Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I'm not sure this is true; it addresses a case, which means the interpretation already is ex-post-facto. I don't know the answer, but it wouldn't surprise me if, in states with anti-abortion laws standing for which the statute of limitations has not expired, abortion providers could be held legally liable.



Ex post facto laws are forbidden by the US Constitution, both at federal and state levels. [1]

At least, at this time, with current interpretation- "the Supreme Court has explained that people must have notice of the possible criminal penalties for their actions at the time they act" [2] (See also Weaver v Graham[3])

This might be subject to change.

[1]https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artI-S9-C3-3-...

[2]https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artI-S9-C3-3-...

[3]http://cdn.loc.gov/service/ll/usrep/usrep450/usrep450024/usr...


The laws are not ex post facto. They have been on the books, on some cases for over 100 years. States were not enforcing them, because they believed they were constitutionally prohibited from doing so.




Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: