abortion when threat of death isn’t obviously imminent. When they’re dragged to court, they can talk until they’re blue in the face about why performing an abortion to avoid severe medical conditions which could have led to death or a lifetime of pain and illness, and it wouldn’t keep them safe. The court might decided to fixate on the fact the doctor being tried can’t ‘prove’ the patient would have died without the abortion, and that’s more likely to happen than not given that the people in power who are pushing forward and supporting these laws would want to make examples of these doctors.

[@aquawoelfly]

So you are admitting you want lawyers to make medical dwcisions? WOW

[@aquawoelfly]

​@@ApolloandMuse BINGO being NOT A DR Being WITHOUT said patients medical information being NOT a prosecutor in charge determining who to bring to trial ..... There is ZERO way for him to give a yes or no answer just a "Dr mush show......" "Patients condition must be such that......" "The law does not cite this kind of example....." Etc etc etc kind of answer and sotomayor knows this. She just wants a soundbite for ignorant people to latch on to. (And this comment section is filled with fish who chomped down on that hook)

[@bethparker1500]

O dont understand the judge, does Idaho have the right to kill a sick, pregnant woman?

[@clayoreilly4553]

Apparently they do. And they will gleefully exercise that "right".

[@serendipityshopnyc]

The judge is pressing the Idaho lawyer to say whether Idaho would be as cruel as Florida about sending home a pregnant woman is clearly very sick and in need of an abortion to not get worse, but is not yet officially in imminent danger of dying.

[@snowmonster42]

Texas and Florida do, Idaho thinks they do.

[@jasongallagher631]

It is just incredible to me that a Supreme Court Justice tells you to answer a question ‘yes’ or ‘no’ and you have the balls to ignore her and give the answer you want. I’m definitely not cut out to be a lawyer…

[@John_in_Oakland]

Dogs are making healthcare decisions for cats…. 🤬

[@LegShowMagazine]

Major fail by the attorney. He got owned.

[@VinciGlassArt]

A worthy representation of the moral cowardice of the position he's advocating for.

[@roberthepburn-gr4fq]

The government has no right to govern wether a person has the right to a abortion

[@martthesling]

In a democracy, yes we do.

[@michaeltillotson3711]

@@martthesling in a direct democracy we do. Which we aren't.

[@jeffbyrd7976]

So you believe that it's fine to kill the baby, ok. When do you think that it's not ok to kill the baby?

[@jeffbyrd7976]

Furthermore, the constitution says that the government must protect a person's right to life.

[@martthesling]

@@michaeltillotson3711 You're right. We can't ban guns or free speech. We can ban abortion. Abortion is not in the u.s Constitution. Guns are.

[@person2463]

These lawmakers (men) are insensitive, and unwilling to do anything unless the woman dies. I question the humanity of America, and Americans.

[@narda1072]

No just question the humanity of the gop

[@joiisler3012]

Can’t just blame the Men now. Women who have had successful pregnancies (and some have even had abortions) are making these sweeping decisions for all women as well.

[@narda1072]

@@joiisler3012 exactly. Blame the entire gop.

[@joiisler3012]

@@narda1072 Don’t put words in my mouth. There are members of Other Parties who are anti-abortion as well. No party requires you to sign an “abortion-stance pledge” before joining. You are not even required to Vote Your Party when that “curtain”closes. js

[@olympic-gradelurker]

they can't and won't do anything even if the woman dies. They'll just say It's all in the hands of god (which god, who knows)

[@MargueretteLorah]

I love her for not taking his bs answers. She’s demanding yes or no.. She’s really holding him to the fire and hearing Barrett jumping in on him as well was pretty awesome. I do think ID is gonna lose this. Even Robert’s didn’t want Roe overturned.

[@narda1072]

I think its kegan jumping in

[@jordansaurusrex4587]

I HOPE Idaho looses it. This state has been decades behind the rest of the country in many regards anyway, it’s time for them to start catching up.

[@aquawoelfly]

I see you drank the koolaid this morning and decided lawyers are now drs thanks to sotomayor.

[@narda1072]

@@aquawoelfly who drank the koolaid. What are u saying

[@aquawoelfly]

@@narda1072 ypu accepted that a lawyer is somehiw qualified to make medical decisions based on the line of queationing by sotomayor

[@davidbingham4348]

I agree with Sotomyers stance of requiring a “yes” or “no” answer from the lawyer. Because that is the choice that a doctor has to make: yes or no. No prevaricarion, no weaseling words. Just yes or no. That is the choice that doctors and patients have to make every day. And if a politician or lawyer can’t give a yes or now answer, then they have no business writing laws that impact medical decision making.

