The site uses cookies that you may not want. Continued use means acceptance. For more information see our privacy policy.

Dark Days in Alabama

“… l’obligation est voide, eo que le condition est encountre common ley…” —Judge Hull, 1414.

9 August 2023.

Montgomery, Alabama.

Overnight, the streets of Montgomery, Alabama, were filled with beams from flashlights. They were not for a vigil, but to see by. The small electronic devices were passed out by a special mission from the United Nations as Alabama entered its second week with minimal electricity—in the words of the state supreme court’s judgment, only what’s “necessary for the protection of human life” if it’s generated by polluting methods.

While Alabama continues begging to its grid partners for as much clean energy as can be had—a tough ask as most of it is already dedicated to reducing other states’ carbon emissions—most of the state’s generation capacity remains mothballed. And to the extent the state can buy more clean juice, unless and until it can get enough to power essentials it simply displaces the fossil fuels. Dirty power is allowed only to power some traffic lights, the state’s water works, and fire stations. Hospitals get juice, but only to care for those on life support or needing stabilization.

The legislature is among the exceptions. Immediately following the ruling by the Alabama Supreme Court, Governor Ivey had called a special session to draft and propose a repeal or replacement for Alabama Amendment 930, the heart of the confusion and the chaos in this state of five million people. Given the dysfunction the state is experiencing, it took until this morning to gather a quorum in both chambers, following the arrival of several lawmakers who had been away on extended vacations. They landed at Dannelly Field on a special flight arranged and piloted by the Alabama Air National Guard.

The UN’s humanitarian mission has included setting up special solar-powered cooling tents, which have become a literal lifesaver in this southern state known for its hot summers. The lack of air conditioning has made many indoor structures unsafe during the hottest hours of the day, with some cities declaring don’t-stay-home orders requiring everyone to find their way to one of more than 2000 cooling sites throughout the state. Outside of the major enclosed stadiums and arenas, which have capacities from several thousand to ten thousands, the UN tents have a maximum capacity of 500 persons. Regular shade tents are erected in the vicinity so that citizens can rotate in and out of the cooled tents. School gymnasiums and megachurches are also part of the mix of cooled spaces available.

With refrigeration limited, food preparation sites have been put up in parking lots of many major grocers, allowing people to cook hot meals away from home. Despite this, there are massive food shortages and the relief efforts includes distributing no-cook or pre-cooked foods to accommodate the state’s residents. The one saving grace is that water service continues uninterrupted, meaning taps still work, though hot water is unavailable as most buildings use methane heaters.

Those with illnesses requiring medication to be refrigerated, including insulin for diabetics, have been forced to make trips to nearby pharmacies or hospitals to receive their doses, which is a major hardship given the lack of transportation options. As a result, as many infirm as possible have been evacuated to nearby states.

The ruling by District Judge Nima Shelley in Mobile had come two months ago in the next-friend class-action suit by expecting persons in the state, for the protection of their health and welfare. Judge Shelley had stayed her ruling pending appeals, but the state attorney general has repeatedly mocked the decision, and the state solicitor general gave only a perfunctory rebuttal at argument once the case reached the high court three weeks ago. Following a week of deliberations, the seven-member majority laid down the law: the district court ruling stands, and all contracts that threaten the unborn in Alabama are, “avoided, inoperable, and illegal.”

Contract is the basic means of commerce throughout the world, including ordinary exchanges of goods for money. It requires two or more persons to agree on an exchange that offers some cost and benefit to each party, and has been the cornerstone of society for hundreds, if not thousands, of years. Under normal circumstances, they could rely on the state to enforce contracts. While commerce could continue on a voluntary basis, most corporations, including suppliers, are unwilling to proceed on that basis, that they might deliver either payment or goods and rely on good will to see the other party keep up their end.

The result has meant curtailing all nonessential activities and commerce within the state that cause pollution capable of causing harm, defect, or death of unborn life. The scientific term, toxic abortion, refers to the ability of pollutants to cross the placental barrier and damage fetal tissue, disrupting the delicate balance involved in growing the womb’s fruit, in addition weakening a pregnant person already under the strain of supporting an incipient life (or lives, in cases of multiple pregnancy). Responsible for both spontaneous abortions (miscarriages) and stillbirths, estimates put the figures nationally between 40 000 and 200 000 per year, though the exact figures would be impossible to calculate. Now, the courts have said, the state constitution demands protection.

That’s because of the specific language used in the amendment, which passed by plebiscite in 2018, made it the explicit public policy of the State of Alabama to prioritize unborn life. “Although the Alabama Constitution has a provision barring the impairment of contracts, the language of Amendment 930 was clear, and its later adoption gives it priority,” the seven-member majority wrote. Had it been a mere statute, it would have been unable to reach to avoid contracts. But, “[U]nless amended, nobody in this state may enter into any contract for goods or services that threaten the unborn. Due to the widespread disruption this conclusion requires, we further hold that there are limited exceptions. Services and commerce that is essential for protection of life is excluded. And thankfully, beyond our law’s reach are all federal facilities and federal operations.”

That last exception refers to the long-standing conceit of law that federal activity is protected from violation of state laws under cases arising from the Neagle rule, established in 1890. Though not insulating federal employees from lawsuit, the state amendment establishes rights not affirmed by the US Supreme Court, and so while at work federal employees are blameless and, for now, federal activity is protected.

The state legislature expects its main duties to be finished by the end of the day, though some of the state’s pundits have speculated they will find good reason to remain in session all the same. Spouses, family members, and major donors have all been seen entering the legislative offices carrying changes of clothes and bottles of soap as they seek the creature comfort of a shower. The sounds of hair dryers and electric razors echo through the halls.

The legislature must also pass a law allowing the governor to issue a writ of election to call for the statewide special election specifically to ratify an amendment. The bill is expected to make allowances for the election to be conducted without much, if any, electricity. The exact date of that election remains up in the air, due to the unusual circumstances. Turnaround time would normally be a few weeks, minimum, and time would be allotted for campaigning, but there’s both no time to lose and the problems of pulling together the materials without normal transportation or electricity needs.

The case, Alabama v. the Unborn Child of Moggs, was only the latest trouble caused by Amendment 930. There have been more than one hundred cases of convicted persons freed on deferred sentences after lawyers sued for the false imprisonment of their unborn children. They will be required to serve their time only after giving birth.

That loophole had led to a criminal gang of pregnant persons, known as the “Mother’s Mafia,” forming. They robbed convenience stores and other small businesses, causing mayhem. They duct-taped pregnancy tests to their chests to warn off any law enforcement officer who might attempt to arrest them.

At their peak, they numbered in the dozens (more if one counts their fetuses as accomplices, something the district attorneys avoided and the attorney general advised against). They were eventually brought to something approaching justice by the “Preggers Posse,” a vigilante group of pregnant women. Following the high-profile apprehension, they imprisoned the Mother’s Mafia in a vacant strip mall in Hysteria, Alabama, where the Pregnant Posse acts as jailers, providing prenatal care until each has their delivery day, at which point the group says they will be handed over to law enforcement.

Asked what he thought about Amendment 930, Posse leader and transgender rights activist Marki Malone said, “It’s deranged. I’m glad to be having this child, but you can’t put unborn life ahead of those who are already here. I’m as against pollution as anyone, but we have to build clean energy. Shutting down the dirty stuff doesn’t make that happen any faster.”

Outside of the state, energy economists have questioned that logic. They say that if the ruling stands and Alabama can’t change the law, they estimate a nine-month effort could bring the state to 80 percent generation capacity, provided the federal funds come through. It would prove a remarkable turnaround for a state that as recently as 2022 was generating about 56% of its electricity using methane and coal.

Ground transportation would take longer to replace, and even electric vehicles cause some PM2.5 emissions through road wear and other mechanical emissions like brake dust. At what point is the air and other toxic risks to fetuses deemed safe enough to satisfy Amendment 930? It seems unlikely Alabama will find out, as the legislature and voters seek to replace it with something less burdensome and return to modern life.

At the latest press conference this morning, the Alabama House majority leader said he expected as many as six proposed amendments to pass. “We don’t want to leave this thing to chance. We need to make sure the voters pass at least one of these, so that our state is not held hostage by the courts.” The amendment language was being carefully considered, both to guard against further lawsuits and to work constructively if more than one were to pass.

The main option discussed was outright repeal, followed by a softened version of 930 that would make it non-policy. Another option would declare there to be no right in Alabama to avoid environmental toxins, even for the unborn. A few would require special steps by pregnant persons. Those included requiring them to wear HEPA filters, or even requiring them to spend their maternity outside the borders of the state. But legal critics say these lesser options, which would leave 930 in operation, would be like resetting the clock on a timebomb rather than disarming it. And environmental scientists point out that HEPA filters do not remove certain pollutants—mainly gasses.

Fetal health is impacted by air pollution in two ways. Air pollution may be directly passed to the fetus by the pregnant person, causing harm. But air pollution can also harm the pregnant person’s health, which makes them a weaker host for the fetus to grow inside of. Air pollutants include particulate matter (PM2.5), volatile organic compounds (VOCs), Nitrogen oxides (NOx), and Sulfur oxides (SOx). Fetal harms include low birth weight, birth defect, spontaneous (toxic) abortion (miscarriage), and stillbirth. Survivors may suffer persistent and chronic health problems throughout their lives.

Sources of manmade air pollution include carbon electricity generation, other industrial combustion, vehicles’ combustion engines (including trains, watercraft, and aircraft), and forest fires.


This article was originally written on ink and paper, without the use of artificial energy sources, and it was transmitted for publication via a solar-powered satellite phone, avoiding any use of polluting energy.

We Need Leaders.

Leaders tell people what needs to be done.

A leader is someone who tells people where they’re going, and the people, agreeing with that goal, finding it worth the effort, work to go there too. That’s where we get the name leader.

In America we have people who set them selves up as legislators, or in executive roles as administrators. They know how to, what, sign papers, speak in public. But how few actually lead? Do they bother to go ahead of the people and bring them along?

In the wake of Dobbs, we need leadership. We need Biden and other Democrats to stand up and say, “We’re going to bring about an America where rights are protected as they’re supposed to be. And here’s how I think we get there, and here’s what I want you to do to help us get there.”

In general, we don’t get status updates from our parties. They don’t check-in with us in a meaningful way. They often shove thorns of reality into our flesh, in hopes we’ll wince and donate. But they don’t stop and say, “Okay, here’s how it’s going. Here’s why it’s not working. Here’s what we should do differently.”

But status updates are exactly what leaders do. If your team at work has a big smelly hairy project and you’re yak-shaving it away one step at a time, they want to make sure everyone’s doing the right thing, and if something goes wrong, they want to adjust quickly.

Finally, if a leader knows themselves incapable of the job, either they’re unwilling to go where they need to go, or they know the people will not follow, or they cannot imagine the path, or they think themselves inadequate to the journey, they quit and let someone else lead.


Obviously my go-to on abortion rights is an effort to amend the Constitution that joins with other movements that also seek constitutional memorialization of rights (equal rights amendment, gay marriage, gun safety, etc.). In Biden’s Dobbs speech, I was a little surprised he didn’t say that we should ultimately work to change the Constitution. But he didn’t say much of anything about where he wants us to go.

Democrats need to be leading. Martin Luther King Jr. was a leader. Jack Kennedy was a leader. He pointed up to the Moon and said, “Grab your shit. Let’s go.”

