Montana's Supreme Court ruled that minors don't need their parents' permission to get an abortion in the state.

Montana’s Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that minors don’t need their parents’ permission to get an abortion in the state – agreeing with a lower court ruling that found the parental consent law violates the privacy clause in the state constitution.

“We conclude that minors, like adults, have a fundamental right to privacy, which includes procreative autonomy and making medical decisions affecting his or her bodily integrity and health in partnership with a chosen health care provider free from governmental interest,” Justice Laurie McKinnon wrote in the unanimous opinion.

The ruling comes as an initiative to ask voters if they want to protect the right to a pre-viability abortion in the state constitution is expected to be on the Montana ballot in November. County officials have verified enough signatures to qualify the issue for the ballot, supporters have said. The Secretary of State’s Office has to certify the general election ballots by Aug. 22.

  • cybervseas@lemmy.worldEnglish
    53·
    3 months ago

    That sounds like a very Montana opinion.

    I say that not knowing much about Montana. I assume they’re conservatives in the same mould Mainers: “You leave me alone and I’ll leave you alone.”

    • Nougat@fedia.io
      11·
      3 months ago

      Trump saw fit to have a rally in Montana, a solid red, non-swing state, which means he at least thinks people would swoon for him there.

      • The_v@lemmy.world
        15·
        3 months ago

        Montana has been deeply red for many decades like most rural areas. Racism also runs very deep in the state.

        Over the past 30 years the population has been becoming more urban. People who live in urban areas are voting overwhelmingly blue in the state.

        As the urban areas continue to grow the politics of the state will change as well.

        The Republicans will have to resort to voter suppression like they do in other states to maintain their power.

      • lolcatnip@reddthat.comEnglish
        5·
        3 months ago

        I’m pretty sure Trump doesn’t know much more about Montana than a random Lemmy user. Not that I think Montana is some bastion of freedom, but drawing conclusions about a state’s culture based on which outside politicians hold rallies there is pretty silly.

    • Sc00ter@lemm.ee
      9·
      3 months ago

      My anecdote supports this. My former neighbor is a die hard trump conspiracy theorist. Thought Biden died when he announced he was dropping out of the race without making an appearance type. Grew up in rural Ohio. I mean he’s the demographic.

      But the nicest dude I’ve ever met. We lived on the fringe of the hood, and he was always out helping everyone he saw. Old black lady lived on the other side of me: shoved all her snow and never even told her it was him. Constantly stopping while walking his dogs to help people: carry groceries, clean your garage, move a couch. He truly didn’t care who you were, what you looked like, or what your situation was, he was going to help.

      He got married in glacier national park and never came back lol

      • ulkesh@lemmy.world
        11·
        3 months ago

        I know plenty of people who do nice things but still carry hate in their hearts for certain demographics. As the saying goes, no one is the villain in their own story. It’s great you have a nice neighbor, but if he votes for someone who wants to remove explicit or precedential rights from others, he’s not as nice as he seems.

  • Drunemeton@lemmy.worldEnglish
    43·
    3 months ago

    Roe v Wade was based on a women’s privacy with her doctor, and it was overturned.

    How long until someone challenges this and SCOTUS takes up the case? Anyone like to bet how they’d rule!?

    • Juniper (she/her) 🫐@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      11·
      3 months ago

      The Montana State constitution has a guaranteed right to privacy, which is what Row v Wade used to guarantee abortion access. It would take a Montana constitutional amendment to change it in Montana. Scotus has no authority over the matter.

    • Jojo, Lady of the West
      1·
      3 months ago

      Well, this was the state supreme Court, so to do that a federally ruling would have to have pretty broad implications, like “states cannot legally guarantee a right to privacy to their citizens” and would be pretty contentious