[@melt4769]

Women in similar situations who are refused medical care and end up losing their fertility or suffering other life and health altering conditions should sue the doctors and hospitals for their negligence. No wonder the birth rate is decreasing. With 1 in 4 known pregnancies ending in miscarriage (according to the National Library of Medicine) and doctors fearful of treating women having a miscarriage, who would risk a pregnancy?

[@serendipityshopnyc]

I think there should be class action lawsuits suing right-wing politicians for practicing medicine without a license.

[@orosalsero]

The argument is not whether a woman have the right to terminate a pregnancy, but whether dose the government have the right to force woman to have babies to increase the government tax base revenues and military recruitment allocations.

[@Sam-ql4ze]

If they want to increase the population they are going about it the wrong way. Abortion bans in other countries have had the opposite effect.

[@olympic-gradelurker]

all these abortion bans will do is make women think twice about getting pregnant. Young women today are now extremely hesitant to get into relationships because all the safety nets were removed. They barely afford to care for themselves let alone another person completely dependent on them and too many men are deferring on any kind of parental responsibility.

[@joko09010]

TRUST WOMEN

[@aquawoelfly]

I dont trust this woman. She is a partsan hack looking for a soundbite and this comment section is now fulled with "fish" who think lawyers are drs.

[@serendipityshopnyc]

That Stephen Miller ad that got appended to my viewing of this video is something else. He's all tight-jawed and strict about foreign terrorists who hate our country and want to attack it. I am much more worried about people like Stephen Miller who hate our country and want to attack it from within, reshaping democracy into autocracy.

[@saturday1066]

what if the doctor believes "pray REALLY hard" means death isn't imminent? (follow up to fundies: do you think HARDER PRAYER would have made that woman alive now?)

[@bgambie21]

This is so dystopian. What is happening? The pro-life party isn’t so pro-life & it’s disgusting.

[@texasrefugee7888]

Corporations are people ☠️women are not here in the Divided States of America

[@stanvalentine1839]

Not true! Really reproductive freedom is something everyone has thats just a fact. My issue is why do people want to practice reproductive freedom after the life happens?

[@michaeltillotson3711]

​@@stanvalentine1839they practice it before, but nothing is perfect.

[@laurakrajnikburick2731]

He was saying that, unless the mother will die, no abortion. That's bull.

[@Dagger-Deep]

​@@James-tq6tp You ignore abortion like you ignore school shootings. 🫤

[@Dagger-Deep]

@@James-tq6tp Republicans are more concerned with abortion than they are with school kids getting mowed down.

[@annoyboyPictures]

No he doesn't. He kept trying to say that the Doctor does not need to provide Medical Certainty - but Liberal Activist Judge Sotomayor kept cutting him off like a Democrat Congressman.

[@michaeltillotson3711]

​@@annoyboyPicturesbut the fact is that they do. Because in the types of states passing these big government control laws, an anti choice board is going to be scrutinizing. So you don't want to lose your license and livelihood and maybe go to jail. So, it has a chilling effect on whether someone recieves medical care

[@serendipityshopnyc]

@@annoyboyPictures Practically speaking, a doctor cannot abort in those states for fear of imprisonment or losing a license, because any supervising board can after the fact whimsically decide she wasn't sick enough. These decisions should be left to patients & doctors, not politicians. No wonder doctors are leaving Idaho in droves.

[@bvierville1]

If it was real, it’s not a hypothetical.

[@michaeltillotson3711]

It is hypothetical in Idaho. Real in other red states. It can be both

[@jeffbyrd7976]

Exactly correct. In order to argue that killing babies should be permitted, the prochoice folks live in hypotheticals, despite doctors telling us that the "kill the baby to save the mother" scenario doesn't exist. That doesn't mean that a life can't be lost in medical procedures, obviously that occurs.

