Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Lyft, Uber lash out at legal threat from strict Texas abortion law

cbc.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 122 posts

Re: Lyft, Uber lash out at legal threat from strict Texas abortion law

#31

Post by fabian2k »

thih9 wrote: post #27
fabian2k wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As far as I understand that's one of the more insane parts of this law. You don't need to show you suffered any harm or loss, absolutely anyone can sue under this law.

This seems ridiculous, to the point that I feel like I'm missing something. Does that mean that multiple people can sue a single person? If the person proves that there was no abortion, who covers the legal fees? Would it be possible to bait people into suing, get expensive lawyers and then provide proof that there was no abortion?

Take this with a huge grain of salt as my information is mostly indirect and I'm certainly not a lawyer. But I've read that there is actually a provision in there that prevents the legal fees for the defendant to be covered even if they win.

I suspect this will crash and burn not because it is insane, but because it's also a mess legally. But that will take time.

Re: Lyft, Uber lash out at legal threat from strict Texas abortion law

#32

Post by thatfrenchguy »

belltaco wrote: post #18

> Sec. 171.208. CIVIL LIABILITY FOR VIOLATION OR AIDING OR ABETTING VIOLATION. (a) Any person, other than an officer or employee of a state or local governmental entity in this state, may bring a civil action against any person who: (1) performs or induces an abortion in violation of this subchapter; (2) knowingly engages in conduct that aids or abets the performance or inducement of an abortion, including paying for…

Definitely need to sue the head of the DOT for not removing all roads that help people get abortions, which is all roads that lead out of the state.

Re: Lyft, Uber lash out at legal threat from strict Texas abortion law

#33

Post by xxpor »

goatherders wrote: post #14
marcinzm wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder if that's a partial goal of this law. Keep the state red and have those who are more liberal leave. Ensures a nice voting block for national elections and ensures local officials do not get voted out in the future.

Yes. I literally drew the Texas congressional lines in 2000 that set all this in motion and the primary goal of everything the state party does is to purge the state of people that don't vote Republican.

Woah woah woah hold up. You're the person who actually drew the lines?

Sorry if this is rude, but what the hell were you thinking?

Re: Lyft, Uber lash out at legal threat from strict Texas abortion law

#34

Post by AdrianB1 »

throwawayboise wrote: post #12
trhway wrote: post #8

>The ban leaves enforcement up to individual citizens, enabling them to sue anyone who provides or "aids or abets" an abortion after six weeks. i'm kind of puzzled by that extension of legal standing to everybody. I mean anybody who notices say a woman losing a bit of weight and that basically allows to file a suit, trigger discovery, and now the woman should prove that it was just a morning exercises? It takes Neghb…

Don't live in Texas so not really paying attention to this, but normally a lawsuit is filed when one has suffered a loss or harm. How does a third party claim any loss or harm giving him standing to sue in this situation?

Technically, there are some ways to demonstrate loss of harm. For example, imagine the father of the potential kid, not agreeing with the abortion, can make a reasonable claim.

The abortion has this ugly side, the father has zero rights. This is why I cannot agree with any side, pro-abortionists are wrong in some points, pro-lifers are wrong in some points and there is no effort to make it right, from any side. Such laws are not making it right, they are just an abuse (or farce) of the judicial system.

Re: Lyft, Uber lash out at legal threat from strict Texas abortion law

#35

Post by bobthechef »

fabian2k wrote: post #10

This law is quite insane, and it seems entirely rational to oppose your drivers being liable simply for driving woman to a clinic.

Don’t be ridiculous. The whole thing about this potentially causing problems for women going in for an innocent appointment is a smokescreen, just like using edge cases to justify abortion as a whole (the way to test this is to ask whether such a person would agree to restricting abortion to just those cases). The real problem those on the left have with this law is that it is a major advance against abortion, pure and simple. The thought-paralyzing “choice” rhetoric is wearing out and losing currency. Expect more to come. Pro-life sanctuary cities and towns are also making inroads.

Re: Lyft, Uber lash out at legal threat from strict Texas abortion law

#36

Post by kongin »

goatherders wrote: post #14
marcinzm wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder if that's a partial goal of this law. Keep the state red and have those who are more liberal leave. Ensures a nice voting block for national elections and ensures local officials do not get voted out in the future.

Yes. I literally drew the Texas congressional lines in 2000 that set all this in motion and the primary goal of everything the state party does is to purge the state of people that don't vote Republican.

The Texas lines can be made so much more efficiently Republican: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lq-Y7crQo44

Re: Lyft, Uber lash out at legal threat from strict Texas abortion law

#37

Post by kevin_thibedeau »

philipov wrote: post #22
fabian2k wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As far as I understand that's one of the more insane parts of this law. You don't need to show you suffered any harm or loss, absolutely anyone can sue under this law.

It's probably using some twisted justification like saying that abortions cause harm to society as a whole, and that gives any member of society standing.

More like "I'll be sent to hell if I don't save a soul". It's all selfishly motivated.

Re: Lyft, Uber lash out at legal threat from strict Texas abortion law

#38

Post by dragonwriter »

trhway wrote: post #8

>The ban leaves enforcement up to individual citizens, enabling them to sue anyone who provides or "aids or abets" an abortion after six weeks. i'm kind of puzzled by that extension of legal standing to everybody. I mean anybody who notices say a woman losing a bit of weight and that basically allows to file a suit, trigger discovery, and now the woman should prove that it was just a morning exercises? It takes Neghb…

> i'm kind of puzzled by that extension of legal standing to everybody

It designed to maximize the legal threat surface for anyone connected to abortion while immunizing the law against the pre-enforcement review it would have been subject to had it been state-enforced.

It’s a study in how to design a law for maximum chilling effect when you know you have an ideologically supportive Supreme Court but one with enough respect for legal precedent that it is unlikely that they’d simply uphold a 6-week abortion ban.

(Viewed another way, its a study in how to conduct an overt, brazen conspiracy against rights and deprivation of rights under color of law and test whether the federal criminal laws against those mean anything.)

Re: Lyft, Uber lash out at legal threat from strict Texas abortion law

#39

Post by AdrianB1 »

viraptor wrote: post #28
AdrianB1 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Correct, would they also sue bus drivers, train conductors and plane pilots? Do they need pregnancy tests for anyone taking a taxi?

Not disagreeing with the law being insane, but the difference there is that cab drivers drop you off / pick you up from a specific address. The other options are mass transport which takes you to the general area only, so they have no information where you're going.

The address can be across the street of the place you want to go, right? Same for the bus station. Not sure how taxis work in Texas, but in my country I can just tell the driver a street name and then where to stop, so the driver does not know where I am going.

Re: Lyft, Uber lash out at legal threat from strict Texas abortion law

#40

Post by MisterSandman »

viraptor wrote: post #28
AdrianB1 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Correct, would they also sue bus drivers, train conductors and plane pilots? Do they need pregnancy tests for anyone taking a taxi?

Not disagreeing with the law being insane, but the difference there is that cab drivers drop you off / pick you up from a specific address. The other options are mass transport which takes you to the general area only, so they have no information where you're going.

I'm curious, though, can an Uber driver be sued if they happen to take a passenger to a school and the passenger commits a mass shooting?

How would the driver even know the women is pregnant or going to get an abortion? It's not like there are clinics that ONLY do abortions.

Post reply on HN