• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Texas v. Ulster County, NY

Loulit01

Raven at SCOTUS Mourning the Republic
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 30, 2021
Messages
27,407
Reaction score
42,579
Location
Hiding from ICE
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive


This may become a federal case that may tried in NY or Texas. We'll see. Part of the Ulster County Clerk's filing read that he was particularly proud to serve the people of his county that day. I so get that.

NY Governor Hochul has refused extradition requests of this type before from Louisiana.
 
Last edited:



Is there NO END to how deeply American government will pry into the personal lives of its citizens?

Government for the people?????????

Government for the elite & religious against the people
 

"New York Gov. Kathy Hochul said in a video posted on social media, “I will never, under any circumstances, turn this doctor over to the state of Louisiana under any extradition requests,” signaling a potential legal battle between the states." link

She's doing the same thing with Texas. NY State has a shield law. And:

"The New York shield law includes a provision that allows a prescriber who is sued to countersue the plaintiff to recover damages. That makes the Texas lawsuit thorny." link
 
Last edited:
"Republican Texas State Attorney General Ken Paxton said he was outraged by the refusal and signaled he would take action."

“New York is shredding the Constitution to hide lawbreakers from justice, and it must end,” Paxton said on X. “I will not stop my efforts to enforce Texas’s pro-life laws that protect our unborn children and mothers.” link

Heh, "states' rights" mutha****a! ;)
 
"Republican Texas State Attorney General Ken Paxton said he was outraged by the refusal and signaled he would take action."
Bring it. We'll be ready.

“New York is shredding the Constitution to hide lawbreakers from justice, and it must end,” Paxton said on X. “I will not stop my efforts to enforce Texas’s pro-life laws that protect our unborn children and mothers.” link

Heh, "states' rights" mutha****a! ;)
 
"Republican Texas State Attorney General Ken Paxton said he was outraged by the refusal and signaled he would take action."

“New York is shredding the Constitution to hide lawbreakers from justice, and it must end,” Paxton said on X. “I will not stop my efforts to enforce Texas’s pro-life laws that protect our unborn children and mothers.” link

Heh, "states' rights" mutha****a! ;)
He has no understanding of the Constitution. He's an idiot who doesn't know that all nubile women in Texas have the right to walk across that state's border with Colorado to freedom and if they're 18, they never have to go back. Those women don't belong to Texas, so it's impossible for their embryos to do so.
 
He has no understanding of the Constitution. He's an idiot who doesn't know that all nubile women in Texas have the right to walk across that state's border with Colorado to freedom and if they're 18, they never have to go back. Those women don't belong to Texas, so it's impossible for their embryos to do so.
Well, Texas doesn't border Colorado, but otherwise I agree.
 
Well, Texas doesn't border Colorado, but otherwise I agree.
This would embarrass me if it were not for the border shared between New Mexico and Oklahoma's panhandle, which is tiny and leads directly to Colorado. If one followed that border, one would be on the border, not in New Mexico or Oklahoma.

Thanks for agreeing on the other thing.
 
This would embarrass me if it were not for the border shared between New Mexico and Oklahoma's panhandle, which is tiny and leads directly to Colorado. If one followed that border, one would be on the border, not in New Mexico or Oklahoma.

Thanks for agreeing on the other thing.
So Texas borders Colorado?

And you're welcome.
 
So Texas borders Colorado?

And you're welcome.
Texas shares a border with New Mexico and Oklahoma and these two states share a border and Texas shares a border with that border. Hence, you can go up that border to CO. That's my meaning.
 


This may become a federal case that may tried in NY or Texas. We'll see. Part of the Ulster County Clerk's filing read that he was particularly proud to serve the people of his county that day. I so get that.

NY Governor Hochul has refused extradition requests of this type before from Louisiana.


And NY is rejecting it again.


"A county clerk in New York on Monday again refused to file a more than $100,000 civil judgment from Texas against a doctor accused of prescribing abortion pills to a Dallas-area woman.​
New York is among eight states with shield laws that protect providers from other states’ reach. Abortion opponents claim the laws violate a constitutional requirement that states respect the laws and legal judgments of other states."​
“While I’m not entirely sure how things work in Texas, here in New York, a rejection means the matter is closed,” Bruck wrote in a letter to Texas officials.​
Hochul, responding to the latest request from Paxton’s office, claimed he was attempting to dictate “the personal decisions of women across America.”
“Our response to their baseless claim is clear: no way in hell. New York won’t be bullied,” she said in a prepared statement. “And I’ll never back down from this fight.”​
 
I am interested in who they'd appeal to.

Wouldnt they have to create a federal case out of it?
All that will.do is show that no state has jurisdiction over the events that occur in another state. Otherwise we would have states applying their no gambling laws on those who went to Las Vegas as well as the casinos in Las Vegas for allowing the suing state's citizens to gamble.
 
All that will.do is show that no state has jurisdiction over the events that occur in another state. Otherwise we would have states applying their no gambling laws on those who went to Las Vegas as well as the casinos in Las Vegas for allowing the suing state's citizens to gamble.

That's kind of what I was implying.
 
Back
Top Bottom