[@michaeltillotson3711]

@jeffbyrd7976 Holy shit, you don't think there are medical complications that necessitate aborting the fetus in order to save the mother? You really don't? Holy shit that's ignorant. You might want to think about why, after passing these anti freedom laws Texas saw a massive increase in maternal mortality. Guess, according to you, that more mothers just happened to die in significant numbers after doctors had to be concerned about going to jail Total coincidence

[@michaeltillotson3711]

@jeffbyrd7976 the mere fact that you don't know that these sorts of medical situations are happening shows why Trump loves the uneducated

[@serendipityshopnyc]

@@jeffbyrd7976 In order to argue that abortions should be permitted, the pro-forced-birthers need to ignore many actual cases that have already happened, & actual women that are sickening or being rendered sterile or dying, in favor of rhetorical tricks about "babies" that are a few ounces of cells & not viable babies at all.

[@stylerxo3654]

Politicians need to leave medicine out of politics.

[@Mr.T314]

Define in good faith for me. Do all doctors come to the same conclusion with good faith? What happens when two or more doctors disagree in good faith? These questions need to be answered if people could be prosecuted in these laws. If I were on the court, I would say these gray areas are very concerning, and they either need to be dropped or fine turned like a razor blade.

[@normanriley5373]

I'm from Idaho and i don't approve of Idaho's message

[@dianacalzadias4334]

How devastating for women.

[@silverpurkat]

And this is why young men are having vasectomies, why young women are going through having their tubes tied without children first or not be involved in relationships but prefer to live alone and free. Most of these young adults are going through the challenges of a shrinking middle class, cost of living is beyond the basics even with a reasonable income let alone one parent staying home for family support and some are saddled with student loan debt that is like a mortgage compared to 30 plus years ago so it takes decades to save money and good credit to buy a home. They don’t have many options to support a family like it was in the past 40 years ago and be comfortable living the American dream. Like the one child policy in China when government tries to get involved in reproductive rights they now have a declining population of younger people while having a growing older population that can’t support them like Japan struggling with their birth rates too this will be the downfall of most governments eventually if they don’t start focusing on supporting younger generations. My teenage daughter doesn’t want children and she is planning to have a procedure done to keep it that way in her 20s so she doesn’t have to worry about problems in general. She has concerns about if she could support and protect any children she could have as well as the huge concerns about climate changes that makes it harder to survive in the future. I support her decisions because it’s her life and I have no right in forcing anything on her even though I wish for grandchildren I respect her concerns and decisions. The more government overreaches the more the younger generations will go to the extremes to avoid control, protect themselves and mistreatment.

[@deedrole5296]

Everyone seems to forget what happens when you mandate reproduction does the name Ceaușescu ring a bell for anyone? Does the memory of abandoned and neglected children of Romania not cause anyone a second thought?

[@silverpurkat]

@@deedrole5296 exactly I hate to think that way but you’re right. I would rather have the person have an abortion whether using a pill or procedure than the poor baby suffer a certain more painful death even though “some” states offer safe haven or baby box at their hospitals and fire stations they still sometimes try to prosecute the mothers for something even though they did the right thing and tried to help their baby. When I see them do that publicly they are causing more harm than good because a lot of mothers are in dangerous situations with abuse and neglect themselves or suffering from addiction and trying to do the right thing.

[@michaelhart2715]

Nobody wants this. There are 8 billion people on the planet. Up from 7 billion in 2013. We are growing uncontrollably. If someone doesn’t want to bring someone into this world for any reason, then one could argue it’s more humane not to.

[@olympic-gradelurker]

give it a generation. Fertility rates are in first world counties are too low to sustain themselves. They will have to rely on immigration to make up for the working population. we may even save money in the long run. why spend resources investing 18 to 20 years on developing children when you can simply just pick the best adults from overseas?

[@bob3ironfist]

Barrett at the very end slowly realizing that her teammates will lie to her to get what they want 😂

[@camdenlane5627]

really wish republicans would stop trying to play doctor because they get angry and emotional, and start to actually listen to medical professionals. These incompetent politicians trying to remove LGBT and Women's rights are literally effectively toying with people's lives. It isn't right.

[@mikochild2]

If it doesn't work, it doesn't work. He's saying the doctors should be confident in making decisions under the law, but they are not. Who are you to say what a trained doctor should think and feel? Accept it, and go back to the drawing board.

[@ramamurthya]

How many of the Supreme Court nominees answer all the questions they have been asked during their confirmation hearing?