And it’s okay for a leader to be lost. It’s a bewildering country. Where should we go? How can we get there? It’s okay not to have the answer. But you have to tell us. You have to say, “If we get 60 in the Senate, then…” or “We’re going to need states to call for a constitutional convention.” Or whatever the lift is. People need to know where you want to try to go. Where do you foresee the mountains and rivers and perils of the journey? Maybe we can’t get there, but dissembling is a waste of time.

So where we are, unless Biden and the Democratic governors, legislators at all levels, step up and lead, give status updates on where we are, what we need to get there, is we’ll have to find some leaders. That means either other Democrats or third parties or whatever. But it’s going to take leadership, not just stump speeches and deafening silence when we need fireside chats with action items.

And it will be 2024 before most of the people who want a better response can build the machinery in most states. Names on the ballots, all that jazz. In most states it’s too late to do much for 2022 beyond what was already in the pipe. A few states have odd-year elections next year (Louisiana, Mississippi, plus legislative in Virginia and New Jersey, and gubernatorial in Kentucky).

The people will listen if you lead. If you just read some warmed over gibberish, we’ve heard it before. Tell it to Buncombe.

There are leaders in some organizations today doing whatever they can to help the vulnerable tied to the fucking tracks by five Repubs on the Supreme Court. (Oh, sorry, they handed the rope to the states to tie them to the tracks.) The good people are not going to stop pushing their missions. They’ll arrange transport, expand access to contraception, to anti-implantation drugs, and to medical abortion drugs. They know their missions and what they can do. But they and the folks on the tracks deserve leaders. Tell us how you want America to get to those tracks, and how we’ll cut those fucking binds and get them up. Lead your nation.

The Road to the Constitution

The high (as in positively blotto) court’s decision would invite Constitutional reforms big and small.

Not going to go into the actual process in detail, what’s required in terms of fractions and votes. This is more about the idea of a movement to fix in the Constitution the right to choice in pregnancy and abortion. But it’s also about the movement that will be needed, and the ways to help that along.

If you want to amend the Constitution, state-level support is necessary. All amendments must be ratified by the states (at least three out of four). But if you want to amend the Constitution, that’s a feature! Yes, a number of states are domineered by anti-rights Republicans who hold power by a number of mechanisms including gerrymandering, voter suppression, lack of public-access laws, so the road to ratification has to drive through at least a few of those, requires their rectification.

But a campaign for the Constitution is an asset in building those roads! It draws media attention, and if done properly, it magnetizes different groups to pitch in. So let’s start with that second thought: this isn’t about an abortion amendment by itself. This is about renewal. It’s about taking up that mighty pen and fixing the holes that have developed over the past decades.

So in the states, you don’t only push an abortion amendment, you also push for gay marriage and civil rights for LGBTQ persons. Rally for the Equal Rights Amendment for women, for a piece to fix campaigns and gerrymandering. Update the second amendment! Term limits, number of seats in the House, abolish the filibuster, and so on. Whatever the mix. Not all of them will pass. But the commitment and the collaboration are important.

More important is many things deserve to be in the Constitution, if only to memorialize the struggles it took to make progress. The Constitution should be not just a record of the highest law, but it should be a teaching tool, a history of America’s progress toward liberty and justice. It was written “to form a more perfect Union,” and each major step we take to improving its perfection deserves to be added to that.

What can states do to help this along? They can signal willingness to ratify, they can push state-level amendments ahead of the effort for amending the federal constitution, and they can call for a constitutional convention to attempt to propose the amendments for ratification, going over the heads of Congress. They will also garner media attention, help spread the word.

The media attention is key. People need to know about the road to use it. It’s not a shortcut, it’s not a dead end, it’s the way forward. People need to know a road is being built to get our country back into the future. In some states, those which already will codify and protect their citizens’ rights, it will be an easy sell. They’ll pass state-level protections, pass a resolution calling for a convention, but some of them will also help organize neighboring states where the path for the road needs clearing, or where a bridge needs to be built.


We’ve never had a constitutional convention other than since the one that created the Constitution. That may be another amendment that’s needed: that we hold conventions every ten years, or every 20 years. It is a document that needs more tending than we have given it. The Constitution was written with an expectation that it would be amended over time, but perhaps they were too generous in expecting the convention mechanism would see some use by accord of the states rather than as a requirement. That is among the mistakes they made for which we owe our current crusty impasse on political progress.

There are risks to a convention, that conservatives want an amendment to require the federal budget be balanced in terms of revenue and spending. We’ve almost never had a balanced budget, going back to the founding. It’s a bad idea. But would it pass the states? If proposed, we’d find out. All the while, it would keep the other amendments in the news, for gay rights and abortion and all the others that might be proposed.

And in the worst case, that such a dumb amendment was to pass, the federal government’s hands unduly bound by its budget, it would surely be repealed as prohibition once was. The risks of conservative amendments being ratified simply does not rate against the need to protect our citizens and renew our Constitution to protect the nation’s future.

Or maybe the conservatives at a convention would rally for some other dumb idea. We cannot let fear of more bad law stop us from seeking good laws. We already have more than our share of bad rulings and laws, thanks to the conservatives. We already have failed in environmental protections, in education, in civil rights protections, in blocking corruption, in all these things, for the Republicans have used their fiats and their vetoes to see to it.


As women’s rights are stripped away in some states, as women suffer, the media will be covering that issue until the right is restored to the whole country. Advocates are already poised to use that attention to keep pressing the issue, but if they can wed it to the broader movement of constitutional reform, it will help people to understand the difference. We can no longer rely on statutory protections or precedents that may be gone by the end of the court’s next sitting.

The anti-abortion movement has not prepared for a post-Roe world. The things that a good government would have already done, regardless of abortion politics, have not been done. (On 18 May 2022, a mere dozen Republicans voted to spend $28 million to alleviate the baby formula shortage! See US House: 18 May 2022: Roll Call 220.) These include:

  • Family leave
  • Reducing poverty
  • Clean air policies to reduce miscarriages and stillbirths
  • Healthcare access, including Medicaid expansion (especially prenatal care)

Indeed, they would have long been done by empowered Democrats, but even as Republicans have agitated to ban abortions, they have sought to make abortions all the more attractive to those who are left unsupported, and their pro-pollution policies have resulted in large numbers of miscarriages and stillbirths.

The media hasn’t done enough to tell those stories, but in a post-Roe world, the media will start telling them, and it should relate them to women’s rights and the failures of the anti-abortion movement. At the same time, if the reform movement advocates for some change, it will do well to prepare by pushing for any laws or programs that would be needed should their goal be reached.

A constitutional reform movement will make it clear, as the robed Republicans would do in overturning Roe, that we must memorialize our nation’s progress in the Constitution. Nothing less will do. They will steal our rights away from us if we do not put them out of the reach of those spoiled children.

The Voting Rights Act—a statute, a codification—was constitutional until the court decided a Black president meant racism was through. And now the states are using their power to make voting harder, even banning handing out water to the thirsty people waiting to vote. Abortion was protected until Republicans stole enough seats to tear it away. It needs to go in the strongbox of the Constitution, where it can be amended out if need be, but it can’t be taken out by the black dresses.


There are those who say codifying Roe, much less amending the Constitution, is all but impossible. Today it is. Today we suffer under the regime of the past, under the shadows of bygone sins, the remnant pollutions of racism and sexism. But tomorrow? Are we forever stuck in this moment? Do our clocks no longer tick? I say they do.

If trampling rights signifies anything, it is that politics do change, and that we have the choice and the right to alter or abolish governments—through voting—that have become destructive to our liberty. Journalists and writers who don’t remind you of that do a disservice to the document protecting their right to write.