logo
Ohio Republicans to introduce bill that would treat abortion as homicide and ban all procedures in the state

Ohio Republicans to introduce bill that would treat abortion as homicide and ban all procedures in the state

Independent6 hours ago

Ohio Republicans are introducing a bill to ban all abortions in the state by classifying the procedure as homicide.
Representatives Levi Dean and Johnathan Newman are set to introduce the " Ohio Prenatal Equal Protection Act ' on Wednesday, which would classify abortion as homicide. Austin Beigel, founder of End Abortion Ohio, told The Independent the bill will 'make a positive affirmation of the personhood of the pre-born.'
In 2023, Ohio residents voted to enshrine abortion access in the state Constitution. Since then, judges have struck down legislation that seeks to limit or ban abortion access despite the amendment.
The legislation will almost certainly face legal challenges if it passes. Beigel told The Independent the goal of the bill is to 'create an immediate conflict between our state's constitution...and the U.S. Constitution, which declares that no state may deprive a person of life, liberty or property without due process of the law.'
Beigel hopes legal challenges to the bill could rise as far as the Supreme Court.
The bill could also end in vitro fertilization in the state and ban some forms of contraception, including IUDs, The Columbus Dispatch reports. Beigel said IVF clinics 'will not be able to operate the way they are right now' under the legislation, but noted the bill does not mention contraception.
Several abortion rights advocates — and even some anti-abortion activists — have come out against the bill.
Ohio Right to Life President Mike Gonidakis said his organization doesn't support the bill.
'We have never supported criminalizing a woman for having an abortion, and we never will,' Gonidakis told the Dispatch. 'It's completely out of bounds and inappropriate.'
"This isn't even a Hail Mary," he added. "It's a strategy that won't be successful at the legislative level and it's a strategy that won't be successful at the judicial level."
Beigel said End Abortion Ohio doesn't align with Ohio Right to Life: 'We do not have the same goals, because Ohio Right to Life does not want to abolish abortion, they want to regulate abortion.'
Kellie Copeland, executive director of the advocacy group Abortion Forward, called the bill's supporters 'out-of-touch anti-abortion extremists.'
"This would strip Ohioans' ability to make decisions for our lives, health and well-being, including banning all abortion care, banning some types of birth control, and denying IVF treatment that helps people build their families,' Copeland told the Dispatch.
The Supreme Court enshrined abortion access as a Constitutional right in the 1973 case Roe v Wade. But the nation's highest court overturned the ruling in 2022 with its 6-3 decision on Dobbs v Jackson.
Since then, abortion has been banned in 12 states, while six states have instituted a gestational limit between six and 12 weeks. But most people don't know they're pregnant until their first missed period, which means many don't find out until after six weeks.
Georgia is one of the states which bans abortion after six weeks. There, Atlanta resident Adriana Smith was kept alive on life support for months after doctors declared her brain dead so she could carry out her pregnancy. Her family says doctors kept her on life support due to the gestational limit law.
said she gave birth via C-section on June 13 to a baby boy.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

US energy investors juggle exposure as tax bill debate rolls on
US energy investors juggle exposure as tax bill debate rolls on

Reuters

time41 minutes ago

  • Reuters

US energy investors juggle exposure as tax bill debate rolls on

LITTLETON, Colorado, June 18 (Reuters) - Energy equity investors are adjusting positions across the U.S. power sector in an attempt to pick winners and cut losers ahead of the final passing of President Donald Trump's tax-and-spending bill. The "One Big, Beautiful Bill Act" contains aggressive cuts to several tax credits and incentives tied to clean power generation from renewable energy sources, and has sparked an aggressive selloff in stocks tied to the sector. The bill would also accelerate the phase-out of federal support for electric vehicles, clean energy component manufacturing and wind farm development. However, the latest U.S. Senate proposals - which tweaked the version previously passed by the U.S. House - preserve support for nuclear, geothermal and battery storage projects, and sparked gains in stocks tied to nuclear power. Additional adjustments to the bill proposals are likely before it can be passed into law by Congress, sparking more position jostling by energy investors in the weeks ahead. Below is a breakdown of the key energy sector exchange-traded funds (ETFs) and equities that have and will be most impacted by the proposed budget. Stocks tied to companies engaged in the production of solar panels and inverters and in the installation of solar systems stand to be among the biggest losers once the proposed bill is passed, regardless of its final make-up. The Trump administration and many Republican lawmakers are against federal subsidies for solar power for several reasons, including concerns about its intermittency and its heavy reliance on components made in China and elsewhere. The Senate's recent budget bill proposal phases out several key solar tax credits and subsidies from 2026, and would eliminate them entirely from 2028. As the solar sector has already been hit by rising interest rates - which lifted the cost of system installations - the speedy gutting of federal support has greatly dimmed the prospects for several companies in the space. Stocks in solar inverter manufacturer Enphase (ENPH.O), opens new tab and panel makers First Solar (FSLR.O), opens new tab, Sunrun (RUN.O), opens new tab and SolarEdge (SEDG.O), opens new tab have all dropped by 20% or more within the past month as ramifications of the bill proposals were digested. Shares in the Invesco Solar ETF plumbed five-year lows in April, and are down more than 50% over the past two years as investors jettisoned positions and the sector's outlook darkened under the anti-renewables Trump administration. Several energy investors looking to get out of the solar space have pivoted their funds into the nuclear power sector, which has gained support under the current Trump administration. The Global X Uranium ETF (URA.P), opens new tab has gained more than 35% in value over the past month, and recently scaled its highest levels in more than a decade. Investors have been drawn to the fund by the likelihood of a tightening in the supply of uranium - the main fuel used by nuclear power plants - should more reactors get commissioned once the tax bill becomes law. Stocks in companies tied to geothermal energy production have also rallied recently as provisions tied to supporting the sector were preserved in the latest round of bill wrangling. Shares in Nevada-based Ormat Technologies (ORA.N), opens new tab, which makes power converters for geothermal plants, are up more than 30% since early May. Energy investors have also recently increased positions in funds and companies within the traditional oil and gas sector, as the gutting of clean energy subsidies will likely increase demand for fossil fuels. Shares in the SPDR Energy Select Fund - which holds several major oil and gas producers - have rallied on the recent tensions in the Middle East and due to the brighter outlook for U.S. gas demand if renewable generation is stalled. Firms with large natural gas production businesses stand to gain further if the proposed bill slams the brakes on renewable power growth and increases the U.S. power sector's dependence on gas. Shares in the companies tied to the liquefied natural gas (LNG) sector have also fared well lately due to the Trump administration's support for expanding LNG exports. Shares in Cheniere Energy (LNG.N), opens new tab - the top U.S. LNG exporter - are up around 10% year-to-date and over 50% over the past year. Investors have also increased their exposure to ETFs and companies dedicated to upgrading the U.S. power grid, which have upbeat outlooks regardless of how the final tax bill looks. The First Trust Smart Grid Infrastructure Fund (GRID.O), opens new tab is up around 12% year-to-date, while the First Trust North American Energy Infrastructure Fund is up about 4%. Going forward, investor interest is likely to also grow in the battery storage sector, with the iShares Energy Storage and Materials ETF (IBAT.O), opens new tab already on investors' radars. The fund has dropped around 5% in value so far this year due in part to the dimmed outlook for solar power growth, which utilities pair with battery systems to ensure round-the-clock supplies. But in the months ahead utilities will still likely increase their use of battery systems even if they slow their uptake of new solar systems, as the solar-plus-battery combination remains the fastest route to deliver new power to U.S. grids. The opinions expressed here are those of the author, a columnist for Reuters. Enjoying this column? Check out Reuters Open Interest (ROI), your essential new source for global financial commentary. ROI delivers thought-provoking, data-driven analysis of everything from swap rates to soybeans. Markets are moving faster than ever. ROI can help you keep up. Follow ROI on LinkedIn, opens new tab and X, opens new tab.

Tucker Carlson sparks full scale meltdown from Ted Cruz as senator makes bombshell admission about US role in war with Iran
Tucker Carlson sparks full scale meltdown from Ted Cruz as senator makes bombshell admission about US role in war with Iran

Daily Mail​

timean hour ago

  • Daily Mail​

Tucker Carlson sparks full scale meltdown from Ted Cruz as senator makes bombshell admission about US role in war with Iran