[@lissanne9769]

Pregnancy is a private matter. Not everyone's business or responsibility or commitments, but that woman's right as a female. If you go back in time to the turn of the century from the 18 hundreds to the 19th century, you will learn about, the rise of the AMA, the fall of the midwives, you will learn how abortion fighting started, and grew. Women must HAVE rights over their bodies. Women have had these rights for thousands of years, mostly in secret, but we've owned them. It's because of strangers and the government getting into the faces and lives of women that crimes against women are so high and deadly. Anyone who thinks differently needs to just get over themselves. Strangers will not tell this female how or when I can have sex, or be pregnant or anything else having to do with my body and my basic human rights. It is none of your business. I'm saying this to everyone including the government.

[@denisedelgiudice3378]

Go Sonya!

[@user-du2of3lh1g]

Give Drs qualified immunity on this issue then

[@neatpaws]

HOW on EARTH did it get to THIS?! 'Debating' COMMON SENSE life or death matters!

[@netizen_a]

Politicians practicing medicine and making women and their partners and family utterly miserable.

[@MisterE409]

Abortion is elective the procedure shes describing is not selective its a medical emergency there is a difference

[@fdfischer]

The issue in this clip is that these laws are forcing women and doctors to wait until there is an actual emergency, like the scenario she described, instead of preventing the emergency earlier

[@cynthiawilson5066]

Absolutely

[@reasonablegentleman]

An abortion is the deliberate termination of a human pregnancy for any reason. The people claiming this is not a an abortion are doing so because they want to deny the consequences of their dogma.

[@axygon7529]

This is simply not true. Whether you like it or not, abortion is a medical procedure that does not depend on intent. Any deliberate termination of a pregnancy by removal or expulsion of a fetus or embryo is an abortion. Some anti abortion activists like to paint it as different because it is politically convenient.

[@stephaniebrooks8044]

No. Sometimes, it's not an elective procedure. Things can go wrong in pregnancy! It doesn't always result in a baby. That's wat the judge is saying!

[@t.l.1610]

How are you planning on keeping doctors Idaho? Your OB/GYN’s and ER docs are going to flee like their a**es are on fire & their hair is catching. Fact is, these doctors are subject to CRIMINAL liability simply caring for patients. That’s an incredible ask. In their shoes, I’d be wondering what if? A prosecutor disagrees with their decision, has an ax to grind, wants to put their name in headlines, etc etc. yes that’s a cynical view of prosecutors but not unheard of. Or DA’s.

[@grandam195]

This is BS. The medical care of a woman is between her and her doctor. No third parties involved. Except of course the insurance company who has to pay for it. Otherwise it's between the two people., only.

[@terrydillon9323]

Did someone say that the particular law they are discussing doesn’t protect abortion needs do to complications because that law doesn’t mention abortion, was wondering, what diseases etc. does the law mention that can be treated.

[@Kwk16534]

The federal right to emergency treatment law purposefully did not list particular medical issues so that a hospital could not refuse a particular injury or disease.

[@onthatdirtroad]

Abortions due to not wanting the baby vs. medical necessity are 2 different things.

[@joyhappiness]

no, they really aren't. they're the same: none of YOUR or the GOVERNMENT's concern. only the pregnant person and healthcare providers' concern.

[@stanvalentine1839]

Very true! I never did understand why people don't practice reproductive freedom before the life happens.

[@user-db9yd6vz9r]

Agree

[@stanvalentine1839]

@@joyhappiness do you want to use abortion as a normal way of birth control? Would using a condom or a birth control pill be way easier and safer?

[@gerardosigaran8665]

@@stanvalentine1839then let’s make condoms and contraceptives more accessible!!!!! Oh wait they won’t do that either !!!!

[@martinhumble]

Women has a right over their bodies. And, a fetus is not a person. ♥️🇸🇪

[@sharonholdren7588]

Somewhere along the line one need to ask what happened to the intestinal fortitude of the doctors who are scared for their license and liberty?

[@joiisler3012]

It probably dissipated in the face of the their families going hungry and uneducated. (And their loss of career and personal freedom.)

[@sunshinedenney8695]

Please vote blue for the pregnant people of Idaho 💙💙💙

[@normanriley5373]

best judge i know is GOD let the woman and GOD make this judgement

[@user-ib7dd9yi8b]

"Real hypothetical "😅😅😅

[@AbbeyRoadkill1]

Because the story she was telling was real, it actually happened. Did you not listen to the clip, or are you just deaf?

