[asldjajlfkj]

Statement from Meta: Nothing in the valid warrants we received from local law enforcement in early June, prior to the Supreme Court decision, mentioned abortion. The warrants concerned charges related to a criminal investigation and court documents indicate that police at the time were investigating the case of a stillborn baby who was burned and buried, not a decision to have an abortion.

I don’t understand why there should be a moral imperative to defy a warrant in this case. I hope all pro-choicers would agree, that the freedom of self performing a not-medically-supervised abortion at 23 weeks, the burning und burying in a plastic bag is _not_ the freedom most are fighting for.

[devwastaken]

You cant have a medically supervised abortion at 23 weeks minus very few exceptions. If you could, this wouldn't be the story. So, yes, it is about having a very late abortion. What else do they do with it to avoid the very law that is now going after them?

But yes, medically, 22 weeks the fetus may be viable without the mother, therefore we draw the line. It's murder, charge it as such, and sounds to me investigations are proper.

[fzeroracer]

What do you mean minus very few exceptions? A bunch of states ban abortion only at 24 weeks or later, with the viability line generally being at 24-28 weeks. And the actual point of this case isn't the the individuals going past the viability line, but as an example of what states could do to violate someone's privacy. Especially in states that have completely banned or are working on banning abortion. The threshold of evidence needed for a state to serve such a warrant is low and there's a clear trend of states also using it to punish people out of state or out of their legal jurisdiction.