USPS: States rights to intervene?

[colddiesel]

Supposing an overseas trader wanted to send abortion pills to various addresses in the USA, what rights or legal means do the individual States have to prevent or obstruct that transaction/delivery. Various Federal authorities have the rights to prevent the import of illicit drugs and substances for example, but what is the position when the use, transport or posession may be legal in some states but not in others?

 

[rockcasbah]

Your supplier would be a fool to drop-ship.

You’ll need to ship to an abortion friendly state and you mail from there to your customers.

Donestic mail is practically zero risk, but you run the risk of running afoul of state laws… so you need to live outside the unfriendly states.

You’ll need to get legal opinions on usps domestic laws and assess your risk at various state levels.

Or move to India.

 

[EmptyTank]

currently they require a prescription
you can get them by mail

 

[Biggs_Darklighter]

No different than buying weed online. Most wont ship where its illegal and the ones that will you probably shouldn't buy from.

 

[butters]

Merrick Garland has weighed in, though no doubt the anti-abortion states will argue in court that there are other reasons than 'safety and efficacy' they are using

• "In particular, the FDA has approved the use of the medication Mifepristone. States may not ban Mifepristone based on disagreement with the FDA’s expert judgment about its safety and efficacy."

Yes, but: It is far from settled law as to whether states can ban the pills, and the issue will likely have to be litigated in the courts, though there's really no clear precedent, according to the Washington Post.

https://www.axios.com/2022/06/24/merrick-garland-fda-abortion-pills-state-bans

 

[HisArpy]

This is going to call in question the legality of the emergency orders which prohibited use of certain medications for Covid.

Can States ban the use of otherwise legal prescription drugs? Can one state ban prescriptions drugs mailed from another State? Does this infringe upon the commerce clause? It such a ban prohibited by the exclusive Fed jurisdiction regarding interstate commerce?

It's going to get messy for awhile as all of this is sorted out.

 

[Dribble]

Safety? But Ivermectin....cow wormer...

 

[butters]

Safety? But Ivermectin....cow wormer...

ivermectin in its human-consumption form and prescribed dosage is safe, but not an effective or approved use to treat/prevent covid (as you well know, lol)

ivermectin as a livestock dewormer isn't, nor ever has been, FDA approved for use on people.

 

[Dribble]

ivermectin in its human-consumption form and prescribed dosage is safe, but not an effective or approved use to treat/prevent covid (as you well know, lol)

ivermectin as a livestock dewormer isn't, nor ever has been, FDA approved for use on people.

But the Republicans weren't using FDA approved doses were they? In fact, what did the Fascist media sources tell their listeners?

Ivermectin is a neuraltoxin. It was suggested to be used to slow down the cascade immune response which is what the initial death of old people was due to. It poisons those that take it. Even FDA approved doses. That is how it works. Now, at the time...this actually made sense. But within weeks, we knew it didn't work...but that information was false news.

 

[jaF0]

There are a LOT of things that can't be shipped to some states. Certain gasoline engines to CA for example. Lots of medicines can only be bought in person, not shipped to you. And there's a whole list of plants and seeds.

 

[Dribble]

There are a LOT of things that can't be shipped to some states. Certain gasoline engines to CA for example. Lots of medicines can only be bought in person, not shipped to you. And there's a whole list of plants and seeds.

But who determines that? And how it that regulated?

 

[jaF0]

'State's rights.'

 

[butters]

But the Republicans weren't using FDA approved doses were they? In fact, what did the Fascist media sources tell their listeners?

Ivermectin is a neuraltoxin. It was suggested to be used to slow down the cascade immune response which is what the initial death of old people was due to. It poisons those that take it. Even FDA approved doses. That is how it works. Now, at the time...this actually made sense. But within weeks, we knew it didn't work...but that information was false news.

i think we're agreeing here

 

[Rightguide]

If states can ban the import of guns and ammunition bought in another state they can ban types of drugs as well.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

If states can ban the import of guns and ammunition bought in another state they can ban types of drugs as well.

Because guns are the same thing as drugs.

 

[ishtat]

If states can ban the import of guns and ammunition bought in another state they can ban types of drugs as well.

Of course they can ban whatever they chose: But effectively? I doubt it. Given that the USPS is a federal authority established under the authority of the Constitution what legal means are available to the states to intervene/intercept and/or confiscate the federal post.

Secondly, from my observation the kind of people who market product internationally on the internet could not care less whether some individual state decides to ban them.They do not operate within anyone's law. My own view is that somehow, and I am not certain of the precise means, the market will find a way to supply abortion inducing drugs to those who want them. I suspect that the Supreme court has turned over a weak precedent (Roe) and the various states will now put unenforceable anti abortion law through their legislatures.

Prohibition of alcohol did not work. Prohibition of hard drugs is not working. Why would anybody delude themselves that prohibition of Abortion drugs will work?

 

[Comshaw]

Supposing an overseas trader wanted to send abortion pills to various addresses in the USA, what rights or legal means do the individual States have to prevent or obstruct that transaction/delivery. Various Federal authorities have the rights to prevent the import of illicit drugs and substances for example, but what is the position when the use, transport or posession may be legal in some states but not in others?

As much as it pains me to agree with Harpy, I too believe this is going to get messy and will be worked out in the (one way or the other) courts over time.

The part of this I am watching is the Texas law that gave a state citizen the right to sue another state citizen who went out of state to have an abortion. Now that SCOTUS has allowed the states to outlaw abortion, will Texas codify that into a law? Will those women who go out of state to have an abortion and return now be jailed for doing so? What right does one state have to try to regulate what legally goes on in another? A can of worms for sure.


Comshaw

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

As much as it pains me to agree with Harpy, I too believe this is going to get messy and will be worked out in the (one way or the other) courts over time.

The part of this I am watching is the Texas law that gave a state citizen the right to sue another state citizen who went out of state to have an abortion. Now that SCOTUS has allowed the states to outlaw abortion, will Texas codify that into a law? Will those women who go out of state to have an abortion and return now be jailed for doing so? What right does one state have to try to regulate what legally goes on in another? A can of worms for sure.


Comshaw

How would someone in Texas be able to show someone left the state to have an abortion?

 

[oggbashan]

I used to buy old postcards and historic press photos from the US via eBay (along with other small things).

Not any more. The US postal rates are so high it isn't worth my while to consider any US supplier.

China, on the other hand, will ship to the UK below UK internal postage rates.

 

[Comshaw]

How would someone in Texas be able to show someone left the state to have an abortion?

I have no idea. They wrote it into the vigilante law they passed earlier, with the idea it would intimidate those who go out of state for the procedure. With that kind of mind set, why wouldn't they codify it? For intimidation purposes if nothing else. If they happen to be able to prove a woman did so and they prosecuted her for it, it would have a definite chilling effect on those who want to do that, no? That was the aim of the original vigilante laws.

Comshaw

 

[jaF0]

How would someone in Texas be able to show someone left the state to have an abortion?

How would someone be able to defend themselves against such a charge?

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

How would someone be able to defend themselves against such a charge?

They wouldn’t have to.

 

[Dribble]

I have no idea. They wrote it into the vigilante law they passed earlier, with the idea it would intimidate those who go out of state for the procedure. With that kind of mind set, why wouldn't they codify it? For intimidation purposes if nothing else. If they happen to be able to prove a woman did so and they prosecuted her for it, it would have a definite chilling effect on those who want to do that, no? That was the aim of the original vigilante laws.

Comshaw

Family and neighbors turning in family and neighbors. Nothing the World hasn't seen before. You are witnessing the Fourth Reich

 

[butters]

How would someone in Texas be able to show someone left the state to have an abortion?

firstly, they'd go on reports from people who think that's what they did

they can trace where smart phones were and when

they can access tracking apps for menstrual cycles if people are using them on their phones: if they show a gap in a woman's menstrual cycle consistent with the time period she travels out of state, and resumed cycles after with no pregnancy, they will look into if that all corresponds with if the phone was in the locality of an abortion clinic.

This is where the whole privacy thing comes into it as well.
There are people telling women all across the net to delete their menstrual cycle tracking apps. Of course, the woman may have suffered a miscarriage, but that doesn't mean she wouldn't be investigated and stigmatised because of it. They (the authorities of anti-abortion states) might demand records from hospitals/clinics to 'prove' whether or not there was treatment involved with a miscarriage or abortion, though i can't see pro-choice states conforming to such requests.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

firstly, they'd go on reports from people who think that's what they did

they can trace where smart phones were and when

they can access tracking apps for menstrual cycles if people are using them on their phones: if they show a gap in a woman's menstrual cycle consistent with the time period she travels out of state, and resumed cycles after with no pregnancy, they will look into if that all corresponds with if the phone was in the locality of an abortion clinic.

This is where the whole privacy thing comes into it as well.
There are people telling women all across the net to delete their menstrual cycle tracking apps. Of course, the woman may have suffered a miscarriage, but that doesn't mean she wouldn't be investigated and stigmatised because of it. They (the authorities of anti-abortion states) might demand records from hospitals/clinics to 'prove' whether or not there was treatment involved with a miscarriage or abortion, though i can't see pro-choice states conforming to such requests.

They’d need a warrant to access that information.
They can ask all they want but HIPPA protects their medical records.

Of course it’s possible I’m underestimating how much the state of Texas hates women.