[@michaeltillotson3711]

​@@AbbeyRoadkill1he is dumb. He doesn't realize that it can be a hypothetical in Idaho because the law hasn't gone into effect but real in other locations

[@ingridgrattidge5887]

🌊🌊🌊🌊🌊🌊🌊🌊🌊🌊🌊🌊🌊🌊🌊🌊🌊🌊🌊🌊🌊ENOUGH!!!!!

[@alpascarella8794]

What is a tri-semester?

[@alpascarella8794]

The first example she gave is anecdotal, not hypothetical Also, what the heck is a tri-semester? And she's on the US Supreme Court?

[@daughteroftime8047]

Supreme court doesn't have any requirements anymore it seems.

[@Yabberfrat]

'Tri-semester': a public case of serious mental decline on the part of the speaker

[@Dagger-Deep]

What's a baby?

[@marcariotto1709]

Wow, nobody here ever misspoke or mispronounced words at work. No wonder you, perfect people, feel like you have the right to interfere with others' lives and feel the need to be heroes. I bet you all work tirelessly to help poor, neglected, and abused children too.

[@debrac3391]

Have you EVER encountered a genuinely pro-life conservative? Neither have I.

[@debrac3391]

@@James-tq6tp Too funny.

[@axygon7529]

@@James-tq6tpso you oppose the death penalty, support Medicare for all and free child care?

[@debrac3391]

@@James-tq6tp As a conservative, I can assume you vote the GOP platform, denying at-risk children healthcare, housing, food and education. With respect, your predatory politics will ensure that abortion remain with us into perpetuity. The ONLY solution for the eventual abolition of the procedure is progressive politics, all research supports this. However, you may be one of those rare conservative that actually fosters or even has adopted unwanted children. If this is the case, I commend you.

[@WilliamBoone-hp1rx]

Hypothetical is Theory it doesn't mean it's proven true yet

[@michaeltillotson3711]

It's a hypothetical in Idaho. It is real situations that have happened around the county thanks to the big government right wing

[@WilliamBoone-hp1rx]

@@michaeltillotson3711 there's probably nothing I haven't seen about a woman's human physiology including birth and pregnancy right from the sperm in the egg that penis is part of a man you want your money after it's born don't you. Hypothetical has not been proven with her question.

[@marylamb7707]

The DOCTORS were wrong.

[@chrisbrimhall1613]

Trisemester? I think it’s trimester….boy sounds like a Congresswoman…..answer YES or NO

[@Scratcherzzz]

Real hypotheticals? No such thing

[@serendipityshopnyc]

It's hypothetical for Idaho so far, but a real case that has happened in a state with abortion restrictions.

[@jlert7297]

Tri semester!

[@Astrobrant2]

I have a hard time believing that the actual magazine, Forbes, really has anything to do with this channel. The title says "...Real Abortion Hypotheticals...". Who the heck is uploading and titling these videos? There is no such thing as a "real hypothetical". It's an oxymoron. DUH!!

[@joemoore9248]

There is an argument that can be made for a true hypothetical but it is rendered null in certain circumstances but Sotomayor doesn't explain that

[@Astrobrant2]

@@joemoore9248 There is no such thing as a "real hypothetical". If something actually occurred, it is not hypothetical.

[@joiisler3012]

But the situations cited by SOTOMAYER actually Occurred. (And both sides knew it, as they both had either Clerks and/or Trained Associates and Paralegals doing the “scut work” in advance of the hearing. That is how it works. Come prepared, or don’t come. js) She is probably as sick of this issue as most of us are, and wanted to hear something Other than the “same old, same old” arguments.

[@joemoore9248]

Look this up...If a hypothesis is regarded as true, does it mean that it must then be true? Quora gives a good explanation as to how this works logically

[@joemoore9248]

By the way that caught my attention too that's why I checked it out. I'm not trying to argue with you friend I'm sharing what I found

[@SteeleHand]

'Real hypotheticals....' lol

[@kacornish1]

“Real” because they actually happened in a different state. “Hypothetical” as in what if they happened in Idaho. It should not be that hard for you to understand…

[@SteeleHand]

@kacornish1 it's like saying very very....that 2nd very is unnecessary. A 'real hypothetical' is nothing more than an already existing reality. No? But whatever, thank you so very much for clarifying that which I was too stupid to understand. What would I do without you? 🤔 Im sure your Biden vote has been working out great for you. I wish you continued success.

