[Worldseries27]

Originally Posted by martinse

young woman is suing texas because she got s ticket for driving alone in the hov. She is pregnant and claims she was not alone, her fetus is a person according to texas law.

pregnant woman says her fetus should count as a passenger in hov lanes. She got a ticket

texas will simply amend the law to say the second passenger must be in a seperate, buckled up seat.

[Bill14564]

Originally Posted by bragones

I suppose she will have no issue being charged for 2 when booking airline flights while pregnant.

Airlines charge by the seat. I certainly hope (as would the airline) that she only has the need for one seat during the flight.

[Vermilion Villager]

Originally Posted by bragones

I suppose she will have no issue being charged for 2 when booking airline flights while pregnant.

Airlines require a ticket based on the occupancy of a seat on the plane.

[kbace6]

Originally Posted by kkingston57

This case is the tip of the iceberg with all of the different laws from state to state. Keeps the lawyers busy and these cases are not going to be cases like personal injury lawyers advertise that they only get paid when the injured person gets paid. HUGE can of worms.

I think the question here is not R v. W since it is unlikely that any state's "when life begins" statutes can be applied to vehicular statutes. But I think the real question is, if a pregnant woman is killed in a car accident in the state of Texas, is that considered double vehicular homicide as it is in my state? (very blue state) If the vehicular statutes in Texas do, then I suspect it is in her right legally to use the HOV lane. Not saying it is prudent, only potentially legal.

[retiredguy123]

Originally Posted by Bill14564

Airlines charge by the seat. I certainly hope (as would the airline) that she only has the need for one seat during the flight.

Actually, I think most airlines require anyone over 2 years old to have a ticket and a seat, even if they could sit on someone's lap.

[Caymus]

Originally Posted by Bill14564

Airlines charge by the seat. I certainly hope (as would the airline) that she only has the need for one seat during the flight.

Almost all airlines do not charge "lap" infants. Why would they charge her?

[ThirdOfFive]

Gotta give her credit for originality, if nothing else.

[Bill14564]

Originally Posted by Caymus

Almost all airlines do not charge "lap" infants. Why would they charge her?

Then you are agreeing with me.

[Djean1981]

Two beating hearts = two people.

However, in this case I think the intent is two passenger seats filled (to reduce the number of cars on the road). So, perhaps they should change the HOV laws to be two passengers over 16 years of age (possible drivers).

[retiredguy123]

Originally Posted by ThirdOfFive

Gotta give her credit for originality, if nothing else.

Agree. Reminds me of the law that required bars to close at 2AM, but didn't say that they couldn't reopen at 2:05AM.

[rsimpson]

Originally Posted by MartinSE

Young woman is suing Texas because she got s ticket for driving alone in the HOV. She is pregnant and claims she was not alone, her fetus is a person according to Texas law.

Pregnant woman says her fetus should count as a passenger in HOV lanes. She got a ticket

Easy to fix - Eliminate the HOV lanes. Another failed "green New Deal" idea.

[Keefelane66]

The Fetus is in the correct car seat it would not be viable outside the womb.

[Ptmckiou]

Originally Posted by MartinSE

Young woman is suing Texas because she got s ticket for driving alone in the HOV. She is pregnant and claims she was not alone, her fetus is a person according to Texas law.

Pregnant woman says her fetus should count as a passenger in HOV lanes. She got a ticket

It’s only just begun. “Miscarriage prosecution” is going to become a big money maker for lawyers. Women will have to prove it was no fault of their own that they actually had a natural miscarriage. Otherwise, they can be charged with manslaughter now, because the Supreme Court has essentially given “people” status to fetuses and people are ALL governed by constitutional rights. This ruling has women’s lives a potential horror show, along with monetary hardships of having to defend themselves and their doctors. Abortion may be viewed by many has horrendous, but many also believe a bigger horrendous act is bringing thousands of children into this world that are not wanted. We have enough unwanted children in the world as it is, and we can’t take care of many of them adequately. Especially minority children. Before abortion was legal in many places, I remember having an orphanage in our town. Are we going to be forced to go back to that? It can be daily mental torture to a child growing up unwanted. I wish that life for no one. Being pro-life does NOT stop at birth.

[Bill14564]

Originally Posted by rsimpson

Easy to fix - Eliminate the HOV lanes. Another failed "green New Deal" idea.

Disregarding the fact that HOV lanes are effective and existed long before the "green New Deal" was even conceived.

[Wyseguy]

Originally Posted by kkingston57

This case is the tip of the iceberg with all of the different laws from state to state. Keeps the lawyers busy and these cases are not going to be cases like personal injury lawyers advertise that they only get paid when the injured person gets paid. HUGE can of worms.

The States will figure it out.