Tucker Carlson humiliated Republican senator Ted Cruz during an intense grilling over Iran in which he sensationally claimed America is 'carrying out military strikes.' Former Fox firebrand Carlson has shared a snippet of his sit-down with Cruz, who has been calling for Trump to help Israel overthrow the Iranian regime in what would be a significant escalation in the ongoing conflict. Carlson has made no secret of his disdain for Trump 'abandoning his America First policies' amid the escalating conflict between Israel and Iran. And now with America teetering on the brink of full scale involvement, Carlson pressed Cruz on his knowledge of the Middle Eastern region with a series of 'gotcha' questions which culminated in a jaw dropping revelation that America was directly involved in 'carrying out military strikes' on Iran. Cruz's statement is a major departure from everything the Trump administration has said about US involvement up until this stage - a point that was not lost on Carlson. 'You said Israel was [carrying out strikes],' Carlson said, to which Cruz responded: 'I've said we. Israel is leading them, but we're supporting them.' 'You're breaking news here,' Carlson said. 'The US government last night denied... on behalf of Trump, that we're acting on Israel's behalf in any offensive capacity.' Cruz appeared to backpedal on his statement, then telling Carlson: 'No, we're not bombing them. Israel is bombing them.' Carlson said: 'You just said we were. This is high stakes. You're a senator. If you're saying the United States is at war with Iran right now, people are listening.' The conservative commentator's earlier line of questioning had put Cruz under pressure and highlighted just how little he knows about the region. 'How many people live in Iran, by the way?' Carlson had asked. 'I don't know the population,' Cruz accepted, much to Carlson's horror as he quipped: 'At all?' 'You don't know the population of the people you're trying to topple?' Carlson added. Cruz tried to turn the tables back on Carlson, asking him for the number, to which the podcast host immediately responded: '92 million.' 'How could you not know that?' Carlson said. 'It's kind of relevant because you're calling for the overthrow of the government.' By this stage, the men were shouting over the top of one another as Cruz frantically tried to defend himself, first arguing 'I don't sit around memorizing population tables', before adding: 'Why is it relevant whether it's 90 million or 80 million.' Carlson, who appeared incredulous at the question, began to explain why he found it important 'if you don't know anything about the country', but was cut off by Cruz who said: 'I didn't say I don't know anything about Iran.' 'Okay,' Carlson countered, 'what is the ethnic mix of Iran?' Cruz stumbled over his answer, naming Persians and 'predominately Shia' before he was cut off by Carlson, who said again: 'What percent? You don't know anything on Iran.' Finally Cruz cracked, shouting: 'Okay, I'm not the Tucker Carlson expert on Iran.' Carlson said: 'You're the Senator who is calling for the overthrow of the government and you don't know anything about the country.' The argument went from bad to worse when Cruz began leveling insults at Carlson. He said: 'No, you don't know anything about the country. You're the one who claims they're not trying to murder Donald Trump. You're the one who can't figure out if it was a good idea to kill General Solami.' Trump is said to be considering a US strike on Tehran following Situation Room crisis talks with security advisors. But up until this point, Trump and his senior officials have repeatedly maintained that the United States played no part in the offensive strikes Israel has launched at Iran. Both Israel and Iran launched fresh strikes at each other overnight, as Iran's Revolutionary Guard said it launched a 'more powerful' new wave of missiles at Israel. Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei warned: 'The battle begins... We will show the Zionists no mercy.' Trump and Carlson have had a high-profile falling out amid Carlson's public criticism of the assault on Iran. Trump wrote Monday night on Truth social: 'Somebody please explain to kooky Tucker Carlson that,' IRAN CAN NOT HAVE A NUCLEAR WEAPON!' Earlier in the day, he said: 'I don't know what Tucker Carlson is saying. Let him go get a television network and say it so that people listen.' The former host was spectacularly fired from the news network in April 2023 and started his own independent network. Carlson issued a chilling warning to Trump on the War Room show with Steve Bannon to discuss the ongoing debate about Iran and the role the United States should play. 'A full-scale war with Iran,' he argued, ' would end, I believe, Trump's presidency, effectively end it, so that's why I'm saying this.' Carlson said if he could speak to Trump about the conflict, he would urge him to act in America's interests and bring peace to the region. 'I would say to him, you're the only person who can bring peace. You should continue to try and do that, it's difficult, it takes a long time but your timetable is the only timetable that matters, don't get bum rushed,' he said. Carlson called his long-time ally Trump 'complicit in an act of war,' while he slammed conservatives close to the president as 'warmongers' in a social media post the same day.

G7 leaders are paralysed by their fear of upsetting Donald Trump
G7 leaders are paralysed by their fear of upsetting Donald Trump