[@michaeltillotson3711]

@SteeleHand so you got snippy because he pointed out how ignorant your comment was? Pretty typical from the party that loves the uneducated

[@SteeleHand]

@michaeltillotson3711 yes. Because thats what people from your party have earned. Disdain and ridicule.

[@Nowolf]

​@@SteeleHandBecause the law in Florida is similar to but not exactly the same as the one in Idaho. It really happened in Florida, a real case. What if it happens in Idaho? A hypothetical. And i appreciate your ability to accept being educated on these matters. As you can expect, the particular and specific word usage matters a lot here

[@stevenbear1610]

How is a hypothetical real? Great reporting there Forbes.

[@kacornish1]

“Real” because they actually happened in a different state. “Hypothetical” as in what if they happened in Idaho. It should not be that hard for you to understand…

[@serendipityshopnyc]

@@kacornish1 People apparently enjoy misunderstanding anyone and anything they don't agree with. OTOH, they can easily explain away their presidential candidate of choice repeatedly muffing the name of the current president or announcing clearly that he wants to be a dictator in his next term.

[@JoeMama-li6sd]

Weird how she asks questions and then cuts him off one word into every answer

[@AbbeyRoadkill1]

Because he wouldn't answer. He started with legalisms instead of actually answering the question. You would get utterly destroyed in court.

[@JoeMama-li6sd]

@@AbbeyRoadkill1 maybe, we would know if she let him speak.

[@michaeltillotson3711]

​@JoeMama-li6sd you have a certain amount of time. They aren't going to waste it while the person rambled on without answering

[@fredkitmakerb9479]

Will she shut up and let him answer!? She keeps interrupting him and changing the Dynamics of the question even before he can answer what she previously asked.

[@michaeltillotson3711]

Because he wasn't answering. It is a yes or no question. Go back and see if he said yes or no

[@user-mn4sr7ti5u]

In states that have voted for abortion. Put on the ballot that state representatives have to go out of state for health care. They have to pay for it themselves. Hell, a 3 hour drive out of Arizona for an emergency is no problem.

[@terryzappa3891]

@@onamattapeeya everyone knows even in states that have the most restrictive anti abortion laws, that if you have enough money or connections you'll still be able to get a medical abortion if you want one. The legislators passing these restrictive laws should not be exempt just because they HAVE the money or connections.

[@onamattapeeya]

@@terryzappa3891 okay I guess I misunderstood his comment, yes the rich and Powerful should have to follow the same rules the rest of us do...

[@Mr_Bob_Loblaw]

“Can I FINISH? CanIfinish canIfinish canIfinish?” -Dana Carvey (as H. Ross Perot), SNL She doesn’t seemed concerned with actually knowing the gentleman’s answer. She’s just trying to inflate the validity of the ruling she’s already made in her mind by torpedoing the credibility of the respondent. A crafty politician wearing a judge’s robe, she is.

[@clayoreilly4553]

"Gentleman"?? You mean the hired Liar?

[@ani1344]

She knew his answer already, as did the rest of the court. The law does not allow doctors to use medical judgment to abort unless they can show with certainty that the woman is dying. Period. There is no answer possible for counsel to give that says otherwise. Sotomayor was merely highlighting the actual examples of egregious outcomes to commit the attorney to the logical outcome of this poorly considered and drafted law. Legislators aren’t doctors and they have no business making these judgments. Criminal penalties guarantee needless deaths of both.

[@preshisify]

😷☕🇺🇸

[@user-io9ie5cs8j]

Maybe the Justice can let him answer the question, instead of setting up for failure, like a California education.

[@Dagger-Deep]

Red states have the worst education in the country though. 😮

[@RozzyF680-uf9qe]

California is a great place, do you live there or have you ever been there? what do you know about it? I would be curious to hear about it?

[@Dagger-Deep]

@@RozzyF680-uf9qe California is great, but then again I grew up in the fascist bible belt.

[@D0NNY-JAMES]

⁠@@RozzyF680-uf9qeThe state itself is beautiful, it’s the people that are wacky!!

[@D0NNY-JAMES]

Let me get this straight, democrats think harden criminals shouldn’t get the death penalty, but it’s ok to kill an innocent baby?

[@rocke7398]

Ever tell the story about real unborn babies being pulled apart (murdered) in the womb? That’s a harrowing one too, but one you will never tell.

[@serendipityshopnyc]

Yeah, mostly doesn't happen dude. Any fetus large enough to have limbs, being removed in that way, is already fatally flawed (destined to die in hours) or dead. The vast majority of this country is much more worried about the already living woman sickening or dying, than the potential life that's just a few ounces of unviable tissue.

[@joeb3167]

And that's not a hypothetical either.

[@BAAWAKnight]

I've heard that old wives' tale, just as I heard the one about NASA finding the missing day and Darwin recanting on his deathbed.

[@zofiawaters4913]

I have a “ps” to my last comment…. Let the first true male experience periods… birth…. Menopause… please stand up and relate…I’ll buy you a drink and we shall celebrate the event. On me,,,,,

[@ThatRedhedd]

There are too many valid, prudent, and serious reasons why humans must all have a right to govern their own bodies and medical decisions without restrictions. Women should have the right to choose to terminate a pregnancy up until viability. That being said - she really said "trisemester?"

[@michaeltillotson3711]

​@@James-tq6tpI agree. We should put more restrictions on other rights as well. Always good idea for citizens to support government tyranny

[@michaeltillotson3711]

@@James-tq6tp it isn't a right to end a life. That's just silly nonsense. It's the right to bodily autonomy. At least understand the basics of the conversation of you want to comment

[@michaeltillotson3711]

@James-tq6tp I didn't debate the status of the fetus. So not sure wtf you are talking about. As that is your "science and fact" section, is kind of hilarious that you thought it was meaningful. And of course you can't hit another person, that isn't your bodily autonomy right. Kind of an ignorant argument though. Also, we have no right to life. That's a positive right abs the Constitution doesn't do positive rights. Bodily autonomy is a negative right and covers the issues of life. So, the fetus is using the woman's body without her consent. So, just like EVERY OTHER situation involving the government forcing you to give up your body to help another survive, we should agree that it isn't the governments job to do so and that's our right to deny the other person access to our body

[@dokim9269]

I hate it when any politician phrases a loaded question and demands a yes or no answer. Both sides of the asile do it, and it's shameful that Sotomayor employs this tactic.

[@PeterJohn-hl3ox]

She wasn't even interested in hearing the answer to her own questions

[@AbbeyRoadkill1]

He wouldn't answer the question. You would get destroyed in court. You wouldn't be able to handle it.

[@PeterJohn-hl3ox]

@@AbbeyRoadkill1 Good luck with all that.

[@HelloIamBen]

The lawyer representing Idaho was giving a non-answer. The SC Justice wants a "yes" or a "no" to establish what are the implications for doctors who have to make these decisions. The lawyer for Idaho will not say yes or no, he is saying "It depends". While sometimes that can be ok, in this situation where a doctor is saying to himself or herself, "Could I be PROSECUTED if I get this wrong?". In this scenario, the answer can't be vague. It has to be "Yes" or "No. That's why she keeps cutting him off. The Justice wants "yes" or "no" but is only get "maybe". So I don't it is that she's not interested in hearing the answer, I believe it is more of a case of she's not hearing an answer either way.

[@sheilawinston4739]

I can’t believe we’re still debating this. FFS VOTE BIDEN BLUE💙💙💙

[@eb1042]

Why aren't we bringing a CLASS ACTION suit against the United States for PRACTICING MEDICINE WITHOUT A LICENSE??? THIS IS FUCKING INSANE❗❗❗ 🔥🇺🇸🔥⚖️🔥♂️🔥

[@fishgutz4272]

Sodomyork isn't letting him answer. She wants absolute ban on any regulations or Kazmir on abortion.

[@clayoreilly4553]

Actually, she gave him several opportunities to answer. He chose to try baffling her with bullshit and it didn't work.

[@richardpearcy6149]

Typical dem fires off a complicated question and refuses to allow the attorney to answer and then goes to another complicated question, interrupting the attorney in med sentence. These were not straightforward yes or no questions but rather hypothetical questions requiring more than yes or no. That's an old lawyer trick she probably learned in law school.

[@serendipityshopnyc]

Fancy requiring a Republican lawyer to not give simplistic answers to a really complicated problem! Shame on her. Not.

[@ralphmdambrose1856]

The % of abortions to save baby or mommy's life is tiny compared to abortions for inconvenient pregnancies.

[@snowmonster42]

That really doesn't matter. You can't make a law to save a bunch of people that is also going to kill people, even if it's only a few. It's not like making an omlette.

[@RedRise91]

Sotomeyor has her mind made up and has no interest in hearing his take, even when asking him direct questions. She just wants to hear herself talk.