The Guardian

time2 hours ago

  • The Guardian

G7 leaders are paralysed by their fear of upsetting Donald Trump

There is no founding charter or admissions process to the self-selecting group of 'leading' economic powers that currently numbers seven. It was the G8 from 1997 to March 2014. Then Russia annexed Crimea and had its membership suspended, establishing the rule that participating nations should not seize their neighbours' land. The White House used to condemn that sort of thing on the grounds that 'it violates the principles upon which the international system is built'. These days, not so much. On Sunday, shortly after arriving for a G7 meeting in the Canadian resort of Kananaskis, Donald Trump told his host, the Canadian prime minister, Mark Carney, that Vladimir Putin's expulsion from the club had been a 'big mistake'. Within 24 hours Trump was back in Washington. There is precedent for the early departure. In June 2018, during his first term, Trump bailed on a G7 summit to meet North Korea's supreme leader, Kim Jong-un. This time he cited the escalating Israel-Iran conflict. That crisis is serious enough to justify the president clearing his diary of extraneous commitments. But it is revealing that dialogue with the US's closest allies is a disposable engagement. Arrogant unilateralism is an old feature of US foreign policy, especially in the Middle East. It is the prerogative of a superpower to disregard input from its strategic dependents. But Trump's G7 snub is not just a crass exaggeration of the usual American style. Sympathy with dictators and discomfort in the company of democrats express Trump's governing ethos. 'America First' is a doctrine that cannot conceive of mutual obligation between nations. There can be no G7, only the G1 and clients. Leaders who operate in deference to law and independent institutions are weak and contemptible. Strongmen who recognise no legitimate brake on their actions, who have folded the national interest into a personality cult, are admirable. To say that Trump indulges Putin misconstrues the balance of power. The US is vastly stronger than Russia, but its presidency, bound by fussy checks and balances, lacks the despotic agency of the Kremlin. Trump is envious. He claims simply to want deals with dictators, but he seems also to crave validation from them. By contrast, he thinks it is humiliating for the US commander-in-chief to be seated at a round table as the peer of a German chancellor or the prime minister of Canada – barely a proper country. The idea of coordinating foreign and trade policy on the basis of shared respect for political pluralism and the rule of law is an idea Trump finds absurd, if he even understands it. His agenda is dissolution of the west. The US's former allies need to recognise the magnitude of that ambition. Even when it is acknowledged, the scale of the challenge poses paralysing dilemmas. Layers of economic and military dependency are not easily peeled back. That is true for all of Europe, but especially Britain, where servicing the 'special' transatlantic relationship has been the axiomatic priority for decades. The road to a different strategic configuration, closer to allies on our own continent, is made rockier by Brexit. British audiences watching Trump defile the US constitution might wish Keir Starmer would give voice to their dismay. But there will be no 'Love Actually moment' – the term used derisively by diplomats for a fantasy re-enactment of Hugh Grant's cinematic rebuke to a swaggering, lecherous bully from the White House. Seasoned Trump handlers warn that disagreeing with the vindictive, thin-skinned president is best done behind closed doors. The art is not to challenge his view, but dress up dissent as a smarter way to satisfy his interests. Contradicting him in public is an act of self-injuring futility. Confrontation is not Starmer's style and his method is not fruitless. Trump found time on his curtailed trip to Canada to sign the executive order implementing a milder regime of punitive tariffs on Britain than is faced by most other countries. 'I like them,' Trump said in explanation of relative leniency for British exporters. (The compliment was confounded by his mistakenly describing it as deal with the EU.) Being liked by Trump is a transient condition. His deals are perishable. The ones signed with Canada and China in his first term were discarded. There are short-term commercial gains to be made by playing along with this capricious game, but the cost is accepting that the old rules no longer apply. That is bad for free trade and cataclysmic for democracy and international law. Over time, reluctance to say aloud that Trump is an authoritarian menace to the US's constitutional republic becomes complicity in the assault. The justification for silence is realpolitik – the argument that foreign policy should be moulded to the world as it is, not brandished as a demand that it be something else. But Trump inhabits a world fashioned around his own narcissistic delusions, populated by corrupt sycophants and far-right ideologues. Realpolitik in Trumpland is not an accommodation with reality but its wilful negation. It means normalising a project to hollow out US democracy, fill the shell with tyranny and call it freedom. Solidarity with Americans who are resisting that process is one reason for leaders in other countries to talk about it more candidly. Another is to anticipate and contain the risk of contagion. The Maga movement is indigenous to US politics, and not all of its culture-war obsessions resonate across the Atlantic. But it is also an ideological mothership supporting a flotilla of extreme nationalist parties, campaigns and digital influencers in the EU and the UK. Nigel Farage sails in that slipstream. The Conservatives drift aimlessly alongside. Trump himself is deeply unpopular in Britain, ranked unfavourably even by Reform UK supporters. Hence Farage is not as quick as he once was to boast of chumminess with the Mar-a-Lago crew. He also bristles when reminded that he once spoke of admiration for Putin. It is one of few lines of questioning that unsettles the mask of amiable composure. In the coming years, Farage has a balancing act to perform, fellow-travelling with a global consortium of far-right provocateurs and Kremlin apologists, while cultivating the aura of mainstream respectability required of a potential prime minister. He is well practised at the trick. It might be harder if the dark nature of his politics, the reliance on division, the cynical stirring of conflict, could be exposed by association with Trump; the British franchise of a toxic brand. That argument is harder to make as long as the reality of what is happening in the US is smothered in a gloss of realpolitik. Fear of provoking the tyrant keeps democratic leaders from telling the unvarnished truth about his regime. It is a risk. But a more insidious danger grows in silence, and there is no method for countering tyranny that leaves the truth unspoken. Rafael Behr is a Guardian columnist One year of Labour, with Pippa Crerar, Rafael Behr and more On 9 July, join Pippa Crerar, Rafael Behr, Frances O'Grady and Salma Shah as they look back at one year of the Labour government and plans for the next four years

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store