[@Duckster183]

He’s not answering her yes or no questions!

[@Freshbrood]

All he needs to do is answer yes or no. She's right to keep pressing this simple answer.

[@kacornish1]

She said YES OR NO… She knows he’s full of BS because he can’t answer the question.

[@user-hb6tl4nq1m]

Why do the fathers never have a say about the fetus that's being aborted? Its half of him.

[@ningxiawolfberry]

Just wants his money.

[@KMx108]

Yeah...think of all those fathers who carried half the responsibility of physically carrying and birthing a baby.

[@fdfischer]

Is the dad carrying the child?

[@bigtroll8249]

​@@fdfischer thats not relevant. Its a team effort and both are entitled to decide to save the baby's life w limited exception for life of the mother. Get a clue!

[@reasonablegentleman]

@@bigtroll8249 So you are pro choice but against women making the sole decision to carry the baby or not.

[@cherylsmith4826]

OMG please let him answer the question

[@narda1072]

He doesnt hv one

[@Achdujeh]

A yes or no question can indeed be answered very quick with yes or no. He didn't either.

[@vintagestufflover7020]

Less than a minute in, and she can't even get her terms correct. She said "early in her 2nd tri semester". What? She also said "hypothetical situations that are true".

[@michaeltillotson3711]

Hypothetical in Idaho which is the issue at hand. Real in other states that have stripped people of their rights. Think next time

[@peterbuckley3877]

If the cases described by the judge are true they aren’t hypothetical the are anecdotal, I think this case is more about poor medical decisions rather than any law.

[@carlh.h.2242]

Right. Her example presumes a skittish and cowardly doctor who isn’t equipped to be making those kind of decisions.

[@KMx108]

Doctors are going to change their approach out of fear they will make a move that lands them in court or jail. They will defer what would have otherwise been a timely medical decision. They will put lives at risk in order to comply with a law that threatens to destroy their lives and livelihood and is upheld by people without the same medical knowledge and expertise. Why is this so hard for people to understand?

[@axygon7529]

What does it say about the law that doctors were unsure if they could legally make the right medical decision? The doctor didn’t choose not to perform the abortion because he didn’t know what he was doing, he was scared of breaking the law.

[@peterbuckley3877]

@@axygon7529 it tells me that the hospital had a duty to clarify the laws and write that into their policies and procedures manual, that’s why they have a HR department it’s part of their job.

[@peterbuckley3877]

@@James-tq6tp the Hippocrates oath went out the window a few years ago, in the US a lot of it has been rewritten by changing definitions of words. If the original oath was abided by the world wouldn’t be having this current argument over sexual reassignment surgery that we have now.

[@X00000370]

I guess the "wise Hispanic woman" can only get 1 out of 3. Hispanic is a truth, wise and woman are, of course, questionable...

[@Scratcherzzz]

A hypothetical is not real by its definition

[@mikiafu]

so?

[@jeffbyrd7976]

That was a hypothetical that according to Prenatal Doctors doesn't exist.

[@michaeltillotson3711]

It most certainly exists. It has already occurred in other freedom hating red states. It isn't debatable, it is already proven fact. It is only hypothetical in Idaho since the law hasn't gone into effect yet

[@jeffbyrd7976]

@michaeltillotson3711 interesting. So you have evidence contrary to the doctors? Freedom for who, the mother or the baby? Everyone has the right to life.

[@michaeltillotson3711]

@jeffbyrd7976 no one has a "right to life". That's a positive right and our constitution only deals in negative rights. You have a right to bodily autonomy though. Which the fetus is violating that right for the woman if she doesn't consent Just like I can't force you to give up and let me use your body for survival. But hey, you are free to support big gov control. We can agree to disagree

[@jeffbyrd7976]

@michaeltillotson3711 another example of the failure of the education system. Please read the 14th amendment. The constitution positively protects my rights as a citizen. Clearly you are a person who believes that the government is more important than the individual.

[@jeffbyrd7976]

@michaeltillotson3711 the Constitution is about protecting an individuals rights, it can only be viewed as negative if you support government control. Read the 14th amendment, it specifically states to protect the right to life... Furthermore, a person has the right to not engage in behavior that creates a baby, not the right to kill. This is not about "agree to disagree" this is about facts vs your opinion. And yes I could agree with you, but then we would both be wrong.

[@289cobra9]

I remember her anti white racist remarks.